The legacy of what is left from Jericho
It was Nikos Skoulas, first Minister of Tourism in the mid-80s, who, after visiting the headquarters of the British tour operators, expressed his strong opposition to the kind of tourism that was thriving in a famous Corfu destination.
Sex tourism, out-of-control drinking and violence are unacceptable, he had said, get out of here. The reply he received by the British was something along the lines of "take it or leave it"! As a result, the same happened to another beach and thus it was led to a crisis, struggling to breathe for a long time.
This incident that happened 35 years ago shows the usual inability of politics to harness such interests and the hypocrisy of the rest of us as we seem to ignore the root cause of a biosphere that is ugly and threatening. The fact that these environments are endemic with fungi and parasites, thus becoming eventually normal (and legal) flora, can only be surprising to the unsuspecting. And Corfu no longer has them, after more than half a century of tourist activity.
So what? We will submit to fate?
Changing the model and therefore the brand will not be without casualties since it will have to face greed and arbitrariness. It will thus be unpopular, at particular political cost and conflicting in many cases with what might be considered today as a producer of a primary tourist product. And it might be! But what kind of product it that?
It may be forced to go through defeats and disappointments before harmony and normality can become again a model of life for the locals and attractive, along with nature and its other beauties, for visitors. Otherwise, the tears over the spilled milk will remain hypocritical. And if they show anything beyond the weakness of the current politicians and administrators of Jerusalem, the real difficulty is to change course when those profiting from you don't want that to happen!