The Hellenic Initiative and New Democracy

The recent interfacing of the Prime Minister of Greece with members of The Hellenic Initiative (THI) in Athens reminded me of the research I started three-to-four years ago but suspended it due to overwhelming workload.

 
THI is a global diasporic organization undertaking philanthropic and grant-giving work in Greece while the majority in its board of directors are involved in global investing including Greece. It maintains strong hubs in the USA, London, Canada, and Australia, enjoying grassroots and elite support.

In my initial work I identified two intertwined modalities of citizenship practiced by the organization, which I called emotional and neoliberal. The meeting in Athens reminded me of two passages I had located which in juxtaposition indicated the alignment of THI’s language of institutional identity with New Democracy’s language of political identity. The connecting thread was along the principles of neoliberal citizenship.

I am sharing the following tentative writing, though the quotes I cite firmly establish the convergence between THI and New Democracy's political philosophy.

 
It is unusual and risky to publish a draft in such an early stage, but I make it public anyway in case fellow scholars wish to build on this observation. This is an important political issue regarding diaspora-Greece affiliations, and I hope it will spark the interest of the research community if it has not already.

[July 24, 2026]

***

The Hellenic Initiative’s (THI) ideology links emotional with neoliberal citizenship by building on the trope I identified earlier, heroism. Specifically, it draws an analogy between its project to rebuild Greece with that of Filiki Eteria’s, an early nineteenth century revolutionary organization founded with the purpose of establishing an independent Greek state. In fact, THI has inscribed this line of identification in its organizational structure by creating The 1821 Society (1821 marking the start of the Greek revolution against the Ottoman empire):

 
"The 1821 Society has been founded by The Hellenic Initiative as a new “Philiki Eteria” (the secret society founded in 1814 by Diaspora Greeks to fight for Greek Independence). As modern-day Diaspora Greeks, we are as committed to that freedom for Greece as our ancestors ever were. Today, that cause means helping Greece rebuild its economy, reversing the brain drain, and addressing Greece’s humanitarian needs." (NHI’s website, 2023[check])

[One-year individual membership for the Freedom Fighters section of the 1821 Society is $1821.
Two-year individual/couple membership for the Lord Byron section of the 1821 Society is $18,210.]

And along similar lines in the most recent statement (2026) about the mission of The 1821 Society:

"The 1821 Society is The Hellenic Initiative’s global membership community, bringing together Hellenes and Philhellenes who are committed to strengthening Greece and advancing Hellenism around the world.

In 1821, as Greece fought for independence from the Ottoman Empire, the effort extended far beyond its borders, supported by diaspora Greeks and Philhellenes who mobilized resources, influence, and advocacy. In 1814 they founded “Philiki Eteria,” a secret society dedicated to the cause of Greece’s liberation.

Nearly two centuries later, during Greece’s economic crisis, that same spirit reemerged. Once again, the Greek diaspora stepped forward, this time to help rebuild the country’s economy, support its people, and create opportunity for future generations. This was the spirit under which The Hellenic Initiative was founded."

The language of freedom in the context of the Greece crisis necessarily evokes the desire to free Greece from its economic dependency, from the immense debt to foreign creditors, the infamous troika, which bailed out the country from bankruptcy. But it could also translate today as the aim of aiding Greece through investments to negotiate its current enormous debt [cite numbers].
The lexicon of economic development as freedom aligns with the ideology of neoliberal economy [cite Frazer], which is currently central in the ruling New Democracy (ND) party. As Yiannis Mylonas (2021) notes, “One of ND’s potentially most catchy electoral TV and social media ad [in the 2019/check electoral campaign] stressed that ‘development means freedom.’”

 
Visualized through the depiction of people moving towards open horizons, this message contains a utopian dimension to appeal to the voters’ emancipation desires, spinning neoliberal economic activity toward what xxx frames as “forward thinking and liberatory” (Fraser 2019: 15). (193)

In its commitment to Greece [identify its problems] THI recognizes the structural deficiencies of the country. But it refrains from addressing structural problems linked with poverty, unemployment, part-time employment lacking benefits, soaring real estate prices and cost of everyday necessities (food, electricity, housing). Its approach to the grim realities of poverty, which it acknowledges, is limited to an emphasis in supporting nonprofit relief organization which may alleviate hardship and poverty for some but does not solve the problems that ravage not only the working poor but also the low middle and increasingly the middle class. It also refrains from deliberating of how these social ills may connect with neoliberal capitalist practices. Investments are not translated into major developments in capital-labor relations (level of wages, health care benefits) or environmental preservation. Capitalist development as the promise of freedom appears as a panacea at a time when a list of freedoms, the freedom of the press for example, or the freedom to afford decent housing are seriously compromised in the country. By refraining to deliberate on these issues, THI’s linear view of a redemptive future may be contributing to greater financial freedom for some and at the same time the unfreedom of many others.

Work Cited

Yiannis Mylonas. 2021. "Crisis, Authoritarian Neoliberalism, and the Return of 'New Democracy' to Power in Greece." Stasis.

Yiorgos Anagnostou
Draft 2023

On Greek American (and Diasporic) Leadership (3)

In the context of the ongoing exchange on the topic of Greek American leadership and its varying quality, the Research Center for Excellence in Greek American, Migration, and Diasporic Studies has implemented the following initiative:

Qualification exam for Greek American and Diasporic Leadership candidates

Thematic: Ethnic and Diasporic Historical and Cultural Literacy

Context

This assignment aligns with our community’s commitment to the value of educational excellence. It invites you to reflect on the significance of Greek American (or Greek-American, Greek/American, American Hellenic, Greek immigrant, and/or Greek and American) learning within your leadership vision.

All of the exam materials below are drawn from the two mandatory courses you have taken on Greek American and Diaspora Studies, administered by our Center at Super Excellent University (SEU).

Modality of the exam: In person

Duration: 12 hours

You are required to engage with all of the following questions

(the use of AI is strictly prohibited as evidence of fake leadership)

Questions

• Identify the latest scholarly book you have read about Greek American history and identity. What is the argument of the author(s)? In what ways does it contribute to your educational policy regarding the promotion of Greek American paideia?

• Identify a recent Greek American novel published by a reputable publisher. How does it inform your leadership vision?

• Identify three historians born between 1910 and 1950 who have written about the Greek American working-class past. Does knowing this past matter? Connect your answer with the 100th anniversary of the Castle Gate Mine Disaster.

• Why has Harry Mark Petrakis "raised the ire" of many Greek Americans in the past, according to Charles Moskos? Is there a Greek American museum featuring his work and outlining the controversy? If not, why is that the case? (hint: you may wish to discuss the Chicago case).

• What do you know about the Greek American working class today? Identify a sociologist who is working on this topic. What is the significance of his/her research in our understanding of Greek America and its main identity narratives?

• The narrative of “struggle and success,” which is at the core of Greek American identity, has been criticized on many counts. Discuss. How do you agree or disagree with the critique?

• Does it matter to remember Louis Tikas? What is the seminal Greek American book on this historical figure? What is a famous documentary on this topic? Discuss.

• The documentary The Greek Americans (PBS, 1998) has been criticized by Greek American studies scholars. What was the critique all about? Do you agree or disagree with the gist of the critique? Explain.

• There has recently been a community discussion about the usage of a hyphenated Greek American identity (Greek-American, Greek/American). What is your position? What is the difference between the hyphen and the slash in the two forms of the hyphenation? Provide a brief summary on how the Greek American hyphen has been theorized in connection to Greek American poetry.

• Identify a Greek American scholar who has recently reflected on the notion of “ethnic or diasporic” leadership (drawing on political and sociological theory). Summarize the argument. What are your points of agreement and disagreement?

• Do you support Greek American learning (history, culture, the arts) at all levels of Greek America’s educational network, including universities? Discuss.

• Journalists and scholars from Greek Australia and Greek America have written extensively (in Greek and English, in newspapers and journals) on the notion of Diasporic Hellenism. Identify five of the most important points they have articulated. What is your position?

• There has been discussion lately, both in Greek America and Greek Australia, about a new paradigm on the topic of Greece-Diaspora or Diaspora-Greece relations. What are the major points of this paradigm? What is your position?

Yiorgos Anagnostou

August 4, 2026

Περί Ελληνοαμερικανικής Ηγεσίας (συνέχεια)

Η πρόσφατη συζήτηση περί διασπορικής ηγεσίας συνεχίζεται, προσφέροντας χρήσιμες επισημάνσεις.

Εδώ θα ήθελα να υποδείξω μια πρόσθετη πτυχή η οποία αφορά την ηγεσία σχετικά με την εκάστοτε διασπορική παροικία. Συγκεκριμένα, τη θέση της ηγεσίας –οργανισμοί, λομπίστες, εκκλησιαστικοί φορείς, πολιτισμικοί παραγωγοί (cultural producers, όπως οι ντοκιμαντερίστες)– στα αφηγήματα που αναπαριστούν την ελληνοαμερικανική ταυτότητα.

Πρόκειται για αφηγήματα που συστηματικά, όπως επισημαίνω εδώ και δύο δεκαετίες, παρουσιάζουν την Ελληνική Αμερική μέσω ανιστόρητων ομογενοποιήσεων, ουσιοκρατικών αντιλήψεων και εθνικών μύθων (bootstraps)· ένα πλέγμα προσεγγίσεων που ακυρώνει την ιστορικότητα και την ετερογένεια του διασπορικού πεδίου (για παράδειγμα, βλ. το ντοκιμαντέρ «Οι Ελληνοαμερικανοί» του George Veras που προβλήθηκε από το PBS).

Σε αυτήν την κατάφωρη υπονόμευση αξιών τις οποίες η ηγεσία ισχυρίζεται επανειλημμένα ότι ασπάζεται –τη δημοκρατικότητα και τη γνώση– κανείς φορέας δεν έχει ασκήσει κριτική. Το φάσμα εκτείνεται από τη σιωπηλή συναίνεση και τον έπαινο έως την κατά κόρον αναπαραγωγή τους από κάποιες ηγετικές μορφές.

Το ζήτημα υπό συζήτηση, επομένως, εγείρει τουλάχιστον τρία καίρια ερωτήματα:

(α) τι είδους ηγεσία επιθυμούμε όσον αφορά τη στάση της απέναντι στον αυτοπροσδιορισμό και την αυτογνωσία μας (και όχι μόνο σε σχέση με την Ελλάδα, όπως έχει τεθεί αρχικά· τα δυο εξάλλου είναι αλληλένδετα)·

(β) για ποιο λόγο η ηγεσία συναινεί στην παραγωγή και αναπαραγωγή μιας γνώσης που αποκλείει τις εσωτερικές διαφοροποιήσεις και αντιστέκεται στην ιστορικοποίηση·

και (γ) πώς η νέα ηγεσία θα υπερασπιστεί τις αξίες της γνώσης και της δημοκρατικής συμπεριληπτικότητας μέσα στις υπάρχουσες δομές εξουσίας που σήμερα τις αναιρούν.

Οποιοσδήποτε ουσιαστικός διάλογος για το θέμα οφείλει να εξερευνήσει σε βάθος και τα τρία.

Γιώργος Αναγνώστου

Αύγουστος 1, 2026

Misrepresenting Greek diasporas – Aporias, Μελλοντικές Πορείες

There has been quite a stir these days among diasporic leaders, intellectuals, and citizens in Greek Australia and Greek America, about what has been seen as misplaced assumptions and interpretive angles that a senior Greek journalist brought in his writing about the role of diaspora vis-a-vis Greece.

As many of us diasporics know and have noted in public, this is not an isolated incident of a one-sided, Helladic rendering or even misrepresentation of "the diaspora." It is one component of a broader discourse on diaspora from a Helladic perspective. It includes venerated songs («Ελληνισμός» -Ύμνος για τον απόδημο ελληνισμό), exalted monuments dedicated to apodimos Ellinismos [forthcoming analysis], romantic nationalist official and unofficial accounts («η ψυχή», «η καρδιά της Ελλάδας χτυπάει στην ομογένεια»), based on the antiquated notions of transplantation, omnipotent, monophonic point of view, omogeneia, eternal nostos, ahistorical idealizations, naturally unbreakable ties, etc. Lacking understanding of our histories and cultures, αδιάβαστοι.

This is about blatant exercise of epistemic violence. Let us not allow ourselves to be seduced by its exaggerated positive stereotypes, which compromise our complex, multifaceted realities, bicultural affiliations and allegiances, historical experiences and sensibilities.

It is gravely unethical while it purports to celebrate the diaspora. It continues, despite the fact that so many of us have repeatedly made the point, in convincing Greek, in journalism, blogs, academic articles, books, the arts, only to be blatantly ignored. The fact that critical diaspora studies and its interpretive perspectives are marginalized in the Greek public sphere and elsewhere adds to the problem.

How do we respond? Perhaps this is the moment to call for a broader conversation. One obvious route, I believe, is to intensify our efforts to narrate our multifaceted identities and historical experiences; disseminate our pluralistic mappings purposefully across the Greek public sphere and our own (not forgetting that the Helladic perspective is alive too in our midst).

Perhaps create a venue (a fb page) to systematically feature our ethical labor? The Helladic perspective is pulling us in a centripetal trajectory, interfering with the vast labor we invest toward advancing centrifugal diasporic Hellenism.


Yiorgos Anagnostou
July 30, 2026

Διασπορά, κριτικές εννοιολογήσεις, ηγεμονικές οικειοποιήσεις

Δύο παρατηρήσεις από τρέχουσες εξελίξεις στο ελληνοαμερικανικό και «παγκόσμιο» διασπορικό πεδίο.

Συγκεκριμένα σχετικά με ένα αναδυόμενο φαινόμενο, την οικειοποίηση κριτικών εννοιών («Routes» και «τρίτος χώρος») από ηγεμονικούς θεσμούς:

 
1) Η Ελληνική Πρωτοβουλία (The Hellenic Initiative [THI]) υιοθετεί τον όρο Routes (ρότες) στην «ημέρα καρριέρας» "Roots&Routes: THI Careers and Employability Fair" που οργανώνει, και στην οποία συμμετέχουν μέλη της κυβέρνησης, επιχειρηματίες πολυεθνικών εταιρειών, εκπρόσωποι μέσων ενημέρωσης και εκπαιδευτικών ιδρυμάτων κ.ά.

2) Ο Ορθόδοξος Παρατηρητής, το επίσημο έντυπο της Ελληνορθόδοξης Αρχιεπισκοπής Αμερικής, εκθειάζει τη Lily Talmers, μιας μουσικού η οποία συνδυάζει «Αμερικανική folk με ελληνικές μελωδίες ρεμπέτικου» [δημιουργώντας ένα «τρίτο χώρο], και η οποία συνδέει τη τέχνη της με τον Ορθόδοξο Χριστιανικό προσανατολισμό της. 

Όπως γνωρίζουμε, οι έννοιες Routes και Τρίτος Χώρος προτάθηκαν η κάθε μια ως τρόποι αντίθεσης σε στατικές και ουσιοκρατικές αποδόσεις της ταυτότητας και διασποράς.

Η πρώτη προώθησε την κατανόηση της διασπορικής εμπειρίας ως δυναμικό, ιστορικά προσδιορισμένο πολιτισμικό γίγνεσθαι (cultural becoming) και διαπολιτισμικές γονιμοποιήσεις. Αυτό σε αντιπαράθεση της αναζήτηση των ριζών που πολλές φορές ενισχύει τις παγιωμένες και ανιστορικές ταυτότητες.

Η δεύτερη εστιάστηκε σε διαπολιτισμικές μίξεις και συνυπάρξεις, λειτουργώντας ως τρόπος αντίστασης σε εθνικιστικές ερμηνείες της διασποράς ως πολιτισμικής ομοιότητας και συνέχειας.

Η υιοθέτηση των δύο όρων από διασπορικούς ηγεμονικούς φορείς αποδεικνύει αυτό που έχει εδώ και πολύ καιρό επισημάνει ο θεωρητικός Stuart Hall:

«η κυρίαρχη ιδεολογία συχνά αντιδρά στην αντίθεση, όχι προσπαθώντας να την εξαλείψει, αλλά αντιθέτως επιτρέποντάς της να υπάρχει εντός των τόπων που η ίδια καθορίζει, επιτρέποντάς της σταδιακά να αναγνωριστεί, αλλά μόνο με τους όρους μιας διαδικασίας που της στερεί από οποιαδήποτε πραγματική ή αποτελεσματική αντιπολιτευτική δύναμη». (δες το ευρύτερο παράθεμα παρακάτω)

Πώς λοιπόν η κριτική κοινότητα δρα σε σχέση με αυτήν την αναδυόμενη τάση; Προτείνει νέες εννοιολογήσεις; (έχοντας συνείδηση ότι και αυτές θα γίνουν αντικείμενο οικειοποίησης.) Αναλύοντας κριτικά τα αφηγήματα οικειοποίησης; Κάτι άλλο;

 
=====

«[Ε]ίναι σαφές επομένως ότι η κυρίαρχη κουλτούρα λειτουργεί αποτελεσματικά και με ηγεμονικό τρόπο. Η ηγεμονία εδώ αποδεικνύεται από το γεγονός ότι η κυρίαρχη κουλτούρα δεν χρειάζεται να καταστρέψει την εμφανή αντίσταση. Απλώς πρέπει να τη συμπεριλάβει στους δικούς της χώρους, μαζί με όλες τις άλλες εναλλακτικές και δυνατότητες. Στην πραγματικότητα, όσο περισσότερες από αυτές επιτρέπονται, και όσο πιο ποικίλες είναι, τόσο περισσότερο συμβάλλουν στην αίσθηση της πλούσιας και ανοιχτής ποικιλίας στη ζωής, της αμοιβαίας ανοχής και σεβασμού και της φαινομενικής ελευθερίας. Η έννοια της ενσωμάτωσης υποδεικνύει την εξαιρετικά σημαντική ιδέα ότι η κυρίαρχη ιδεολογία συχνά αντιδρά στην αντίθεση, όχι προσπαθώντας να την εξαλείψει, αλλά αντιθέτως επιτρέποντάς της να υπάρχει εντός των τόπων που η ίδια καθορίζει, επιτρέποντάς της σταδιακά να αναγνωριστεί, αλλά μόνο με τους όρους μιας διαδικασίας που της στερεί από οποιαδήποτε πραγματική ή αποτελεσματική αντιπολιτευτική δύναμη».

Ρίζες και Ρότες (Roots and Routes) I

Περιδιαβαίνοντας μετά από χρόνια απουσίας τη Θεσσαλονίκη, ένα προσωπικό τόπο μνήμης από το λύκειο και τα φοιτητικά μου χρόνια (1975-1984), επιστρέφει στο νου ξαφνικά, σαν απόλυτη ανάγκη, το αγαπημένο Δρόμοι Παλιοί, με κυριεύει, απαιτεί να το σιγοτραγουδήσω.

«Δρόμοι παλιοί που αγάπησα και μίσησα ατέλειωτα

Κάτω απ’ τους ίσκιους των σπιτιών να περπατώ

Νύχτες των γυρισμών αναπότρεπτες κι η πόλη νεκρή

Την ασήμαντη παρουσία μου βρίσκω σε κάθε γωνιά»

Οι λαβύρινθοι της μνήμης επιλέγουν ένα διάδρομο σύνδεσης με το παρελθόν, με μεταφέρουν σε μια δομή αισθήματος για την πόλη βαθιά ριζωμένη από τότε, ως βαθιά μνήμη/γνώση. Επαναλαμβάνω τους στίχους τραγουδιστά μία, δυο, τρεις φορές, βυθίζομαι στο ημίφως ενός μονόδρομου, πηγαινοέρχομαι μια διαδρομή που με ελευθέρωνε από κάτι αλλού και με δέσμευε με κάτι νέο τώρα ρουτίνα, επιστρέφω στη βιβλιοθήκη που κατασπάραξε την εφηβεία μου (και προς λάθος επάγγελμα), να και ο δρόμος για το φροντιστήριο, οδός «εισαγωγή στο πανεπιστήμιο», βαριά βήματα λιώνουν την άσφαλτο, παρηγοριά μια πρόσοψη αγαπημένου βιβλιοπωλείου, αριστερά ένα μπαρ που πλέον δεν υπάρχει, Μητροπόλεως, μετά Ολύμπιον, ραντεβού, το πρόσωπό της εκλείπει το θάμβος της Αριστοτέλους.

Επανέρχομαι από την ονειροπόληση. Μετά από σαράντα χρόνια μακριά της, το ποίημα/τραγούδι δεν μπορεί παρά να συναντήσει έναν άλλο εαυτό, αυτή τη φορά διασπορικό. Είναι αυτός ο εαυτός που τώρα τον προσκαλεί να συλλογισθεί τη σημασία των στίχων σε σχέση με τις «Ρίζες», να αμφισβητήσει ένα αφήγημα που o συμβατικός τρόπος που ενορχηστρώνεται τον περικυκλώνει ως παραδοσιακός χορός, αυτόν που στον κύκλο του ποτέ δεν συμμετείχε.

Δεν γεννήθηκα στη Θεσσαλονίκη, η πόλη δεν είναι η καταγωγή μου. Τη θεωρώ όμως αναπόσπαστο κομμάτι αυτού που τώρα αποκαλούμε ρίζες. Εδώ ερωτεύτηκα, εδώ περιπλανήθηκα απελευθερωμένος από τους ελέγχους της μικρής γενέτειρας πόλης (της προηγούμενης ρίζας), εδώ έπαιξα και απόλαυσα μπάσκετ, εδώ με τυράννησε το μεσαιωνικό εκπαιδευτικό σύστημα, με έπνιξε, εδώ με στένεψε ο διαχωρισμός «αρρένων και θηλέων», εδώ οι βιτρίνες των βιβλιοπωλείων, του Ραγιά, του Μόλχο, του Κεντρί με καλούσαν σε ένα χώρο που διακαώς επιθυμούσα να εισέλθω, τη συγγραφή, μα αδυνατούσα να συμμετάσχω στον κόσμο του.

Οι ρίζες της Θεσσαλονίκης δεν αιωρούνται μοναχικές, σαν εσωτερικά φαντάσματα. Παίρνουν το νόημα τους σε σχέση με τις προηγούμενες, του γενέθλιου τόπου, και αυτές τις ρίζες που επακόλουθα δημιουργήθηκαν, στη διασπορά, στην Αμερική. Οι τελευταίες προφανώς δεν είναι καταγωγικές, αλλά πνευματικές. Συμπεριλαμβάνουν μελέτες για τις ρίζες, οι οποίες σε συνδυασμό με βιωματικές εμπειρίες με προσανατόλισαν προς νέους τρόπους θεώρησης πέρα από απλοποιήσεις και εξιδανικεύσεις.

«Οι δρόμοι που αγάπησα και μίσησα» εκφράζουν μια αμφιθυμία την οποία μοιράζονται πλείστοι διασπορικοί για τις ρίζες τους. Μόλις αυτό το Σάββατο, στα ΝΕΑ, ο Βρασίδας Καραλής υπογραμμίζει την «αμφίθυμη σχέση που είχαν» και ο Ελία Καζάν και ο Τζον Κασσαβέτης «με την καταγωγή τους». Η αμφιθυμία μας οδηγεί να προσεγγίσουμε τις ρίζες πέρα από τη νοσταλγία, καλώντας να χαρτογραφήσουμε την πολυπλοκότητα των αισθημάτων, να εντοπίσουμε τις αντιφάσεις, να κατανοήσουμε την προέλευσή τους, να ιστορικοποιήσουμε τελικά τη σχέση του διασπορικού υποκειμένου με το παρελθόν του.

Πρόσθετα, οι ρίζες διασχίζονται από δρόμους, και κυριολεκτικά και μεταφορικά, που ένας μόνο κάποιους αγάπησε ενώ κάποιους άλλους μίσησε. Η κριτική ανάλυση εξερευνάει τη σχέση με τις ρίζες σε συγκεκριμένους τόπους/δρόμους – τι τους άγγιξε, τι τους εκδίωξε, πώς και γιατί. (1)

Οι ρίζες δεν αποτελούν ένα σταθερό σημείο καταγωγής, αλλά ένα παλίμψηστο «ριζών» οι οποίες δημιουργούνται μέσω διαδρομών στο χώρο και το χρόνο. Προσωπικά οι διαδρομές μου συμπεριλαμβάνουν την Ορεστιάδα, τη Θεσσαλονίκη, τη Λουϊζιάνα, το Οχάϊο, και αλλού. (και τη Μελβούρνη που μόνο προσωρινά επισκέφτηκα αλλά την αισθάνθηκα φαντασιακά σαν ρίζες.)

Οι ρίζες δεν αποτελούν ένα σταθερό σημείο νοήματος. Πρόκειται για ένα παλίμψηστο τα στρώματα του οποίου «συνομιλούν» μεταξύ τους διαδραστικά, το νόημα του ενός αποδίδεται μέσω της οπτικής των άλλων. Η σχέση μου με τις ρίζες στη συμπρωτεύουσα είναι αδύνατο να κατανοηθεί ανεξάρτητα από το βίωμα των «ριζών» στη γενέθλια πόλη. Δεν θα ήταν δυνατόν να αποδώσω τη σχέση μου με τους δρόμους της Θεσσαλονίκης και τις ρίζες γενικότερα με τον τρόπο που το κάνω εδώ χωρίς τις γνώσεις που απέκτησα στο χώρο των πνευματικών μου Αμερικανικών ριζών.

Από αυτήν τη θέση οι ρίζες δεν κατανοούνται χωρίς να λάβουμε υπ' όψη τις ρότες (routes) / διαδρομές του υποκειμένου που τις νοηματοδοτεί. (2) Με άλλα λόγια, Roots and Routes πάνε βόλτα μαζί.

Σημειώσεις:

1. Βλ. παρακάτω σύνδεσμο. Το κείμενο αναλύει το μυθιστόρημα του Θεόδωρου Γρηγοριάδη ζωή μεθόρια μέσα από το πρίσμα της μεθοριακής θεωρίας. Χαρτογραφεί τις φεμινιστικές πρακτικές της ηρωίδας με σκοπό να συνδέσει τη θεματική της μεθορίου, ενός κεντρικού θέματος του μυθιστορήματος, με το εξωκειμενικό θέμα της διασποράς. Η έκκεντρη σύνδεση μου επιτρέπει να προτείνω την επαναθέωρηση του αφηγήματος περί «διασποράς και ριζών» στην Ελλάδα πέρα από την ιδεολογία μιας ενιαίας διασπορικής ταυτότητας και ενός συμπαγούς καταγωγικού χώρου. https://marginalia.gr/.../oria-methorios-diaspora.../

2. Καλό θα ήταν, όσοι προωθούν το αφήγημα «Ρίζες» στην Ελλάδα να μελετήσουν το πόνημα του James Clifford για τις Ρότες. (υπάρχει βέβαια και σχετική ανάλυση σε σχέση με την ελληνοαμερικανική διασπορά, αν δεν το έχετε υπ' όψιν σας.)

Γιώργος Αναγνώστου

Ιούλιος 1, 2026

“Incorporating Diasporic History and Culture in the Greek Language Classroom.” _ A Workshop Talk

This gathering provides me with the opportunity to advocate the inclusion of diasporic histories and identities in our language classroom and initiate a conversation whether there is an interest among language educators to turn this idea into a project.

Let me start with this contrast: On the one hand, scholars in Greece advocate the incorporation of diasporic literature and autobiography in the language heritage classroom. They develop teaching material – anthologies of diasporic texts for example – and discuss issues of pedagogy. What are the criteria for choosing cultural content, they ask. There is a significant corpus of publications.

On the other hand, there is limited discussion in the United State about a pedagogy centered on diasporic material. To the best of knowledge, and I hope I am mistaken, we have not been particularly keen in systematically thinking about this prospect.

I do not believe we have a good sense of the scale of interest among educators on the topic.

An interest is emerging, though, and this talk aims to contribute to the nascent conversation.

Our relative inattention contrasts with the cultural realties of our classrooms where the immigrant past and the ethnic present are ubiquitous. Think of the multiple linguistic registers at work. One is Grenglish, the result of the exposure of the students to two languages; in circulation are vocabularies and grammars of regional dialects connected with family histories; the linguistic repertoire of students includes passages of koine due to exposure to the Greek Orthodoxy liturgy and Sunday school; probably one could detect in their speaking traces of Greek as it was spoken in the 1950s and 1960s. If we were to include Cypriot students, they would have contributed additional layers of linguistic diversity.

Our classroom are exciting spaces of heteroglossias.

The immigrant past and the ethnic present are also present in the memories, experiences, and social imagination of our students. There are family stories and histories, there are feelings and perceptions about growing up and living as a bicultural person.

If this is the case, if indeed immigration and ethnicity is everywhere in the classroom why we do not then inquire about their place in our curricula. As educators we now recognize that the identities and interests which the students bring with them in the classroom matter in connection to the content of our courses and the pedagogies we practice. If we agree, this question confronts us: What is the place of their subjectivities in the modern Greek language classroom? In turn, how do engage with these identities?

The prevailing practices in our classrooms connect students with Greece. Their interest in folk and popular culture, their ancestral roots, history, classical heritage, customs and traditions, places them in relation to Greek regions and national culture. The fact that the textual content of our classroom is Greece-centered accommodates this interest. In this respect, the language classroom empowers these identifications.

But we do not know enough on how our heritage students negotiate their biculturalism, how they understand their identities. College students tend to resist narratives that impose an identity on them. Instead, they view themselves as agents in shaping their own identities.

How do we engage these perspectives in the classroom? What material do we assign to enter into conversation with this point of view? Diasporic studies have theorized these issues.

There is an added dimension I must introduce in the discussion. It is an institutional mission by the Panhellenic Scholarship Foundation, an organization for which many of us have served as academic advisors; an organization also that has granted scholarship to many of our students. I quote their mission statement.

“Building a better America through Education and Hellenism is at the core of the Foundation’s mission. In that spirit, we aim to strengthen our civic fabric by supporting Greek American undergraduates as they develop their paideia and become enlightened and engaged citizen.”

The question here is how Greek and Greek American history and culture mediate the making of Greek diasporic citizenship. We notice, obviously, the emphasis is on the future, Greek American becoming in relation to the United States. Is this call relevant to us? If so, how we contribute to it?

Based on all the above, the question I am asking is this one: Are we interested in building on this conversation? Do you find value in expanding the curriculum to diasporic material?

Educators may have their own reasons to object or hesitate to incorporate diasporic topics in the classroom. Such a position merits discussion, which I hope we will be taking up in the Q&A. A major challenge, I believe is the artificial boundary between modern Greek and Greek American studies. Most language educators have been trained in the former and it is this focus that shapes their approach to teaching language and culture. Venturing in Greek American/diasporic history and culture presents significant challenges.

For those of us who are interested in the topic but are not familiar with conversations about the politics and poetics of Greek America and diaspora in general, there are still several routes for the gradual incorporation of diasporic material.

One is to introduce material that have been analyzed by modern Greek studies scholars.
I have in mind Mimika Kranaki’s Philellines, Thanasis Valtinos’ To Synaxari tou Andrea Kordopatis, and certainly the corpus of Vassilis Alexakis. There are the songs of Xenitia, documentaries on George Pelecanos, a crime fiction writer, in English with captions in Greek, translations of Jeffery Eugenides, Christos Tsiolkas. Many texts are available in translation, making them suitable candidates for modules on translation choices. There is visual material and popular culture that place Greek cultural icons such as Karaghiozis in the American context.

A second approach is to include texts that involve bilingualism, translanguaging, and the poetics of linguistic play between Greek and English, including translation.There is also ample material on linguistic play involving anagrams and homophony, which could lead to the discovery of unexpected and playful affinities between Greek and English.

At this juncture, I ought to bring into the conversation our non-heritage students, a diverse and vital demographic that includes international students and those with multiple heritages. Instead of working with the duality of heritage/non-heritage students, I prefer to think of this population in terms of affinities and partial commonalities. Some children of immigrants may bring to the classroom an affinity for the experience of living with bilingual and bicultural realities. Diasporic material can offer resources to engage with issues beyond heritage, including the circumstances leading to socioeconomic mobility, the experience of migration, otherness and belonging, gender, self-representation, the ideological dimensions of identity narratives, ethnic and racial hierarchies, and the poetics of identity and translation.

I close with this thought: Our language classroom is a site of knowledge production about diasporic histories and experiences. This happens in a variety of ways. For their class projects, students often chose to tell family, or personal stories. This includes their interviews with family members. Classes which incorporate the interaction of our students with their peers in Greece, and which include comparison of their experiences, produce an ethnographic treasure trove. In other words, the language classroom is a key place for understanding the “next generation.” We may wish to think collectively about ways to enhance this function and disseminate the results.

Yiorgos Anagnostou


A Workshop on Greek Linguistics. The Laboratory for the Study of the Greek Language. The Ohio State University. April 18, 2026.

The Forgotten Half, or the Plight of the Twice Hyphenated, by Gerasimus Katsan, The Voices of the Other Greek America # 16

The Voices of the Other Greek America # 16

The Forgotten Half, or the Plight of the Twice Hyphenated

by Gerasimus Katsan

"If insist on 'purity,' where does that leave the better than two-thirds of Greeks who have intermarried? What secular cultural institutions do we currently have that don’t alienate the children of intermarried families or create the othering of 'half-Greeks' and the twice-hyphenated Greek-African-Americans, Greek-Latino-Americans, Greek-(white ethnic)-Americans, Greek-Asian-Americans? Naturally it is true that specific communities have addressed this problem in their own ways, some finding solutions to the question of inclusion and negotiating the boundaries of identity. There is a kind of arrogance in the insistence that to be a 'real Greek' you must be only Greek and nothing else, and to gain acceptance you must put aside the other side of your identity. It also begs the question of who gets to decide who is a “real Greek” in the first place.4 Intermarried couples always have to negotiate this issue within their own families. Which culture will be dominant, which will be subordinate? Preferably a balance could be found between the two."

Ergon: Gender and Diasporic Greek Women

A major contour of Ergon’s politics involves foregrounding questions of diasporic gender and women. The interest lies in exploring how women have been acting on patriarchal structures and economic systems of exploitation. How the next generation negotiates intergenerational trauma, tradition, norms, male authority. How it articulates and frames women’s voices. The strategies and tactics of women’s agency.

Questions on the ethics and politics of representation are central to our inquiry while also the material conditions shaping women’s life trajectories.

We utilize a variety of writing genres: interview, essay, article, blog, poetry, book review. We analyze fiction, public fora, essays, experiences, cultural memories, the archive.

This cultural work primarily connects with Greek America and lately Greek Australia and is now venturing into representations cast in terms of globality. Involving conversations across national boundaries this orientation inevitably opens a space where modern Greek and transnational diasporic studies intersect. It is in this space of cross-fertilization that we also wish to cultivate inviting colleagues from various disciplines to contribute to our mission.

Ergon is the product of labor that perhaps does not advance one’s career the way publishing in other venues would. This is what makes the work of our contributors special, the ethos of practicing scholarship in various iterations because first and foremost what matters is the ethics and politics we pursue.

I thank all our contributors who make this project possible!

Sharing the list of our publications on the topic (with apologies for any inadvertent omissions).

The Feasting Virgin. Georgia Kolias. Review by Henriette Lazaridis, 2021. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/books/the-feasting-virgin

“‘It is Chic to be Greek’ in the Greek/American Classroom: Ethnic Revival, Representation, Gender.” Yiorgos Anagnostou, 2021. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/essays/it-is-chic-to-be-greek

“Writing Greek America: Perspectives on Gender and Sexuality.” Artemis Leontis, 2021. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/ergastirio/perspectives-on-gender-and-sexuality

“Fathers and Daughters: Joanna Eleftheríou’s This Way Back.” Review of This Way Back, by Joanna Eleftheriou. George Kouvaros,2022. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/books/fathers-and-daughters

“Aubrey Dawne Edwards, Artist, Educator, Storyteller, Advocate for Social Justice: An Interview.” Interview by Artemis Leontis. 2023. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/interviews/advocate-for-social-justice

“Her Heritage Made Sense”—Diasporic Success! Women Transmitting and Queering Foodways in Annie Liontas’s Let Me Explain You.” Yiorgos Anagnostou, 2023. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/articles/her-heritage-made-sense

“The Politics of Life and Death: Working-Class Greek Immigrant Women and the Castle Gate Mine Disaster––A Tribute.” Yiorgos Anagnostou, 2024. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/articles/the-politics-of-life-and-death

The Mother Must Die. Koraly Dimitriadis. Review by Dean Kalymniou https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/books/koraly-dimitriadis-the-mother-must-die

Still navigating through uncharted waters in radio silence: Is anyone there? Leah Fygetakis, 2025. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/essays/voices-of-the-other-greek-america-leah-fygetakis

The Greek Table, Artemis Leontis, 2026. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/essays/voices-of-the-other-greek-america-artemis-leontis

Performing Belonging: Reimagining Greek America through Embodied Artistic Practice, Yona Stamatis, 2026. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/essays/voices-of-the-other-greek-america-yona-stamatis

A Greek Revolution in America, Eleftheria Lialios, 2026. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/essays/voices-of-the-other-greek-america-eleftheria-lialios

Across a Polarized Divide, Elaine Angelopoulos, 2026. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/essays/voices-of-the-other-greek-america-elaine-angelopoulos

“Greek Women Speak: An Appreciation.” Dean Kalymniou. 2026. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/essays/greek-women-speak-an-appreciation

“Articulating Women’s Voices Across Borders: Reflections on Balance the Scales: Women, Migration and Leadership 1835–2026.” Dean Kalymniou, 2026.
https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/essays/articulating-womens-voices-across-borders

“Critical Humanities, Cultural Leaders, the Ethics and Politics of Diasporic Representation.” Yiorgos Anagnostou, 2026. https://ergon.scienzine.com/article/blog/the-ethics-and-politics-of-diasporic-representation

On the Question of Diasporic Voice and Polyvocality – A Note

Definition: “Polyvocality refers to the presence of multiple voices, perspectives, or viewpoints within a single work, allowing for a rich tapestry of narratives and interpretations. This concept emphasizes the idea that no single voice can encapsulate the entirety of human experience, encouraging dialogue and interaction among diverse characters or narrative strands. It is especially relevant in hybrid forms and cross-genre works where varied genres and styles converge.”

Voice and voicing are terms now in wide circulation in emerging diasporic identity narratives: the importance of registering a variety of perspectives, experiences, claims to truth; of sharing one’s life story, interpretation of history, explanation of this and that cultural phenomenon. Polyvocality is hailed, not unjustly, as a tool for inclusion, for democratic representation.

 
To historicize “voice” in connection to Greek America, this is a most welcoming development. The demand for the inclusion of voices from all walks of life – the poor, feminists, working-class activists, LGBTQ, non-Greek Orthodox, critical intellectuals – was central in the strategy of resisting the hegemony of an identity narrative which was grand in scale but small in scope: monophonic and reductive. It was (and still is) facing little resistance in significant public sectors and among several so-called leaders.

But acknowledging the value of voice, multiplicity offers only a step toward a meaningful exchange of perspectives. Once I experienced the following in a diasporic polyphonic event: voicing nationalist pride, ahistorical explanations of the past, claims on the cultural syncretism of the diasporic self, idealist explanations of mobility and contrasting sociological positions on the topic among a potpourri of contradictory perspectives.

Without a moderator to deliberate, point to false assumptions and unfounded claims, the polyphonic event ended in a cacophonic tenor. People spoke but there was no effort to really listen to and engage with others to reach a sort of intersubjectivity/mutual understanding. It ended up as a multiplicity of monophonic narratives without a chorus to reflect, comment, critique. As far from a Greek performance as one could imagine. Overwhelming praise was everywhere in public (media, speeches official announcements), consternation was abundant in private.

No scholar analyzed the event, no media critically reflected on it.

Hegemonic views remained intact.

Polyphony does not mean that all claims carry equal weight of validity. At work must be the operation of deliberation: criteria for evaluating claims, knowledge to assess the merit of perspectives, critical judgement. More so because voices are deeply ideological and resistant to change. Who decides on these criteria? Polyvocality comes with a rich body of scholarship and, well, multiple perspectives.

How we practice this deliberation is an urgent question. How do we achieve this kind of dialogic and agonistic exchange productively when – and I speak in relation to Greek America – this art and politics of inclusion has been stifled by expansive networks of power?

Yiorgos Anagnostou

March 16, 2026