The name is absent

Appendix 1

of outreach that were very close to those circulating within the EU development
community, but were not aware of any actual programs running in the country, while
others claimed never to have heard of such services. I was intrigued by this situation and
my investigation became a hunt for an explanation as to why and how the EU definition
of outreach was being adapted and applied. Eventually, however, I turned to the notes I
had collected through MERIA.

During the various meetings with the doctor and the social worker from the
organization we had originally approached, I discovered that they viewed minority
groups from an ahistorical perspective, as ever-present collectivities without particular
claims for special treatment or protection justified by past discrimination, and that they
considered programming around particular local needs like those of Greek Roma
discriminatory to the broader Athenian population. These perspectives were affected by
a cross-section of historical flows associated with particular Greek national narratives
having to do with civil liberties and ethnos, which were also affecting other aspects of the
organization’s operations. Their attempts to negotiate a particular working relationship
with MERIA were informed by their understanding that “outside” concepts must be
adapted to fit the local Greek reality. To accomplish MERIA's goals, including the
development of an outreach program in line with the EU vision with this group, it would
have been necessary to challenge the underlying embedded flows that informed their
perspectives on national identity and understanding of cultural relativity. Instead, we
turned our attention towards finding an organization that shared more of the same flows
MERIA represents. In so doing we came across a multinational NGO that shared our
views and which was in fact quite actively trying to challenge Greek understandings of

<<   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   >>

More intriguing information