Archive note: This text comes from the old archive of Nomika Epilekta and is preserved with care for historical and informational reading.

Regionalism (regionalism) is the pathological attachment to one’s place of origin, the village or the province or the wider area, usually the prefecture. Thus we say that Cretans are regionalists, that people from Chania are regionalists, that Epirotes are regionalists, or Kefalonians, Maniots... and, in general, modern Greeks almost in their entirety are narrowly bound to their tiny, and as a rule insignificant, places of origin in an excessive and often morbid way, in the sense that anything not directly or indirectly connected with the place of origin is rejected as filthy, useless, profane, false, adulterated, foreign, cold and indifferent. Genuine, true, sacred and unique is whatever is connected with the regionalist’s place of origin, which takes on an almost worshipful character. Thus, statements such as “this meat is from my village”, “I brought honey and cheese from the village” and similar phrases are not rare. They do not show nostalgia; they mean that anything coming from the speaker’s village has the meaning of the genuine, the incomparable and the unsurpassed, the unique, the unexcelled and, above all, the sacred. Within this framework of worship of the place of origin, a man from Chania, for example, does not consider himself simply Cretan, nor Greek, European or anything else, but exclusively a Chaniot; and if he comes from Sfakia, he considers himself a Sfakian and boasts: “I am a Sfakian and I do not tolerate being insulted.” Those who come from other regions of Greece feel accordingly, such as a Corinthian, or someone from Gortynia or Levidi, who does not declare himself a Peloponnesian or a Tripolitan, but a Levidiot; someone from Serres, from Kavala and, more specifically, from Mesoropi, from Podochori, from Thasos and so on, without omitting the Kefalonians, Lefkadians or Chians, Lesbians, Smyrniots, Rhodians, Zakynthians, Pontians, Ithacans, Corfiots, Thracians, Naxians, Constantinopolitans, Santorinians, Samians and all the others who have the privilege of possessing a place of origin outside Athens, Thessaloniki and Piraeus! Characteristic of the regionalist mentality was also an incident, one of countless and hilarious incidents, in the context of an important criminal trial, where the defendant’s counsel, a distinguished criminal lawyer and orator, a prominent politician of a left-wing party and former minister, in the course of his inspired address declared to the astonished judges with complete seriousness: “I especially wish to point out that the defendant is not only an excellent member of society, a supporter of the weak, a distinguished scientist and a man of letters. Beyond all this, he is also from my village!” This quality alone of the defendant, namely that he came from the same village as counsel, provided him with additional elements proving his innocence and his inability to commit a wrongful act. “He is also from my village!” What else would a judge need in order to reach an acquittal, the complete discharge of the fellow villager of his counsel-politician? Absolutely nothing. To come from the same village as the famous counsel or politician mathematically entails your illustrious origin and your ability to be promoted, respected and accepted by everyone, by society as a whole. The revelation of origin from a specific place is often assisted by the surname, which reveals provenance and, if contradicted, always provokes a reaction: “Is it possible that you are called Papadatos and are not Kefalonian? Are you joking? Some ancestor of yours must have been Kefalonian... It cannot be otherwise. Impossible. You are Kefalonian and therefore my compatriot!” Thus, someone originating from the insignificant village of the founder of today’s opposition party became a famous journalist and needed no other qualification or ability in order to rise. Another, originating from the other insignificant village of the founder of the governing party, became a minister, another a general secretary and another a university professor. Consequently, origin from the village of someone socially, politically or economically powerful means privileges, possibilities, opportunities, gains, preference, recognition, predominance and power. But even the unknown and insignificant person, as soon as he meets his fellow villager, surrenders body and soul and places himself at the disposal of his compatriot... Many public services are staffed by fellow villagers or compatriots of the competent minister, and entire villages were appointed to the public sector and to sinecures because of the regionalism of the powerful person who made the appointments, or of the competent factors who had the ability to appoint and promote others, and who preferred their fellow villagers, compatriots or people from the same place by anything but meritocratic criteria and certainly not “according to fair judgment”... As a rule, when modern Greeks meet for the first time and become acquainted, the first and perhaps the only thing they ask is: “Where do you come from?” or “Where are you from?” And then follows the triumphant declaration or answer: “Ah! Wonderful, you are from my village,” or “I am from the next village too,” “we are compatriots,” “I come from another region, from Thessaloniki and not from Rethymno, but my wife is from Zoniana!” In other words, if those communicating discover that they come from the same area or, more ideally, from the same village, then there are no limits to the cordiality and effusions between them. Another related observation is astonishing: when fellow villagers live permanently in their place of origin, they often clash, quarrel and not rarely become entangled in many-year judicial disputes, most often claiming a few meters of barren land. They argue over insignificant objects and for insignificant reasons. Indeed, extremely acute enmities and quarrels are created, inherited from generation to generation and evolving into real “vendettas”. If, however, the fellow villagers find themselves outside the boundaries of their obscure village, which often is not mentioned on a map, nor even on Google, then they discover that they are connected by the aforementioned unbreakable link, the bond of blood and the privilege of common origin from the village forgotten by all, which may perhaps have been deserted and may no longer be inhabited except by a few over-centenarians whom people and death have forgotten. In the minds of the fellow villagers this deserted and insignificant village acquires the dimensions of the Jews’ promised land or of paradise, the blessed place that grants access and privileges to its children. As a rule without exception, the fellow villager always prefers, selects, chooses, appoints, surrounds himself with, promotes and benefits his fellow villager, setting aside and wronging, without pangs of conscience and without reservations, all the others who do not possess this privilege or the quality of origin from a specific place, and indeed from a particular village. With origin as the sole criterion, illegal and impermissible discrimination is constantly practiced in our society, with judgments that are purely regionalist and that result in blatant injustices, dissatisfaction, protests and complaints that receive no answer. Our compatriots, the people from the same place, our fellow villagers, are chosen and, consequently, those supposedly considered to be closely connected with us by origin; and, among other things, the most fundamental human right is systematically violated, according to which every discrimination is prohibited, including on grounds of race, ethnic origin or social origin, genetic characteristics, membership of a national minority, birth and so forth. Of course, that declaration has not been supplemented by adding the prohibition against preferring our fellow villager, our person from the same place and our compatriot... Whoever does not have, by chance, the privilege of being a fellow villager or person from the same place as the given judge, when compared, competing or contesting with the fellow villager of the one judging, will certainly be set aside, rejected, will lose, because by definition the fellow villager is judged to be more likely to prevail, and the infallible criterion for preference is the common place of origin, the village or the particular homeland of the judge and the judged. In essence, regionalism, which is always accompanied by fanaticism and stubbornness, does not differ significantly from racism, which also uses corresponding and analogous criteria to those of the regionalist, and the outcome is always that the non-privileged person is wronged, whether because he is not a fellow villager in the case of regionalism, or because he belongs to another race or breed in the case of racism.