With the “opening up” of our region 3–4 decades ago, new residents were drawn to its unique natural, climatic and cultural features. For the first time since Mani appeared as a distinct entity in historical records, the integration of these newcomers, due to their number and diversity, has become a very difficult task. This is what leads us to seek, in various ways, the recording, evaluation, and promotion of the region’s social and historical characteristics, aiming to offer elements of self-awareness to our fellow citizens and to deepen the understanding of the area for those new residents who have chosen to settle here.

To serve this goal, we at MANIOT SOLIDARITY are especially drawn to researching the flow of social and historical elements of our region, as recorded by notable intellectuals of Mani, those who became widely recognised writers and journalists over the two centuries of the modern Greek state. We republish their texts, particularly those closely connected to our region, their homeland. Our readers have, of course, understood this by simply observing each issue. However, our exploration of such texts has also led us to a comparative approach between the quality of writing in books and journalistic texts of older periods and the current one, which we would like to present below. We do this to better justify our choices and to connect them to a broader framework for helping new residents become acquainted with our region.

The literary and journalistic texts of earlier times are characterised by structure and precision, with meanings that are immediately understandable. The texts are dense with content, directly accessible to their readers. These features form a quality archive of documented material that outlines our land and defines the concept of MANI both as a place and as a way of life for its people. We make these observations in contrast to much of the literary and journalistic output of today, emphasizing our determination not to follow this general trend, but instead to draw inspiration from the journalism of the past.

Modern technologies, as they have evolved, have created a deluge of information through contemporary communication channels (radio, television, print and digital media, and the internet). Today’s citizen endures this endless flow 24 hours day, which whether you look at it or turn your gaze away, is always there to overwhelm you. Today’s citizen has “matured” under its influence and now “lives” through headlines with capital letters on screens, thus devaluing the significance of capital letters of the old writing, which were crucial elements for structuring the most important chapters of our very lives. 

At MANIOT SOLIDARITY we strive to adopt only those characteristics of new technology that do not compromise the quality and richness of written language and meanings, as these were taught to us a few decades ago by our elders —at home and in school— and as we continue to see them reflected in older writings. From the very first issue, our primary goal has been to combat information overload. We attempt this by filtering the news and limiting it to that which directly or indirectly concerns our broader region. Our principle is that news should not be a dry report, but should include a critical perspective and a thoughtful commentary, always presented gently, with the aim of encouraging readers to reflect. We also reject any attempt to create a climate of petty political manipulation through the repeated presentation of the same news at different stages of its development, avoiding the deliberate misinformation that this tactic can cause. We prioritise news based on the social benefit that can be produced by implementing its content, while identifying and silencing elements of subjective bias.

Ultimately, we are convinced that the course we follow in crafting the content of each issue not only counters the phenomenon of information overload, an endemic illness in modern communication, but also offers reliable and objective information about our region. This contributes not only to strengthening pride in our homeland, but also to the harmonious integration of Mani’s new residents. These aims are also embedded in the mission of our non-profit association of the same name, which has been publishing this newspaper for 27 years.

THE EDITORIAL BOARD

The situation that prevails at this time in the socio-political system of the country, both at the highest level and largely at its lower-level structures as well, leads to the search for and presentation of well-documented scientific analyses related to its main characteristics and also the causes that shaped these conditions. An important source for such an approach is the German sociologist and political economist Max Weber, and more specifically, his concise analysis of the political system in a lecture he gave to his students shortly after the end of World War I, in 1918, titled: “Politics as a Vocation”.

We present key points from its content: «Political leaders of all levels of power are divided into two main categories: those who live “for” politics and those who live “off” politics. The politician who lives “for” politics makes this activity synonymous with “the content of his life”. He moves through life either enjoying the sense of power he exercises, or deriving his inner balance and the feeling of self-worth from the awareness that his life acquires meaning by serving a “purpose”. With this inner meaning, every sincere person who lives “for” a purpose also lives “from” that purpose. Whoever lives “off” politics as a profession, strives to make it a permanent source of income, whoever lives “for” politics does not do so. On the basis of this distinction, the concept of a “calling” to power is also formed for those who exhibit characteristics of individuals who possess the charisma of a “leader”, that is, individuals who belong to the category of those who live “for” politics. The devotion created by the charisma of the “leader” means that people do not obey him because of customs or decrees, but because they believe in him. The leader himself lives for his purpose and “cares” for his work». It should be noted that the concept of leader in the text extends throughout the social spectrum, including the states and their individual administrative and self-governing structures, the religious expressions and the trade union associations.

The elements that emerge from this content, linked to the events of more than a century that has passed since then, are confirmed by the recorded results that were created in states and in other structures of power. The few leaders who responded to the moral “calling” that was validated through the electoral process and functioned “for” politics during the exercise of the power that was entrusted to them, led countries – or their respective institutional structures – to prosperity and qualitative reform. The opposite occurred with those leaders whose actions, as recorded by history, lead to the conclusion that they lived “off” politics.

These historical observations should be strongly considered during critical periods when the population groups are called upon to elect the leaders who will guide them into the future, especially when the time context points to difficult economic conditions that threaten social cohesion and the smooth functioning of social institutions. Unfortunately, we are currently living in such a period, and the evaluation of leaderships based on Max Weber’s criterion, is emerging as a necessity for every citizen who participates in any form of institutional expression.

The category of those who live “off” politics has evolved over time, has taken on various forms, and has spread into the wider social sphere, so that its intentions are not perceived. It attempts, through the confusion it creates, to be perceived as its opposite, in order to enjoy the social acceptance necessary for its dominance.To achieve this goal, it creates subordinate systems of decentralized power in which it integrates a swarm of individuals who operate in the same way – that is, they live “off” politics – while simultaneously attempting to blur citizens’ vision, as they try to distinguish those politicians who, through the “calling”, seek to embody the characteristics of the leader who lives “for” politics: someone who offers his/her natural and intellectual abilities, for the benefit of the community.

An insightful observation of the current political landscape will certainly lead the informed citizens to a clear distinction between those who are involved in politics and to their classification into one of the two opposing categories of leaders according to Max Weber – and to determine their support accordingly. Especially in decentralized forms of power, such as local government, due to the proximity between the observer and the observed, the distinction is easier and the subsequent classification can lead to choices that result in effectiveness and social prosperity…

THE EDITORIAL BOARD