It is customary that the centennial or bicentennial anniversary of an important event be celebrated by organising commemorative ceremonies. These celebrations, in addition to reviving historical memory, also call for comparisons between then and now, and for a critical reflection on events that happened during the intervening period. This holds especially true for important events that concern an entire nation, such as the rebirth of the Greek Nation that emerged as a direct consequence of the Greek independence war of 1821. In this article we will reflect on both the one-hundred and the two-hundred year anniversaries since the beginning of the Greek Revolution. It seems, however, that in both 1921 (one-hundred year anniversary), and in 2021 (two-hundred year anniversary), the conditions were not favourable for a calm contemplation and evaluation of the events. The Asia Minor Campaign in 1921 and the COVID-19 pandemic at the present time brought about emergency situations of the utmost importance which needed immediate attention in order to avoid high-level risks. Emergency response measures to these events had to be drafted and  implemented, while commemorative celebrations were deemed of only secondary importance. In 1921, due to the Asia Minor situation, it was decided to postpone the commemorative ceremonies until the year 1930; this would be the one-hundred year anniversary since the founding of the modern Greek state after the signing of the Treaty of London by the three Protecting Powers (England, France and Russia) and the acceptance of its terms thereafter by the Ottoman Empire.  In the current year, the two-hundred year anniversary since 1821, most events so far have either been postponed, will be offered online, or will be implemented on a reduced scale in areas where heroic events took place. Any festivities planned for the coming months will depend on the evolution of the pandemic, and might be deferred or even cancelled.

                    However, commemorative ceremonies always produce strong visual messages and their cancellation may, in a positive way, cause us to reflect on the problems that we have faced as a nation since 1821. That is, the present cancellations may lead us to a deeper analysis of what has happened during the entire period of freedom from the revolution until now. This deep reflection, if it is related to the difficulties that arise during the management of the pandemic, can bring to light many negative elements, created by our attitudes and mistakes during the last two centuries. Such a reflection will help us understand the frequent disagreements between politicians and citizens, which in many cases have led to divisions and civil unrest. It is these mistakes in critical periods of our national life that led to national tragedies and prevented the complete incorporation of all the unliberated parts of Hellenism into the modern Greek state. During the current phase of the pandemic, disagreements have taken a different form: a significant percentage of citizens have refused to be vaccinated against Covid-19, by invoking the exercise of individual rights, guaranteed by the Greek constitution. The invocation of these rights, however, has caused negative social repercussions and infringes on the constitutionally guaranteed right to protect the health of the wide community.

                    We will mention two very important periods: those after the end of the two World Wars. Although we were on the side of the winners both times, due to lack of national unity, our country was deprived of the possibility of incorporating  into the national body unliberated areas with dense Greek populations. After the First World War, Eastern Thrace, extending all the way up to the outskirts of Constantinople, was  assigned to Greece, but due to disagreement between Prime Minister Venizelos and king Constantine, not only we were led to the Asia Minor Catastrophe but also we were forced to evacuate the whole coast of Asia Minor, as a prerequisite for the signing of a ceasefire. After World War II, due to the British military support during the Civil War, we tacitly resigned to claim the incorporation of Cyprus into Greece, as Great Britain had promised at the beginning of the war, while we almost lost the Dodecanese as well!

                    In this anniversary year, while reflecting on the critical events of the years 1820-1830 and the messages that they send to citizens and politicians, we should focus on the tragic figure of the first Governor of Greece, Ioannis Kapodistrias. It is our duty to remember his superhuman efforts to expand the borders of the newly-established Greek state as much as possible and to found a well-functioning state on a non-partisan basis and with fair rules of law. We have an obligation to reflect on the consequences for our nation of the loss of this great man. It is important to remember his selflessness and to emphasise at every opportunity his tireless efforts to achieve political unity. Finally, as a token recognition of his contributions to our nation, we have the obligation to embrace the  ideals and the policies he pursued; this is necessary for the safe course of our country in the future.

Time is continuous, but we, humans, like to slice it into intervals… We do this in order to do all kinds of measurements and calculations during the limited course of our lives. Time, however, moves at its own speed which for humans is hard to comprehend. Events happen in time scales that do not reflect human life times. Humans need to carefully re-examine past events and situations and draw valid conclusions that will help us now, as we move forward. The reflections in this introductory paragraph are the basis for a short analysis of last year’s events and some thoughts on the new year 2021.

            Events of 2020 have erased all erroneous expectations that life on our planet will continue to progress and prosper. Most of us used to believe that health, employment, security and, most important of all, democracy, are based on reliable and steady risk prevention systems. We had forgotten, after many decades of peace and normalcy, that the relations between nature and society are dynamic and that the balance between the two of them can be negatively affected by fluctuations of power and by unforseen new elements that come up and cause changes and events catalytic in nature. The new coronavirus pandemic that humanity is currently experiencing proved wrong the consensus that the Spanish Flu pandemic, which happened a century ago, was the last one. It has reminded us that all countries have to cooperate and develop common stable health policies. We have now internalised not only that public health is the most important public good, but also that emergency, exceptional and temporary measures can adversely affect other sectors, such as the economy and employment.

            In our country, we have clearly observed once more that the policy of “putting things off for later” and the extensive corruption in public administration are not just data for statistics, but also the causes for the big imbalance between us and our neighbouring country. This power imbalance was what fuelled the Turkish provocations, which we experienced many times this past year. Finally, the ludicrous political events that are unfolding in the USA remind us once more that the populism of the working classes can severely threaten democratic systems. The unfair distribution of wealth and the poor efforts by the state to provide education for the young are the main causes for the rising populism.

               Now that mobility is limited due to the pandemic, our extended stay at home gives the opportunity for everyone, citizens and government, to examine all the events of the past year and reflect on the causes. In this way, everyone (citizens as well as their representatives, the politicians) can cooperatively and coherently move from the surface to the deeper causes, and contribute by all performing their own duty. It seems as if last year’s disasters can be reversed, but only if individual actions are carefully co-ordinated. Vaccinations and effective medication as well as the experience gained in the treatment of the disease, are all positive developments in the course for radical treatment of the new pandemic; however, we need to form a unified stance on preventive measures. Subsidies for workers and businesses affected by the coronavirus, combined with favorable loan repayment terms and new lending, can counteract the negative effects on the financial sector, as long as they are not abused by parasitic tactics, as in the past. The strategic alliances which we are steadily forming, the careful, although late, planning for the purchase of military equipment, and the recent election results in the USA, all strengthen the sense of our national security.

               In our region, it seems that the low population density, a product of the special way of social coexistence chosen by our ancestors, has limited the expansion of the new pandemic, while the generally positive effects of the new motorway have greatly supported the finances of the people who live and work in Mani. In matters of national security, the disposition to protect our national sovereignty, as we inherited it from our ancestors, is considered given, permanent and essential. All that remains now is to formulate a firm desire to fight populism. A key factor in promoting this goal in our region is to enhance the effectiveness of our schools, which now face the added difficulty of integrating the many children, who come from foreign families permanently settled in Mani, into the national and local culture.

                                                                                                           THE EDITORIAL BOARD 

     Cohesive relations between peoples are defined by the regulations set by individual constitutions. The articles of the constitution reflect our shared values, which were developed after many years of people living together and forming a state. A common vision for the future of a nation is based on these shared values. Materialisation of this vision means that each citizen has to put the common good ahead of his/her personal gain. Aiming towards the common good always brings good results for every citizen of a nation.

     In 1821, the shared vision for freedom united different Greek societal groups, led them to common action, and finally resulted in the country’s liberation from the brutal Ottoman tyranny. The vision for a reborn free Greece was morally higher than the petty personal interests of individual citizens. Individual gain was placed in second place to freedom. Our area, Mani, is a representative example of putting aside personal ambitions and gains before the common vision of freedom for Hellenism. Maniots fought for the common freedom, although at the time they were enjoying autonomous administration with their own local Maniot leader, their everyday life was secure, and they were relative safe as far as their life and property were concerned.

     The common vision for liberating all areas that were inhabited by populations with Greek consciousness was expressed in the “Great Idea”, which dominated the dreams and aspirations of Greek citizens for the greatest part of one hundred years. This vision resulted in the liberation wars of that period in many regions that used to belong to Greece, but were still under Ottoman occupation. The Maniots again were leaders in the struggles for liberating their subjugated compatriots living in the rest of the greater Greek geographical area. However, before a national vision materialises, it has to be realistic. A thorough analysis of the international conditions and a careful examination of the power relations (the actual relations between the powers?) of a certain period (of the time?) has to happen beforehand. It is necessary that international conditions and power relations are taken into account. Every time when the vision of the Great Idea was pursued at periods when the circumstances were adverse, untimely acts of war were undertaken and disaster ensued. However, those times when military operations were based on careful diplomatic preparations and on a realistic analysis of the power relations, spectacular successes were achieved.

     In the previous paragraphs, where we examined (looked at) the need for a new vision, we often saw the words “common” and “shared”.  If the vision is not shared, then it lacks broad support, and such a national undertaking is not realistic; it is either frivolous or it conceals personal interests, and it will lead to a catastrophy. In the recent history of Greece we have had such examples, with the most important (respresentative?) one being the coup d’état against Makarios, the President of Cyprus, in 1974, which resulted in the invasion of the Turkish military in Cyprus and the permanent occupation by Turkey of a big part of the island. Unfortunately this kind of pseudo-visions (false visions) are quite popular in our times, and they threaten the normal evolution (smooth working out) of our crucial (most important) national affairs.

     If we look at the situation in our neighbouring Turkey, we will notice that the Turkish leaders have worked diligently to promote their own national vision. First they stabilised their political system, then they developed their economy, steadily increased the production, and used effectively the advanced technology which they imported from countries with a strong background in this area (with a strong digital background?). They created a strong industry, which resulted in not only the strengthening of their country, but also in a significant improvement of the standard of living of their citizens. When all these preparations brought positive results, then the politicians started appealing to the emotions of their people, glorifying the period of expansion of the Ottoman empire and promoting their national vision, which consists in revising and overturning the present status quo.

     Based on the above, we can conclude that for the national vision to be effective, it is necessary for it to be based on a strong and realistic basis. The first step for its materialisation is the strenghtening of the private and state economy. It is very important that the national vision be based on fairness and accepted as such by the powerful states of the time. However, the most important condition for the success of the national vision as it relates to the future of a country is for the vision to be embraced not only by the political parties and their leaders, but most of all by its citizens. If we start working on creating the necessary conditions, as described in this last paragraph, then it is certain that the national vision for the future of our country will soon be defined.

   We believe that now, ten months after the appearance of the coronavirus, is the right time to conduct sociological studies which will examine the present attitude of society towards the pandemic, i.e., of the human society as a whole and of the individual societal groups of each country. We notice that the societies of Asian countries with autocratic regimes tend to enforce firm restrictive measures which result in the quick confinement of the spreading of the pandemic. The societies of countries with democratic regimes tend to give priority to saving human lives and to a lesser extent to balancing the economy and the professional activities of their citizens, so that the whole economy does not collapse. In theory, our country has followed the framework adopted by democratic states, however, in practice it seems that individual behaviours deviate from the norm.

   It is normal that older people are more afraid during a pandemic, because at an old age it is easier to catch the virus and more difficult for the treatment to be effective. Because older people are more vulnerable, they are more likely to comply with the daily practices proposed by health professionals and the restrictive measures that are enforced by the government. The government decides on the specific measures to be taken after consulting with committees of specialised scientists who study the epidemiological data and make relevant proposals. Older people voluntarily restrict autonomous actions and the fulfillment of personal desires. The opposite is true for younger people who are more impulsive and full of energy. They do not always comply with the restrictive measures, because being young and strong, they know that they are not as vulnerable to the disease. Even if they catch the virus, they may be asymptomatic and not need treatment.

   The challenge which the politicians and health professionals of our country need to face is how to make everyone, but most importantly the younger people, comply with the rules for combating the pandemic. Citizens need to respect not only the preventive measures taken by the state but also the restrictive measures for the spreading of the disease. Since the repression of irresponsible conduct is difficult, if not impossible, the best way for the politicians to promote responsible behaviour is to become role models themselves by exhibiting social responsibility and thus try to persuade the younger generation to act in a more responsible manner. The best education for the society as a whole is the exemplary daily conduct of its leaders. Of course, time and a consistent effort are needed, so that the average citizen will learn to copy the “beacon” model and the daily behaviour of his/her leaders. It will be difficult at the beginning, but once the model is established, extreme autonomous actions will become increasingly rare among young people, who will realise that they need to voluntarily self-impose restrictions to their excessive freedom, so that the most vulnerable societal groups can be protected.

   The requirement to lockdown in our homes during the first stage of the pandemic was applied successfully by the government, because at that time the Greek citizens actually obeyed the authorities due to their fear for the impact of the new and unknown until then coronavirus.  Unfortunately, the lockdown was followed by the lifting of these measures and the reopening of businesses, an act which was necessary for the partial recovery of the economy and the avoidance of a new bankruptcy for our country. After the first wave of the pandemic, younger people thought that the consequences for human health were not as serious as previously thought and that the death rate was actually lower than previously believed. For these reasons our youth thought that they do not need to compromise their freedoms or restrict their autonomy and their personal choices. Recent data has proven that they are wrong. Not following the restrictive measures might mean that younger people who catch the virus are asymptomatic, however, when these asymptomatic people come into contact with older people, they spread the disease to this vulnerable group of people with catastrophic consequences.

      Recent negative developments make us pose the following two questions: in a democratic country like ours, is it an obligation for citizens to impose self-restrictions on the freedom that comes from their extreme autonomous activities? is it an obligation for citizens to make sure that their autonomous activities do not negatively affect the preservation of health and the preservation of life of vulnerable societal groups? Most Greeks agree that the above two requirements should be followed by all citizens. We hope that as time goes by, everyone will realise how catastrophic the results of non-compliance to  the preventive and restrictive measures for the spreading of the disease are. We hope that more and more people will realise that the measures enforced by the government are for the common good and they will be willing to comply.

THE OPEN SPACES AND SOCIAL/FAMILY STRUCTURE OF MANI PROVIDE PROTECTION FROM COVID-19

                Although there are many things unknown regarding the spead of the corona virus, epidemiologists agree that social distancing is very important for our protection. However, social distancing is difficult in cities because of the dense urban living, close proximity in the working enviroment and the urban way of life in general. After the end of the two-month lockdown, the experts were advising the most vulnerable in the population who own homes in their places of origin, in the provinces, to move there.  We knowsince the outbreak of the pandemic in March, that sparse population and widely-spaced buildings together with the rest of the measures against corona virus are important protection factors.

                Mani is a good example of an area with sparsity of population and buildings. The establishment and the development of the Maniot settlements, particularly during the last five centuries, reflects the lifestyle choices of our ancestors, their love for freedom, their decisions and cultural expressions, as well as the financial and social autonomy of each patriarchal family. Because of all these factors, the residential areas of Mani consist of small, widely-spaced family settlements. The infertile terrain meant that the inhabitants needed to work much harder, extensively cultivating the land, growing crops and raising livestock. The sparsity of settlements meant that with the exception of social communication within each individual family, Maniots rarely had social interactions with others, except for when they jointly undertook activities in times of war and peace.

                Specialists tell us that long-term social customs gradually become the norm in the moral code and conduct of each society. According to the science of Sociobiology, some of the social customs that have been practised for centuries, eventually become part of our genetic code. It seems that our ancestors, in addition to protecting and preserving the geographical area where they lived and became distinguished in military operations, they also passed on to us the ability to apply the advantages of scarsity and distancing to today’s conditions.            

                Because we do not know how long the pandemic will last, it is very difficult to foresee the changes that COVID-19 will bring to the social structure and its effects on the working environment and on the building domain. The big changes that happened in the workplace during the past six months of the pandemic have given us a rough idea of the possibilities that are provided by the sparsity that characterises Mani. We have now discovered that recent advancements in technology provide the opportunity for remote working, teleconferencing and teleteaching (i.e., delivery of lessons, archive research and text study).

                The trial period that we recently went through has shown us that there are new roads to be explored, such as exploiting the splendid geophysics and the temperate climate of our area and promoting Mani as an ideal workplace for remote working. Of course, for this to happen, we need first to work on the following infrastructures:

1) improve the road access to Kalamata and Sparta, and through these roads the access to the new motorway that leads to Athens (two such public projects which are to be auctioned soon are the first step in the right direction, although other more extensive technical projects still need to be implemented).  Easy access to these cities / bases of operations will allow efficient radial travelling for those who work remotedly either in full-time or in part-time positions and as a result, will be provided with higher quality and more secure working conditions.

2) upgrade computer skills for both students (through the public education system) and also for employees who work in the public and municipal sectors.

3) upgrade the services offered by those who work in the tourist industry, so that tourist income is distributed more fairly to more small businesses. This makes sense because of the compact size of local Maniot hotels.

4) gradually step up the agricultural production through larger cluster organisations so that the agricultural production income sums up with family income that is derived from other sources.

                Of course, advocating and realising these development proposals requires fostering and coordinating them by the two main local institutional venues, the municipality of Western Mani and the municipality of Eastern Mani. Unfortunately, during the 20 years that have elapsed since the establishment of these two municipalities, no such long-term measures and projects have been undertaken or initiatives that would substantially improve the future of our area. Neither have the two prefectural administrations until 2010 or, after that, the regional self-government undertaken any worthwhile development public works in our region. Let us hope that the corona virus pandemic and the first auspicious signal by the new administration of the regional government will lead to some new extensive investment projects, like the ones we stated above, and which need to be undertaken in the present circumstances.

   The best way of summarising the history of the 200 years since the Greek revolution (1821-2021) is the following: SEVEN WARS, FOUR CIVIL WARS, SEVEN BANKRUPTCIES. This is also the title of a book published in recent years by History Professor Georgios V. Dertilis (the author comes from a Maniot family which settled in Neapolis Voion, in Laconia). Upon reflecting on these two centuries, we note that with the exception of some wars which had more wide-ranging causes, the rest of the wars, the bankruptcies and the civil conflicts were all caused by the typical mentality of the Greek governments, which were representing the desires of the political circles of the time. Upon examining our history, we realise that the political homogenisation of the Greek nation was not as thorough and successful as it could have been. If the homogenisation had been stronger, the Greek political community would have had common goals and the electorate would have elected the right politicians to promote and achieve these goals. These politicians would have adapted these goals to the possibilities that were offered at that time and they would have used whatever resources and means were available to full potential.

   During the 19^th century two important Greek political ideas failed because of internal causes. These goals, although they were realistic, failed to gain common acceptance and thus political homogenisation was not achieved. These political goals were the following:

a) Governor Ioannis Kapodistrias’ efforts to create a civilised, righteous and just Greek state, immediately after the internal civil conflicts. Not only his efforts failed, they also led to his assasination and to even more serious armed warfare.

b) The efforts to include in the Greek territory the areas outside the borders of Greece where ethnic Greeks lived. This movement was called “The Great Idea”, was supported by the idealist Bavarian Otto, King of Greece, but was undermined by internal disputes and disagreementss between the political parties. It ended badly with the disastrous Greek-Turkish war of 1897.

   The uncooperative attitude of the political community and the lack of desire to pursue national goals, which would certainly have meant sacrifices and personal costs, resulted in failure. Even in the few cases, where the international situation was favourable, the Greek political leaders were capable and they had clear and realistic goals, failure ensued because micropolitics and personal gains got the upper hand.

  Two very capable great Greek politicians were Harilaos Trikoupis and Eleftherios Venizelos. Harilaos Trikoupis changed the until then inward-looking operation of the Greek state, and he tried to modernise the country by introducing many European technological advancements. However, he was very wrong in his expectation that the Greek citizens would be responsible tax payers. The result was that Trikoupis could not collect through taxes the funds that would have allowed him to pay back the loans that he had taken so that he could undertake extensive modernisation public works. This failure led to his defeat in the next elections, resulting in his death, and to the bankruptcy of the country. Eleftherios Venizelos had foreseen the political developments in the Balkans and in Europe, and he tried hard to lead Greece forward with a strong and ambitious vision for the future. Again, however, micropolitics, personal interests and the fatigue of the Greek soldiers who had been fighting external wars for many years, they played a role in the defeat of the army and the death of the “Big Idea”. Venizelos’ hopes that Greece would be led to its great destiny were cruelly dashed.

   Similar situations to the ones we have mentioned above have also developed in the past and continue to develop today in our area, Mani. The political homogenisation of the small militant communities of Mani started in 1818 when the Maniot warlords promised to the representatives of the Filiki Etaireia (Society of Friends) that they will support the War of Independence. The cooperation among them continued during the first three years of the Revolution (for some of them at great loss to life, property and privileges). Maniots, who were enjoying a semi-autonomous status in small communities, without the presence of Turks, embraced the common goals of freedom and independence. They put aside economic interests for the common good and they rushed to the battlefields, with the very vague promise that their sacrifices would be recognised if the war turned out victorious. Unfortunately, the developments after 1824 gradually divided the local Maniot leaders, who put aside the high ideals, and pursued instead personal interests. This shift in mentality led the whole country, but even more our own area, Mani, to tragic developments. Ever since, division and polarisation have followed us like a curse. These phenomena are even more prominent during critical times. During the past decades, we have seen an opening in our small local communities and the creation of some new ideas, which gives us a reason to be optimistic that some positive changes can also happen here, in Mani. Let us hope that the solidarity of the years 1814-1824 will gradually be guiding more and more Maniots, so that the necessary “critical mass” can be formed, which will lead us to more common goals and prospects for the future.

                                                                                                THE EDITORIAL BOARD