[noemon]

UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was embroiled in a deepening diplomatic dispute with Athens on Tuesday after he snubbed his Greek counterpart in a spat over the so-called Elgin Marbles.

Downing Street said Sunak abruptly cancelled a meeting with Kyriakos Mitsotakis because the Greek prime minister reneged on a promise not to use his visit to London to publicly demand the return of the Parthenon Sculptures.

But Athens denied any such undertaking was given and diplomats expressed amazement that Sunak had offended a centre-right politician and key Nato ally. The opposition Labour party called the move “pathetic”.

Sunak’s spokesperson said on Tuesday that Mitsotakis had given an assurance he would not use his visit as “a public platform” to call for the return of the 2,500-year-old sculptures from the British Museum to Athens.

“These assurances were not adhered to,” the spokesperson said, referring to a BBC interview on Sunday in which Mitsotakis compared the removal of the marbles from the Parthenon to cutting “the Mona Lisa in half”.

Downing Street said Sunak felt it would “not be productive to have a meeting dominated by that issue”. Mitsotakis refused the offer of an alternative meeting with Oliver Dowden, the deputy prime minister.

The move caused anger in Greece. A government official in Athens said the British had asked for the question of the marbles not to be turned into a “huge issue” but insisted: “There was never any agreement on what we would say or not say publicly.”

Pavlos Marinakis, a spokesperson for the Greek government, told Skai TV on Tuesday that “Britain’s attitude shows no respect for the prime minister and our country”.

A Labour party spokesperson said Sunak’s snub of Mitsotakis was “pathetic”. “To pick a fight with a Nato ally for the sake of a headline shows just how weak Rishi Sunak is.”

Mitsotakis met Labour’s Sir Keir Starmer on Monday. Some Tories believe that Sunak was aggrieved the Greek prime minister had met the opposition leader.

Downing Street denied this and Athens pointed out that the meeting between Mitsotakis and Starmer was well signalled in advance.

Starmer indicated to Mitsotakis that he would not “stand in the way” of a mooted loan deal between the British Museum and Athens that would see part of the Parthenon Sculptures loaned to the Acropolis Museum.

Mitsotakis is demanding the full restitution of the entire frieze but George Osborne, former Tory chancellor and chair of the British Museum, has vowed to try to reach a compromise loan deal with Athens.

Sunak has now made clear his opposition to such a compromise. “We do think it’s a slippery slope,” Downing Street said. “It’s not something we would support.”

A Tory official suggested Starmer was being “reckless” in supporting any sort of negotiation between the British Museum and Athens.

Lord Peter Ricketts, former permanent secretary at the Foreign Office, said he was “puzzled and surprised” by the episode, including the unusual move by Sunak to offer to substitute his deputy.

Leaders “spend their life talking to people who they have disagreements with” and the division over the sculptures was well known, Ricketts said.

His advice would have been that the “right thing” would be to hold the meeting, acknowledge the differences over the marbles “courteously” at the start and then move on to the “pressing issues” of the day, including migration and the Israel-Hamas conflict.

Lord Kim Darroch, the former UK ambassador to Washington, said Sunak’s reaction was “over the top”. He added: “Generations of British ministers have sat stoically through Greek ministers lobbying for the return of the Elgin Marbles and not given an inch in reply.”

A European official said the timing and abruptness with which Sunak cancelled the meeting was “inelegant”, adding that offering a meeting with his deputy was “quite offensive”.

A former Tory cabinet minister said: “There is no explanation other than petulance and a complete lack of strategic direction.”

Sunak claims the Greek PM promised not to talk about the Parthenon Marbles. He spoke to the BBC about it, so "I had to insult him".

The idea that a Greek PM would come to London and not talk about the Parthenon Marbles is quite

So Greek analysts calculate 2 motives behind Sunak's move:

1) He is using an ally to score points with the far-right idiots in the country.
2) He is also Erdogan's plaything.

Read more here:

https://www.ekathimerini.com/news/12259 ... motivated/

https://www.ekathimerini.com/news/12259 ... n-marbles/

Anyhow, the UK was hoping that Greece would help them with a migration deal akin to the one they had in the EU for illegal migrants!

This is all bye bye now!

So Sunak managed to provide even more publicity for the Parthenon Marbles issue. More publicity on his own political weakness and more publicity on the UK's pariah status in Europe as a whole.

And for nothing!

[noemon]

[noemon]

[noemon]

King Charles wears Greek flag tie as he meets Rishi Sunak after Parthenon Marbles row



Monarch appears to offer gesture of goodwill to Athens – as PM denies ‘hissy fit’ in diplomatic row

King Charles has worn a Greek tie to Cop28, just days after Rishi Sunak’s spat with Athens over the Parthenon Marbles.

The PM has denied throwing a “hissy fit” after he scrapped a planned meeting with the Greek PM, accusing Kyriakos Mitsotakis of “grandstanding” about the return of the sculptures.

It seems Charles may have decided to enter the political controversy by sporting the blue and white tie and handkerchief on Friday.

The pattern in the monarch’s tie showed both the colours of the Greek flag and its distinctive cross, symbolising Eastern Orthodox Christianity.

But Buckingham Palace suggested the Greek flag-coloured tie was a random choice by the King. Royal sources pointed out that Charles also wore the tie when he met South Korean leaders last week.

Charles’s father Prince Philip was born in Greece into the Greek royal family, and the King has spoken about his enduring affection for the country.

The gesture in Dubai, which some have perceived as a snub to the PM, recalls the controversy over the Queen’s blue and yellow outfit at the 2017 state opening of parliament – seen as a gesture of goodwill to the EU after the Brexit referendum.

However, the Queen’s dresser Angela Kelly later insisted that the colours were merely a coincidence and had been overinterpretated in the heated days after the divisive vote.

The Greek media saw the choice of tie as Charles offering backing for their country in the antiquities row. “The diplomacy of the tie has spoken,” said Lifo magazine. Proto Therma said the move “could well be interpreted as a show of support for our country”.

King Charles III speaks with Rishi Sunak at the opening ceremony of the World Climate Action Summit at Cop28 in Dubai

Charles’s choice of tie comes after Mr Sunak parked a diplomatic row by controversially snubbing Mr Mitsotakis during his visit to London. The Greek leader compared the artefacts’ removal and presence in the British Museum to cutting the Mona Lisa in half.

No 10 claimed Mr Mitsotakis had reneged on a promise not to discuss the centuries-old dispute over what are now known as the Parthenon Sculptures, with the Tory leader using PMQs to accuse the Greek PM of “grandstanding”.

Former Tory chancellor George Osborne – who is the chair of the British Museum – said Mr Sunak may have thrown a “hissy fit” because the Greek PM chose to meet Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer first.

Mr Osborne has been talking with the Greek government about a potential arrangement which would allow the sculptures to be displayed in Greece.

“Is it just petulance? Is it just having a bit of a hissy fit?” said Mr Osborne on his Political Currency podcast. “And, I think, if that’s the reason, it’s not because Mitsotakis was going to raise the Elgin Marbles. It’s because he had met Keir Starmer the day before,” he said.

Asked whether the former chancellor was right about a “hissy fit”, Mr Sunak told journalists at Cop28: “No, no. I think I’ve said everything I’ve got to say on this in parliament the other day.”

The Tory leader also hinted that a loan arrangement could be impossible due to Greece’s current stance. “Our position is very clear – as a matter of law, the marbles can’t be returned and we’ve been unequivocal about that,” he said.

“And I think the British Museum’s website itself says that in order for the loans to happen the recipient needs to acknowledge the lawful ownership of the country that’s lending the things.”

Mr Sunak added: “And I think the Greeks have not suggested that they are in any way shape or form willing to do that. Our view and our position on that is crystal clear: the marbles were acquired legally at the time.”

Greece has long demanded the return of the historic works, which were removed by Lord Elgin from occupied Athens in the early 19th century when he was the British ambassador to the Ottoman empire.

The 1963 British Museum Act prohibits the removal of objects from the institution’s collection, a position in law that Mr Osborne said would ensure Greece would have to return the sculptures following any exchange.

Some Tory MPs have criticised Mr Sunak’s apparent own goal – which saw him plastered across Greek front pages this week, including one carrying the words “F*** you b******”.

[Tainari88]

@noemon I do not understand why the Parthenon Marbles are not returned to Greece? Why does the British Museum not return the art and other valuable pieces to their nations of origin?

When I left the USA I had a very old Chaco Canyon geometric bowl from an ancient Native American group. Leaving the country with a piece belonging to an old Native American culture even though it was a gift to my mother? It was unthinkable. I left it with a man who is looking for the original custodian of the tribe and that is that. You give it back.

It was worth a lot of money. But you have to be honest with the objects that are very rare and belong as a cultural legacy to those nations. Why are the British not complying?

[noemon]

@noemon I do not understand why the Parthenon Marbles are not returned to Greece? Why does the British Museum not return the art and other valuable pieces to their nations of origin?

Long story short. The Brits truly believe:

1) that they own the Parthenon
2) that they are more Greek than the Greeks themselves, same as some certain Christians believe that they are the real Israelites. Replacement theory.

Why do I say this?

Because while several artefacts have been returned, the Parthenon Marbles are not. And while several other artefacts the British have recognised ownership to their original owners, they refuse to do the same for the Marbles.

You see this manifesting in many different ways:

1) "If it was not for Elgin, they would not exist now". Reality is that Elgin caused more damage to the building than Venetian cannons.
2) "We protect them better than Greeks do". Reality is that the Greek marbles are in far better condition than ones in London.

But you see that more clearly in the writings of the British Hellenists in the 18th-20 centuries.

All the other missing pieces from the Parthenon, located in the Vatican, Louvre and the US have been returned.

On the issue of ownership, UNESCO has recognized Greek ownership over the Parthenon marbles and has demanded of the British government to give back the stolen property.

Now the Brits, play the game: "if we return these, we will be asked to empty our museums", which is a fake hyperbole, because very few items in their museums have a recognised owner.

[Tainari88]

Long story short. The Brits truly believe:

1) that they own the Parthenon
2) that they are more Greek than the Greeks themselves, same as some certain Christians believe that they are the real Israelites. Replacement theory.

Why do I say this?

Because while several artefacts have been returned, the Parthenon Marbles are not. And while several other artefacts the British have recognised ownership to their original owners, they refuse to do the same for the Marbles.

You see this manifesting in many different ways:

1) If it was not for Elgin, they would not exist now. Reality is if Elgin caused more damage to the building than Venetian cannons.
2) We protect them better than Greeks do. Reality is the Greek marbles are in far better condition than ones in London.

But you see that more clearly in the writings of the British Hellenists in the 18th-20 centuries.

All the other missing pieces from the Parthenon, located in the Vatican, Louvre and the US have been returned.

On the issue of ownership, UNESCO has recognised Greek ownership over the Parthenon marbles and has demanded of the British government to give back the stolen property.

Now the Brits, play the game: "if we return these, we will be asked to empty our museums", which is a fake hyperbole, because very few items in their museums have a recognised owner.

Aha, I have always suspected that the British love appropriating other cultures from the Mediterranean region's culture. They love posing as Romans and Greeks. I always wondered about that eh?

It must be something about Anglo Saxon mentality because they never fail to go and start saying they discovered this or that. I remember in Old San Juan, this American Anglo woman came in to the art gallery where I worked as a teenager and she said, 'Yes, we preserved these marvelous old buildings and we made San Juan the beautiful old city it is today.' I just looked at her, I said to her, 'No, you Americans wanted to raze the old Spanish colonial buildings to the ground and make malls in the 1950s. The Institute of Puerto Rican Culture founded by Ricardo Alegría said no to that. And also the Americans did not invent the old Spanish colonial architecture. Why do you say such false things?' She was upset and left the shop.

It is obvious bullshit. It is almost like they want anything of cultural value all over the world to come from them? You should just enjoy other cultures achievements and beauty and so on, and not worry about if your group has control over them at all. It is a lack of being able to be comfortable in your own paradigm or story.

[noemon]

In any case, it is doubtful that Rishi Sunak insulted the Greek PM because of the Parthenon Marbles.

Sunak has refused to meet with the Greek PM since he took office. The Greek PM has met with King Charles(once per year at least) more times than he has met with Sunak(0).

The main reason for this is because:

1) He is Erdogan's ally, Sunak and the Spanish are lobbying the EU in favor of Erdogan, he does not want a meeting with the Greek PM to highlight this matter in the eyes of the British public as he is trying to keep it under wraps.
2) Sunak does not want to be seen as soft in the eyes of the British nationalists, especially when he meets with EU leaders. British nationalists take satisfaction from humiliating EU leaders. You can see that in this tet-a-tet with Keir Starmer, where he explicitly blames Starmer of "taking the side of the EU" because he met with the Greek PM!

Sunak is not an elected PM, neither the public wants him, nor the Tory party who elected Truss instead of Rishi, he is weak and he is a lame duck.

[Rich]

Long story short. The Brits truly believe:

1) that they own the Parthenon
2) that they are more Greek than the Greeks themselves, same as some certain Christians believe that they are the real Israelites. Replacement theory.

Well I'm British and have lived all my life in Britain and I can't remember meeting a single person who showed the slightest interest in Britain's possession of the Parthenon Marbles, and I certainly get to hear many divergent, even odd ball opinions. So my first thought was to go to Spiked, as the first place to look for a contrarian view. I found: Why the British Museum should keep the Parthenon Marbles.

My thoughts after reading this are that the Marbles should be returned on the condition, that we make explicit that this is not a generalised support for return of objects and in particular we do not support the return of Pagan and Christian artifacts to Muslim countries and that Amerindians have no right to seize prehistoric human remains found in the Americas.

[Potemkin]

Aha, I have always suspected that the British love appropriating other cultures from the Mediterranean region's culture. They love posing as Romans and Greeks. I always wondered about that eh?

It must be something about Anglo Saxon mentality because they never fail to go and start saying they discovered this or that. I remember in Old San Juan, this American Anglo woman came in to the art gallery where I worked as a teenager and she said, 'Yes, we preserved these marvelous old buildings and we made San Juan the beautiful old city it is today.' I just looked at her, I said to her, 'No, you Americans wanted to raze the old Spanish colonial buildings to the ground and make malls in the 1950s. The Institute of Puerto Rican Culture founded by Ricardo Alegría said no to that. And also the Americans did not invent the old Spanish colonial architecture. Why do you say such false things?' She was upset and left the shop.

It is obvious bullshit. It is almost like they want anything of cultural value all over the world to come from them? You should just enjoy other cultures achievements and beauty and so on, and not worry about if your group has control over them at all. It is a lack of being able to be comfortable in your own paradigm or story.

I think it’s a deep-seated inferiority complex, @Tainari88. The British (and even more so the Americans) are johnny-come-latelies to world history. Until the 18th century, England (and its successor state Britain) was a third- or fourth-rate European power, beneath the notice of world empires like Spain or even the Holy Roman Empire. Despite Britain’s huge success in the 18th and 19th centuries, we still retain that inner core of self-doubt. Who are we really? Are we the successors of the Greeks and the Romans, who brought civilisation and enlightenment to the world by building empires and spreading their languages and cultures? Or are we the successors of our real ancestors, the Germanic barbarian tribes who sacked Rome and ravaged Greece? We still don’t know. And the loss of the Empire in the 20th century just made the problem more acute. Hence the delusional boasting. Lol.

And yes, this is just another failure to face reality.

[Tainari88]

In any case, it is doubtful that Rishi Sunak insulted the Greek PM because of the Parthenon Marbles.

Sunak has refused to meet with the Greek PM since he took office. The Greek PM has met with King Charles(once per year at least) more times than he has met with Sunak(0).

The main reason for this is because:

1) He is Erdogan's ally, Sunak and the Spanish are lobbying the EU in favor of Erdogan, he does not want a meeting with the Greek PM to highlight this matter in the eyes of the British public as he is trying to keep it under wraps.
2) Sunak does not want to be seen as soft in the eyes of the British nationalists, especially when he meets with EU leaders. British nationalists take satisfaction from humiliating EU leaders. You can see that in this tet-a-tet with Keir Starmer, where he explicitly blames Starmer of "taking the side of the EU" because he met with the Greek PM!

Sunak is not an elected PM, neither the public wants him, nor the Tory party who elected Truss instead of Rishi, he is weak and he is a lame duck.

What is your opinion of the British nationalists?

I do not like Erdogan at all. What advantage is there to being against him or not in the British parliament?

He is weak and a lame duck. But I really dislike his really pandering behavior above all. He panders to a public who he must know really do not approve of him in general. Why even take the position? Was it for getting famous and being able to be socially in higher socioeconomic circles within the UK? Such an ambitious man with such a lack of understanding how bad that class system is in the UK.

[noemon]

I found: Why the British Museum should keep the Parthenon Marbles.

It must have taken you a few hours or perhaps days to find such an article from 2018. Sounds like the usual anti-Corbynist terrorism. .ie "Do not return the marbles because Corbyn said he will" and "we can't afford him to be right".

My thoughts after reading this are that the Marbles should be returned on the condition,

Condition?



The times when Brits were capable of imposing conditions has long gone.

There is only 1 condition, repatriate the Marbles and pay for compensation for the damage caused by Elgin.

[noemon]

What is your opinion of the British nationalists?

Ha, that's a big story.

I do not like Erdogan at all. What advantage is there to being against him or not in the British parliament?

Little, public opinion is not very pro-Turkish, however the UK has been courting Turkey for 2 reasons, as an immigrant dumping ground and as a buyer for weapons now that the US has placed sanctions on Turkey(and hence British weapons are "competitive" again). If Sunak can get a win out of Turkey, like the big sale of weapons or a big unloading of immigrants then he will be happy.

He is weak and a lame duck. But I really dislike his really pandering behavior above all. He panders to a public who he must know really do not approve of him in general. Why even take the position? Was it for getting famous and being able to be socially in higher socioeconomic circles within the UK? Such an ambitious man with such a lack of understanding how bad that class system is in the UK.

At this point, he is just trying to keep the nationalists on board so that his defeat next year is not a rout and a ridicule.

[Tainari88]

I think it’s a deep-seated inferiority complex, @Tainari88. The British (and even more so the Americans) are johnny-come-latelies to world history. Until the 18th century, England (and its successor state Britain) was a third- or fourth-rate European power, beneath the notice of world empires like Spain or even the Holy Roman Empire. Despite Britain’s huge success in the 18th and 19th centuries, we still retain that inner core of self-doubt. Who are we really? Are we the successors of the Greeks and the Romans, who brought civilisation and enlightenment to the world by building empires and spreading their languages and cultures? Or are we the successors of our real ancestors, the Germanic barbarian tribes who sacked Rome and ravaged Greece? We still don’t know. And the loss of the Empire in the 20th century just made the problem more acute. Hence the delusional boasting. Lol.

And yes, this is just another failure to face reality.

I always say that what defines people is the land they have occupied for a very long time. That landscape defines human culture in many ways Potemkin.

For example, Greek culture is very much influenced by the land it has occupied and the seas they have explored and fished in for millennia. That area of the world has made Greece what she is.

So for the British that rock they have occupied in that cold North Sea and the Atlantic etc has defined it. It is a big island. Insular and with low lying clouds and subtle colors. They love tea drinking because it is a cold and damp and uncomfortably chilly environment in winter and early spring. So tea is a great balm for the British. And a great habit.

They should look to their earliest origins of occupying that land and that is who they are. Pagans and also people of cold seas and windy weather. I think the British are sturdy and steady people. You have to be to be in that environment century after century.

The Med and the Caribbean are about living your life outdoors. Publicly. Everything is done outdoors because the weather is like that. You also in such places get to know your neighbors since it is always sunny and full of life. You live your life on the street in the Caribbean. Africans are really lovers of dance, music and song and just being social. They are loud and love color. So do the Southern Spaniards. The Tainos loved dance and song and also social and communal existences. All three groups who mixed there loved that. So it is part of our national identity. To this day my husband can not be inside for more than a couple of hours. He can't take indoor life. It bothers him.

Snow and wind and cold seas and cold air changes your mentality.

[Tainari88]

@Potemkin I wanted to respond more in depth to this line of yours:

Who are we really? Are we the successors of the Greeks and the Romans, who brought civilisation and enlightenment to the world by building empires and spreading their languages and cultures?

I think the Anglos from England and the Scottish from Scotland are old tribes that got broken up by the Christianization of Europe by the Romans and the early Christian church. They had typically Pagan beliefs and they had myths related to natural forests and rivers and everything one sees in the rural Mayan myths too (people living close to Nature all the time tend to create mythical creatures directly related to the natural environment). Early tribal people tended to have that kind of mythology.

Monotheistic societies were the Abrahamic religions.

I find that Anglos do not feel comfortable with open emotional displays. I think repressing emotion for a long time creates pathology with emotional issues in a culture. The Japanese also tend to not like open emotional displays.

The culture I grew up in? Emotional displays were absolutely commonplace, acceptable and encouraged. You knew that having strong emotions to whatever situation was fine and acceptable. Even expected. Adults, kids, old people and everyone in between could cry, laugh, be angry, be upset, be happy, be joyful, etc every emotion and it was all good. You got support and acknowledgement from everyone else and they would fuss over you for a bit and then it is over. Emotion comes and goes. You keep on moving. I find the British very very repressed. Almost too much. To the point of lack of openness about what is going on emotionally with them. It is interesting. I think my culture from your culture Potemkin is about as opposite as it gets.

[Potemkin]

I always say that what defines people is the land they have occupied for a very long time. That landscape defines human culture in many ways Potemkin.

For example, Greek culture is very much influenced by the land it has occupied and the seas they have explored and fished in for millennia. That area of the world has made Greece what she is.

So for the British that rock they have occupied in that cold North Sea and the Atlantic etc has defined it. It is a big island. Insular and with low lying clouds and subtle colors. They love tea drinking because it is a cold and damp and uncomfortably chilly environment in winter and early spring. So tea is a great balm for the British. And a great habit.

They should look to their earliest origins of occupying that land and that is who they are. Pagans and also people of cold seas and windy weather. I think the British are sturdy and steady people. You have to be to be in that environment century after century.

The Med and the Caribbean are about living your life outdoors. Publicly. Everything is done outdoors because the weather is like that. You also in such places get to know your neighbors since it is always sunny and full of life. You live your life on the street in the Caribbean. Africans are really lovers of dance, music and song and just being social. They are loud and love color. So do the Southern Spaniards. The Tainos loved dance and song and also social and communal existences. All three groups who mixed there loved that. So it is part of our national identity. To this day my husband can not be inside for more than a couple of hours. He can't take indoor life. It bothers him.

Snow and wind and cold seas and cold air changes your mentality.

Exactly, @Tainari88. Environment determines consciousness. The climate in Britain for about half the year is essentially hostile to human life. It has a certain gloomy grandeur to it, but it’s not warm in any sense of that word. And outdoor communal life is simply not possible; even in summer, the weather is too unpredictable. As the saying has it, if you don’t like the weather in Britain, just wait ten minutes. Lol.

The climate here has a lot to do with why the British are less sociable than, say, Caribbean peoples. You’re right about that.

[Potemkin]

@Potemkin I wanted to respond more in depth to this line of yours:



I think the Anglos from England and the Scottish from Scotland are old tribes that got broken up by the Christianization of Europe by the Romans and the early Christian church. They had typically Pagan beliefs and they had myths related to natural forests and rivers and everything one sees in the rural Mayan myths too (people living close to Nature all the time tend to create mythical creatures directly related to the natural environment). Early tribal people tended to have that kind of mythology.

Monotheistic societies were the Abrahamic religions.

I find that Anglos do not feel comfortable with open emotional displays. I think repressing emotion for a long time creates pathology with emotional issues in a culture. The Japanese also tend to not like open emotional displays.

The culture I grew up in? Emotional displays were absolutely commonplace, acceptable and encouraged. You knew that having strong emotions to whatever situation was fine and acceptable. Even expected. Adults, kids, old people and everyone in between could cry, laugh, be angry, be upset, be happy, be joyful, etc every emotion and it was all good. You got support and acknowledgement from everyone else and they would fuss over you for a bit and then it is over. Emotion comes and goes. You keep on moving. I find the British very very repressed. Almost too much. To the point of lack of openness about what is going on emotionally with them. It is interesting. I think my culture from your culture Potemkin is about as opposite as it gets.

Exactly, Tainari. We are clearly not the heirs of the ancient Greek or Romans. For all their faults, they were essentially pro-social and lived their lives communally and outdoors. The British tend to be emotionally repressed and socially isolated. The weather has a lot to do with it, and so does our history. Displaying too much emotion in public is regarded as a sign of weakness and mental instability. It is not approved of, and it is not supported. From a very early age, we are taught to hide our feeling, even from those closest to us.

[noemon]

In the course of the 18-20th centuries, almost all Northern European nations truly convinced themselves that they are the real Greeks and Romans.

Industrialization, Colonialism, and the Age of Enlightenment went over their heads.

They even invented the term "Renaissance" to claim that they are being reborn like a Phoenix. Even this word itself is a replacement theory word. The term "Elgin Marbles" is also such a racist and replacement theory term.

Hitler sent droves of soldiers to die in the Diro Caves of Mani because he truly believed the caves lead to Berlin and that the caves had been used by the Spartans to reach Berlin under the earth.

From all the Europeans in the 18-20th century, the Brits had the most "rational" claim in the sense that they were or had:

1) The Parthenon Marbles
2) The most liberal
3) The most powerful Empire and a Maritime Empire to boot!
4) The first to industrialise
5) The most prestigious universities.

Today, almost nobody believes that anymore but traces remain such as the Parthenon Marbles, the term "Renaissance" still lingers around, even though it is extremely racist in and of itself and there are other little things here and there.

[Tainari88]

In the course of the 18-20th centuries, almost all Northern European nations truly convinced themselves that they are the real Greeks and Romans.

Industrialization, Colonialism, and the Age of Enlightenment went over their heads.

They even invented the term "Renaissance" to claim that they are being reborn like a Phoenix. Even this word itself is a replacement theory word. The term "Elgin Marbles" is also such a racist and replacement theory term.

Hitler sent droves of soldiers to die in the Diro Caves of Mani because he truly believed the caves lead to Berlin and that the caves had been used by the Spartans to reach Berlin under the earth.

From all the Europeans in the 18-20th century, the Brits had the most "rational" claim in the sense that they were or had:

1) The Parthenon Marbles
2) The most liberal
3) The most powerful Empire and a Maritime Empire to boot!
4) The first to industrialise
5) The most prestigious universities.

Today, almost nobody believes that anymore but traces remain such as the Parthenon Marbles, the term "Renaissance" still lingers around, even though it is extremely racist in and of itself and there are other little things here and there.

This is why I think a little place should never try to be bigger than what it is. It is interesting but Japan is a series of islands. So is Great Britain or the UK.

Nationalism if taken to extremes is detrimental. Remain humble and remain true to the core of what a nation is really about. Study the history and be accepting of outside influences if those influences are benevolent. If they are detrimental because the messages are about taking away any kind of dignity of the people from there? Then that is a form of colonialism. It is always a bad thing. It is important to stay humble, true to the character of the history of that place, and share what is positive and good with the rest of the world.

I do not think we were meant to not know each other. But, we also were meant to respect what makes us unique. Not to take away what has been built to replace it with a sense of inferiority. It leads to terrible consequences.

[Tainari88]

Exactly, Tainari. We are clearly not the heirs of the ancient Greek or Romans. For all their faults, they were essentially pro-social and lived their lives communally and outdoors. The British tend to be emotionally repressed and socially isolated. The weather has a lot to do with it, and so does our history. Displaying too much emotion in public is regarded as a sign of weakness and mental instability. It is not approved of, and it is not supported. From a very early age, we are taught to hide our feeling, even from those closest to us.

Mexican culture allows for emotion, but they have a lot of rules in Mexican culture. It is far more formal than the Puerto Rican culture for sure. Mexicans have rules for almost everything socially related. But emotion is so well managed. They let the kids show emotion and the adults, but they discourage anything that is too excessive and that overtakes some other important event. You have to be appropriate in Mexico. If you are not? Severe disapproval. Hee hee.