Syriza Rising

[Die Neue Zeit]

http://inthesetimes.com/article/13472/syriza_rising/



The radical Left in Greece almost rules.

BY RICHARD SEYMOUR

After a period of worrying decline, some of Europe’s Left parties, formed to contest social democracy from the Left, are on the rebound. The remarkable surge of Syriza in Greece is the latest indication of this, emerging in the May 6th elections as the main contender to consolidate the Left. With 16.8 percent of the total, Syriza finished second, only two points behind the center-right New Democracy.

What made this possible is the imposition of “austerity” policies that cut public spending, reduce wages and redistribute the burden of taxes to the working class. Greece’s debts have been used as a pretext for a series of assaults on the public sector. In order to secure funds from the European Union to pay off debts to Europe’s major banks, Greece had to sign on to the Memorandum of Understanding, which imposed cutbacks and mandated the sell-off of $66 billion worth of public assets at fire-sale prices.

Proclaiming a radical agenda—tearing up the Memorandum, nationalizing banks, raising the minimum wage, restoring lost benefits for workers, and ending cuts to public-sector jobs—Syriza surprised everyone, coming closer to taking office than any other left-of-social-democracy formation in Europe. It has displaced the traditional social democratic party, Pasok (Panhellenic Socialist Movement), as the main party of the Greek working class, beating Pasok in many of its traditional urban strongholds (above all, in Athens). Among blue-collar public-sector workers, Syriza won 27 percent, compared to 10.6 percent for Pasok. Among blue-collar private-sector workers, it won 21 percent, compared to 7 percent for Pasok.

The significance of this is obvious. The stakes in Greece’s struggle are graver than any situation in Europe since the Portuguese Revolution in 1974.

Roots of the crisis

Historically, Greek capitalism has been built on the basis of shipping and finance. These two sectors have led Greece’s political power bloc, have never paid taxes to support a welfare state, and don’t to this day. As such, the Greek welfare state, constructed by Pasok after the dictatorship collapsed in 1974, was funded by the taxes of workers, and extensive borrowing. The result was accumulating budget deficits.

But the strategy of the power bloc was to fully integrate into the European Union, where such deficits were taboo. They were to be suppressed through spending cuts and restructuring, with the remainder concealed by Goldman Sachs. The trouble, though, was that Greece’s role in the Eurozone was to act as an export market for Europe’s core economies—above all, Germany. This escalated public and private debt in Greece. If the illusion was that growth—spurred by financialization—would eventually pay the bills, the “credit crunch” was a merciless reality check.

When Pasok was elected in 2009 to reverse a series of cutbacks, the country’s debts were four times the EU limit. Unwilling to tax the rich, the party’s solution was fiscal “credibility”—meaning austerity, soaring unemployment and people dying due to lack of medicine.

This began a cycle of protest that recalls the aftermath of Greece’s military junta. From the student movement to the Indignados, from the first to the last of 17 general strikes, the tempo has varied, but the trend is one of intense polarization, largely favoring the Left. The problem for Pasok, and the “technocratic” coalition that briefly succeeded it, was that the Greek working class had not suffered a serious defeat of the sort that had been dealt to other groups of workers—airline workers in the U.S., for example, or miners in the U.K.

Nor had Greek communism been vanquished. In addition to a number of organizations of the radical Left, major factions were present in the Greek Communist Party and Syriza, both of which contributed to radicalization. Five years of recession, social struggle and escalating austerity have produced a situation in which one faction came close to leading a government of the radical Left. This crisis is not just of an economy or a state, but of a whole social compact, and the systems of political and ideological representation that have bound it together.

Syriza: Duck or rabbit?

There is little agreement among the European Left about what kind of organization Syriza is. From one perspective, it is a typical reformist group with a pro-European strategy that (radical rhetoric aside) will tend toward conciliation with European elites. Those who take this view note the dominance of the ex-Eurocommunist formation Synaspismós (Coalition of Left Movements and Ecology), which makes up about 85 percent of the membership.

A few factors complicate this picture. First, while the radical fringe in Syriza is far from dominant, it is not negligible. Among Syriza’s constituents are the Communist Organization of Greece, a Maoist organization and the second-largest group in the coalition, and the International Workers Left, a Trotskyist party. Though the dominant forces in Syriza are indeed relatively moderate, the other forces are not a mere appendage. The stances that emerge are the result of complex forces within the organization as well as from external pressures.

Second, Synaspismós has its Right and Left currents internally. Its very structure, seeking to form a “canopy” of the Left, encourages platforms and internal differentiation. Its participation in social movements drew in leftist youth, and the old right-wing leadership that once pursued a (brief, disastrous) alliance with New Democracy was defeated in 2004. Synaspismós has since pursued alliances with the radical Left rather than simply seeking favor with Pasok, and many of its right-wing leaders eventually defected to form the Democratic Left, now a partner in the coalition government.

Third, Syriza’s pro-European stance has not been static. While Syriza still favors remaining in the Eurozone, there is growing dissent internally, led by its Left leaders such as Panagiotis Lafazanis. The slogan before May was “not one sacrifice for the euro,” reflecting a much more ambiguous, critical stance (though in practice, this slogan was dropped some time before the May election).

Syriza answers the need for a mediating factor between complicit social democracy, which offers at best timid resistance to the worst aspects of austerity, and an abstract maximalism, which poses revolutionary demands in a situation that is not revolutionary. In Greece, social democracy is cadaverous, but as yet the social struggles have not produced organs of popular power. The majority of Greek workers are looking for a Left government to stop austerity, and this was the slogan that Syriza raised before the May elections.

A loss … but for how long?

Syriza’s proposals are not especially radical—and are even to the right of where Pasok once stood—but they pose an intolerable dilemma to European capital. The main plank of Syriza’s agenda was to revoke the laws implementing the Memorandum, and force a renegotiation. In the course of fighting the subsequent election in June, Syriza’s leaders tried to soften the unilateral element of this policy. But notably, they stuck with it. When Syriza leader Alexis Tsipras held his final election rally on June 14, he was clear that if Syriza won, the Memorandum would be dead.

For Europe’s leaders, this meant either renegotiating the Memorandum (thus accepting a political defeat and setting a dangerous precedent), or forcing Greece out of the EU (at the risk of destabilizing the Eurozone). Syriza’s plan would have relieved some of the burden from Greek shoulders, putting the crisis back in the heart of Europe.

In the June 17 elections, Syriza advanced to 26.8 percent of the vote. However, this was not enough to win, due to the consolidation of the right-wing vote around New Democracy, which garnered 29.6 percent. A major factor in New Democracy’s increase was the intimidation campaign mounted against Syriza. European leaders let it be known they would not renegotiate; if Greece voted the wrong way, it would be forced to withdraw from the euro, and be cast into destitution. In the last week, a panic campaign led to savings being withdrawn from Greece, which shifted the advantage away from Syriza. The result was a relief for EU leaders, and a defeat for Greek workers.

But the new government is only as stable as Greek society is, or as the EU is. We may yet see Syriza’s strategy put to the test.

[Tim Cornelis]

First:


After a period of worrying decline, some of Europe’s Left parties, formed to contest social democracy from the Left, are on the rebound.

Then:


Proclaiming a radical agenda—tearing up the Memorandum, nationalizing banks, raising the minimum wage, restoring lost benefits for workers, and ending cuts to public-sector jobs—Syriza surprised everyone, coming closer to taking office than any other left-of-social-democracy formation in Europe.

A stark contradiction indeed. Such "radical" programmes were characterising of social-democratic parties prior to neoliberalism.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Ah, but the soc-dem parties prior to neoliberalism didn't commit to nationalizing all the banks, unlike these left parties. A European left should have as one of its policies an ECB monopoly on all financial services in the EU.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Ah, but the soc-dem parties prior to neoliberalism didn't commit to nationalize all the banks, unlike these left parties.

Sometimes they did, in theory, proclaim that they desired this (like Syriza). That they did not in practice do this was a consequence of their political ideology.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Sometimes they did, in theory, proclaim that they desired this (like Syriza). That they did not in practice do this was a consequence of their political ideology.

I'm not sure those soc-dems did "in theory," even. The theory might have been a one-third-each mix. Check these out:

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1219987--germany-re-surfaces-as-europe-s-imperial-power


The profile of Germany’s banking sector has historically been one of broad conservatism, says Trevor Evans, professor of economics at the Berlin School of Economics and Law. Approximately one-third of the banking sector is comprised of profit-making institutions — Deutsche Bank et al. — with state-owned savings banks accounting for a further third. But even there trouble blossomed in the regional savings banks, known as Landesbanks, which went seeking high-yield assets.

“And what were they?” asks Evans. “Collateralized debt obligations. So the Landesbanks, these regional savings banks, set up subsidiaries in Dublin and started buying these securities, which they understood absolutely nothing about and made big losses. It’s tragic.”

One third would be private, profit-making. One third would be state-owned federally. One third would be coop, credit union, non-profit, regional, municipal, etc.

[A Marxist Historian]

First:

Then:

A stark contradiction indeed. Such "radical" programmes were characterising of social-democratic parties prior to neoliberalism.

The article notes that PASOK, a pseudo "Social Democratic" but actually bourgeois party, a split from the ND, used to have a more radical program than SYRIZA. (Presumably Papandreou was under the influence of his old friend Michel Pablo when he wrote the program). And the British Labour Party was "committed" to nationalizing all industry under Clause Four, which was only abolished as late as the 1950s.

The SYRIZA program is only just another example of Stalin's saying that paper will take whatever is written on it.

Actually, the article in the OP explains perfectly why SYRIZA lost. Its real election program was to renegotiate the debt memoranda. But the EU, as explained, made it very clear that renegotiation was simply not going to happen, cutting the ground out from under SYRIZA's real program, making voting for SYRIZA pointless.

In all probability, the ND-PASOK government, which is the one the bankers preferred anyway, will be able to cut a better deal for Greece than whatever Tsipras could have tried to negotiate.

-M.H.-

[Geiseric]

Oh my god, you've got to be kidding me MH. it seems like you're so sectarian that you prefer capitalists to "other," socialists! And the EU is run by fucking capitalists, so you actually trust them when they say that the debt "can't be renegotiated"? This seems like defensism x1000, and you seem to have some kind of clairvoyance that the capitalists will be "better deal makers," than SYRIZA, thus by your populist logic, everybody should vote for them! I can quasi understand why one might support KKE, since it used to be a revolutionary communist party (before they did the purges, killing the trotskyists your group ideologically descends from) but I don't understand how somebody would have less faith in SYRIZA than capitalists.

[A Marxist Historian]

Oh my god, you've got to be kidding me MH. it seems like you're so sectarian that you prefer capitalists to "other," socialists! And the EU is run by fucking capitalists, so you actually trust them when they say that the debt "can't be renegotiated"? This seems like defensism x1000, and you seem to have some kind of clairvoyance that the capitalists will be "better deal makers," than SYRIZA, thus by your populist logic, everybody should vote for them! I can quasi understand why one might support KKE, since it used to be a revolutionary communist party (before they did the purges, killing the trotskyists your group ideologically descends from) but I don't understand how somebody would have less faith in SYRIZA than capitalists.

I have no faith in either. You do, your mistake.

Why can't the debt be renegotiated? Because if it is, then that open a pandora's box to renegotiating all the other debts, and pretty soon it's the 1931 Kredit Anstalt bankruptcy all over again, the European banks start dropping like flies, and it's the Great Depression all over again.

You seem not to realize that the crisis of Greece and Europe is real, not just because Merkel is a stubborn bull-headed German.

Any concessions that either SYRIZA or PASOK-ND could get out of the bankers will be minor, at most a temporary payment delay. Greece is not Argentina, and 2012 is not the '90s.

The only solution is revolution and socialism. That's what the KKE says in its election propaganda, that's why they are worth voting for, despite the gulf between words and actions.

SYRIZA say, vote for us, we'll renegotiate, calm down, this problem can be solved in the framework of capitalism. That they got a lot of votes for this is understandable. That wannabe revolutionaries voted for them too is truly stupid.

-M.H.-

[Hit The North]

And the British Labour Party was "committed" to nationalizing all industry under Clause Four, which was only abolished as late as the 1950s.


Correction: Clause four was not abolished by the Labour Party until 1995 as part of the ideological offensive of 'New Labour'. I mention this because as an historian I guess accuracy of dates is important to you.

Anyways, the Labour Party never presented clause four to the electorate as part of an election manifesto, so its existence and then its termination were merely symbolic.

[Skyhilist]

To be honest there's a good chance Syriza leaders would just betray the workers anyways. There's not really any prominent party in Greece who I believe can be trusted until the whole system is changed drastically.

[KokkinoTsakali]

The only solution is revolution and socialism. That's what the KKE says in its election propaganda, that's why they are worth voting for, despite the gulf between words and actions.

SYRIZA say, vote for us, we'll renegotiate, calm down, this problem can be solved in the framework of capitalism. That they got a lot of votes for this is understandable. That wannabe revolutionaries voted for them too is truly stupid.


MH. I'm not sure that you consider some facts correctly. This whole left turn of the KKE that you keep talking about says just how much opportunistic is the KKE. How can a Stalinist party really support the revolution when it has made so many mistakes in the past, blamed trotskyists and real revolutionaries for them, and then executed them?

Actually, it quite reminds me of what Stalin did in 1928, when the Five-Year plan was put in motion. Initially he made a 'left turn' by saying that the exploitative kulaks should be extinct as a class and collectivization of agriculture should begin. He disagreed with the right wing of the party and particularly Bukharin, and earned the trust of the left wing. I believe that you know how all this ended.

KKE is just the same. It's making a 'left turn' in the elections to manipulate the popular opinion, only to betray the workers later. SYRIZA on contrast, is quite honest. He has this stance from the very beginning. I have been watching the news all these months (not from the mass media) and viewed all the official statements and Tsipras's letter to the EU Commission. From the first two sentences the words "cancellation of the Memorandum" were clear. The mass media tried to confuse the public by manipulating his words and using the "renegotiation of the whole austerity policy in Europe" as a counter-argument, which SYRIZA would deflect every time it would be given the chance to.

Of course, the KKE, like a bourgeois party that it is now, preferred to attack SYRIZA along with the other parliamentary parties. And, to conclude, SYRIZA proposes a pack of anti-capitalistic measures such as the nationalization of all the banks and the taxing of the wealthy industrialists. Capitalism is not only the problem of Greece but of all the world, so despite KKE's belief and promotion of its own version of 'socialism in one country' platform, capitalism in Europe can only be extinguished with the help of all the European people. If we were to have a revolution right now in Greece, the only solution left for the Great Powers and the Western bloc would be the armed intervention.

A SYRIZA government would make plausible this overthrow of the capitalists, little by little. Then, starting from the Southern countries of the EU the class consciousness should be awaken. For all this to happen, it will take years. KKE thinks that if Greece revolts, then the European countries would too. Or would they? I mean, the northern and central European countries are much farther than the Southern ones from socialism and revolution. Unless you think that class consciousness could be developed overnight.

[FSL]

Of course, the KKE, like a bourgeois party that it is now, preferred to attack SYRIZA along with the other parliamentary parties. And, to conclude, SYRIZA proposes a pack of anti-capitalistic measures such as the nationalization of all the banks and the taxing of the wealthy industrialists. Capitalism is not only the problem of Greece but of all the world, so despite KKE's belief and promotion of its own version of 'socialism in one country' platform, capitalism in Europe can only be extinguished with the help of all the European people. If we were to have a revolution right now in Greece, the only solution left for the Great Powers and the Western bloc would be the armed intervention.

A SYRIZA government would make plausible this overthrow of the capitalists, little by little. Then, starting from the Southern countries of the EU the class consciousness should be awaken. For all this to happen, it will take years. KKE thinks that if Greece revolts, then the European countries would too. Or would they? I mean, the northern and central European countries are much farther than the Southern ones from socialism and revolution. Unless you think that class consciousness could be developed overnight.
The annoying thing isn't that you're a conservative.
It's that your a passionate conservative who also has the delusion that he is something else.



“We must choose”—this is the argument the opportunists have always used to justify themselves, and they are using it now. Big things cannot be achieved at one stroke. We must fight for small but achievable things. How do we know whether they are achievable? They are achievable if the majority of the political parties, or of the most “influential” politicians, agree with them. The larger the number of politicians who agree with some tiny improvement, the easier it is to achieve it. We must not be utopians and strive after big things. We must be practical politicians; we must join in the demand for small things, and these small things will facilitate the fight for the big ones. We regard the small things as the surest stage in the struggle for big things.

That is how all the opportunists, all the reformists, argue; unlike the revolutionaries. http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1906/jun/28.htm


What was bankrupt a hundred years back is a million times more bankrupt today. And if some people could at least claim they "meant well" then, they have no excuse today.
You say you watch the news? Let's say you do.
If you do you're a liar. Because then you know what Syriza said about the latest eurozone meeting. You know he praised Monti, the technocrat, and Rajoy, the rightist, for "standing up to Merkel" and you know he asked -demanded even- that the same thing that applies to Italy applies to Greece.
And what's that? Nationalization of the banks as you so shamelessly seem to suggest? No. ESMization of the banks. All banks under Brussels ownership and control for as long as it is needed for them to be cleared of bad loans and after that again to capitalists.
That is what he asked. And you watch the news and therefore know it.


Why are you then so shameless? Why are you lying?
Is it easier for you to justify supporting the policies capitalist technocrats and rightists support, if you lie about it? Do you hope to fool others as well or just yourself?
You people are incredible. Just incredible.

[FSL]

Ah, but the soc-dem parties prior to neoliberalism didn't commit to nationalize all the banks, unlike these left parties. A European left should have as one of its policies an ECB monopoly on all financial services in the EU.

Neither does Syriza. Before the election the person responsible for their program suggested they use the swedish model ie nationalize the banks now during the crisis to save them and resell them later. Now they want the banks to become property of the ESM much like the communist revolutionaries Monti and Rajoy.

A european left should do whatever it wants but it is of no concern to us.
European communists on the other hand know very well they need to have as one of their policies a workers' state monopoly on all financial services.
It is written in the manifesto even.

[Delenda Carthago]

Roots of the crisis

Historically, Greek capitalism has been built on the basis of shipping and finance. These two sectors have led Greece’s political power bloc, have never paid taxes to support a welfare state, and don’t to this day.

Can you spell "social-democracy"?

[KokkinoTsakali]

The annoying thing isn't that you're a conservative.
It's that your a passionate conservative who also has the delusion that he is something else.

Oh, please. I don't accept lectures for conservatism from supporters of Stalin.

[KokkinoTsakali]

You say you watch the news? Let's say you do.
If you do you're a liar. Because then you know what Syriza said about the latest eurozone meeting. You know he praised Monti, the technocrat, and Rajoy, the rightist, for "standing up to Merkel" and you know he asked -demanded even- that the same thing that applies to Italy applies to Greece.

It's typical of Stalinists to act this way. What SYRIZA said is that even Monti and Rajoy, who are conservatives, have stood up to Merkel. Which means that something like this would surely be done by a leftist government. And he asked about the nationalization of all the banks, and not the merging of some banks into a united one, which is what Rajoy did with Bankia. SYRIZA praised that action by Rajoy, but never said that they would copy it. They said that they would nationalize the banks, and that's what they'll do when they form a government.

And also, you should know that SYRIZA doesn't have a background of betrayals and executions of revolutionaries. I, for one cannot trust a party like KKE which is the definition of opportunism and has such a stained background.

[Delenda Carthago]

And also, you should know that SYRIZA doesn't have a background of betrayals
http://www.revleft.com/vb/days-and-actions-t173163/index.html

[FSL]

It's typical of Stalinists to act this way. What SYRIZA said is that even Monti and Rajoy, who are conservatives, have stood up to Merkel. Which means that something like this would surely be done by a leftist government. And he asked about the nationalization of all the banks, and not the merging of some banks into a united one, which is what Rajoy did with Bankia. SYRIZA praised that action by Rajoy, but never said that they would copy it. They said that they would nationalize the banks, and that's what they'll do when they form a government.

And also, you should know that SYRIZA doesn't have a background of betrayals and executions of revolutionaries. I, for one cannot trust a party like KKE which is the definition of opportunism and has such a stained background.

Unbelievable.
Monti and Rajoy "stood up to Merkel" representing the interests of the capitalists of Italy and Spain. They stood up just after both of them brought legislation with cuts. Rajoy a new budget with 27 billion euros in cuts and Monti a new labor reform. They "stood up" asking for their banks to be saved not by their bourgeois state's public debt but by EU's contribution in the ESM.
Not for one moment did they stand up for their people, as these are the last thing on their mind. And it is with them Tsipras wants an alliance, it's what they proposed that he wants to happen in Greece. He is in absolute agreement with a Spanish rightist and an Italian appointed technocrat.

Of course no one can have any doubts that a "leftist government" would "stand up" to Merkel in the exast same manner. Negotiating within an imperialist union on what country's capitalists will take the largest piece of the pie. But why should I care since I don't have any factories?



From your persistence on claiming Syriza aims to nationalize all banks I can again only reach the same conclusion. You're either misinformed or deliberately lying.
Here's some information to help you:
http://www.hazliseconomist.com/uploads/speeches/RT2012_A/TSIPRAS_GR_Speech.pdf

Tsipras' speech in the "economist" conference.
Keep suggesting that Syriza wants to nationalize the banks and not to just let the ESM have them and I'm afraid there will be no "either... or..." in characterizing you.




Στην Ελλάδα πρέπει πρώτα και πάνω απ’ όλα να σταματήσουμε την πτώση.

Πρέπει να εγκαταλείψουμε σε συνεργασία με τους εταίρους μας αυτό το μη βιώσιμο σχέδιο
From this speech. What is the exact translation of that?
Is it something like: "In Greece we must first and foremost stop the fall. We must abandon in cooperation with our partners (ie other member states) this non-viable plan"?

Is he the one who aims to overthrow capitalists little by little?
Was this the wording he used before the elections?



Ακόμα και η ηγεσία των Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών, αλλά και της Γαλλίας το συνειδητοποιούν και δηλώνουν δημόσια ότι πρέπει να μπουν προτεραιότητες ανάπτυξης.
What does this say? Maybe something like "Even the leadership in the US and France understand this (the "dead end") and state publicly that we must have growth as a priority"?

Is someone else rulling these countries and not the likes of Obama and Hollande as I thought?
What kind of growth do they have in mind?


And lastly,

Ανακεφαλαιοποίηση τραπεζών από ESM ώστε να μην γράφονται στο χρέος τα κεφάλαια που χρησιμοποιούνται για τη στήριξη τους.

"Recapitalization of the banks by the ESM so that the capital used in their support isn't included in the debt."


This is what Syriza wants. Exactly the same thing with Monti and Rajoy because they represent the exact same interests. UNder this plan, banks are recapitalized by the European Stability Mechanism and pass under its ownership until they're in the clear.
Keep suggesting that syriza aims to nationalize the banks after reading these comments (made in an "Economist" conference, closely watched by investors and governments) and you are, I'm sorry to say it, nothing but a despicable fraud.

There is not one ounce of radicalism in supporting the Greek Monti.
Get in touch with reality and live with it.

[A Marxist Historian]

Correction: Clause four was not abolished by the Labour Party until 1995 as part of the ideological offensive of 'New Labour'. I mention this because as an historian I guess accuracy of dates is important to you.

Anyways, the Labour Party never presented clause four to the electorate as part of an election manifesto, so its existence and then its termination were merely symbolic.

Thanks for the correction. They abolished it that late? Amazing. I thought there was some big right wing marker for the LP in the late '50s, or maybe I'm confusing this with Bad Godesberg and the SPD, that was late '50s.

If England had ever gone through a crisis as extreme as what's happening in Greece now, I suspect they would have put it in an election manifesto.

I consider the fairly radical verbiage in the SYRIZA manifesto to be basically just boilerplate, it wasn't the basis of the election campaign, which was definitely to renegotiate with the bankers, that's clear to everyone I should think.

-M.H.-

[A Marxist Historian]

MH. I'm not sure that you consider some facts correctly. This whole left turn of the KKE that you keep talking about says just how much opportunistic is the KKE. How can a Stalinist party really support the revolution when it has made so many mistakes in the past, blamed trotskyists and real revolutionaries for them, and then executed them?

Actually, it quite reminds me of what Stalin did in 1928, when the Five-Year plan was put in motion. Initially he made a 'left turn' by saying that the exploitative kulaks should be extinct as a class and collectivization of agriculture should begin. He disagreed with the right wing of the party and particularly Bukharin, and earned the trust of the left wing. I believe that you know how all this ended.

KKE is just the same. It's making a 'left turn' in the elections to manipulate the popular opinion, only to betray the workers later. SYRIZA on contrast, is quite honest. He has this stance from the very beginning. I have been watching the news all these months (not from the mass media) and viewed all the official statements and Tsipras's letter to the EU Commission. From the first two sentences the words "cancellation of the Memorandum" were clear. The mass media tried to confuse the public by manipulating his words and using the "renegotiation of the whole austerity policy in Europe" as a counter-argument, which SYRIZA would deflect every time it would be given the chance to.

Of course, the KKE, like a bourgeois party that it is now, preferred to attack SYRIZA along with the other parliamentary parties. And, to conclude, SYRIZA proposes a pack of anti-capitalistic measures such as the nationalization of all the banks and the taxing of the wealthy industrialists. Capitalism is not only the problem of Greece but of all the world, so despite KKE's belief and promotion of its own version of 'socialism in one country' platform, capitalism in Europe can only be extinguished with the help of all the European people. If we were to have a revolution right now in Greece, the only solution left for the Great Powers and the Western bloc would be the armed intervention.

A SYRIZA government would make plausible this overthrow of the capitalists, little by little. Then, starting from the Southern countries of the EU the class consciousness should be awaken. For all this to happen, it will take years. KKE thinks that if Greece revolts, then the European countries would too. Or would they? I mean, the northern and central European countries are much farther than the Southern ones from socialism and revolution. Unless you think that class consciousness could be developed overnight.

I don't think it's accurate to call the KKE Third Periodists, they don't say that the entire world is about to go communist next week, and they don't after all call SYRIZA fascist. But, be it noted, what was the attitude of the Trotskyists to the Third Peirod left turn? Did they say this is Stalinism, and Stalinism is "bourgeois"? No, quite the contrary, they tried as much as possible to stay in the Communist Parties and support them vs. Social Democracy, as the workers in the Communist International took this left turn very seriously, and workers in the CPUSSR too.

While denouncing and criticizing reactionary aspects such as the disastrous ultra-left policy in Germany which helped Hitler win, forced collectivization in the USSR etc.

Similarly, while I think revolutionaries should have voted for the KKE candidates as the only candidates talking revolution and socialism, that does not mean stopping criticising the KKE for its many acts of opportunism & betrayals.

Yes, socialism in one country is a false perspective, but any sort of socialism is better than capitalism, and you essentially are arguing against revolution in Greece right now at all, because the EU would intervene and crush the workers. Well, not so simple, because a Greek workers revolution would hit Europe like lightning, make the so called "Arab Spring" look liike a tempest in a teapot.

Real Trotskyists oppose "permanent revolution" to socialism in one country not to argue against revolution, as you do, but to say that revolution needs to be spread to succeed.

You support SYRIZA in order to overthrow capitalism "little by little." That is reformism. And nonsense. To overthrow capitalism you have to overthrow the capitalist state. You cannot reform it out of existence, which is what essentially you are arguing here.

-M.H.-

[Delenda Carthago]

Its surreal that we are making the discussion on the basis whether SYRIZA will overthrow capitalism or not.

[KokkinoTsakali]

MH, instead of commenting on your post, I'd like you to read the following reply of the United Secretariat of the Fourth International (USFI) to OKDE-Spartakos, which before the 6th May elections supported the slogan "Vote to KKE, no vote to SYRIZA".


Answer to the Central Committee of the OKDE-Spartakos (Greek section of the Fourth International)

Dear comrades,

First of all, we should say we should have consulted you before publishing the declaration of the Bureau of the International. So this is noted.

It is the urgency of the situation as well as the need to mark our solidarity with the Greek people and all the radical left which pushed us to react quickly.

We don’t agree with your reaction to the declaration.

It does not deal with your orientation or your party-building choices. We do not deal with Antarsya’s relations with Syriza, nor the electoral question, nor the problems of characterization of Syriza, nor what should be an overall transitional approach. On all these questions opinions are divided in the International, and even in the Greek section.

We tackle only one question: given the campaign of the “troika” against Syriza which refuses to apply these same austerity plans should we or should we not support Syriza in this opposition to the current policy of the Greek ruling class and that of the European Union? Our answer, like that of almost all the sections of the International, is clear: it is necessary to support Syriza, which so far has been opposed to the austerity policies, notably by refusing to constitute or support a government applying these policies.

You then take up another question returning to the formulations of the five principal demands of Syriza by explaining that these are not transitional demands. We know that Syriza is a coalition dominated by left reformists. We know that they do not share our conception of the transitional programme. It is true also that the formulations of Syriza’s demands are often changed, but beyond the formulations, they reject the EU “Memorandum”, commit to a moratorium on the debt, reject the austerity measures already applied, and in particular, so far, refuse any agreement with the plans of the EU. This position which, over and above the many variations in the declarations of leaders of Syriza, has been officially reaffirmed it seems. [1]

By definition, a transitional demand is not often (even generally) explicitly anticapitalist, since it starts from the really existing level of consciousness: it must be from the start considered legitimate by a broad part of the population. It is the fight for its implementation, in a situation of open crisis, which “reveals” its anticapitalist implications and makes it possible to raise the level of consciousness and struggle. From our point of view, the rejection of the memorandum and austerity measures, the moratorium on the debt for its cancellation – at least for the greatest part – can indeed correspond to the level of consciousness present while constituting a breaking point making it possible for a transitory dynamic to start up.

Once again, under these conditions, should we or should we not support this policy? Should we or should we not participate in solidarity with the Greek people and this refusal by Syriza, supported by all the Greek and international radical left? Our answer, is, yes, we must be in solidarity.

This is what the declaration says, neither more nor less. The pressures from the ruling classes are enormous. It is probable that differentiations will appear, that there will be reorganizations of the left, and we must be attentive to all that, but at this stage, Syriza holds good, and they should be supported, because we will be listened to by their militants and their voters to the extent that we have supported them against the enemies of the Greek people. We do not think that a policy which, in the name of future possible treasons, leads revolutionaries to be opposed to Syriza is a good one. We prefer a unitive policy, unity of the organisations of the radical left, trade-union unity, and unity of the grassroots movement, in particular by encouraging and supporting all the experiences of self-organisation. This is also the meaning of our stance in favour of a convergence of Syriza, Antarsya and KKE, and in the perspective of a left anti-austerity government. It is in any case a proposal to discuss in order to oppose an anti-austerity block to ND and the PASOK.

We know that the obstacles to this unitive policy are enormous, in particular because of the policy of the KKE, but faced with the scope of the captialsit attacks there is not other path than to propose the path and means of workers’ unity.

This perspective must combine with the coming together of all the anticapitalists who are in Antarsya but also in certain sectors of Syriza and beyond and in the trade union and associative movements.

Given the importance of Greece, the discussion will continue. It should tackle all the questions, but in such a situation, it is duty of revolutionaries and the Fourth International to seek the ways to carry out a unitive and anticapitalist policy.

Bureau of the Fourth International

6th of June


This answer by the USFI was based on a statement of the Executive Bureau of the FI, which can be found here (http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article2626).

[Kornilios Sunshine]

It's making a 'left turn' in the elections to manipulate the popular opinion, only to betray the workers later. SYRIZA on contrast, is quite honest. He has this stance from the very beginning.
SYRIZA Honest? Nice one. Before the elections the said "FUCK THE GOD DAMN MEMORANDUM ITS BAD LOLZ " and now they are conversating about renegotiating it! Nice honesty in SYRIZA's positions.



Of course, the KKE, like a bourgeois party that it is now, preferred to attack SYRIZA along with the other parliamentary parties.
So a party that is against Golden Dawn PASOK ND and the two European "left" parties, is a bourgeois party? Of course for SYRIZA fans, this is a bourgeois party.


A SYRIZA government would make plausible this enhacement of the capitalists, INSTANTLY. In no way, would capitalism be abolished by SYRIZA. Don't you damn understand? SYRIZA IS PASOK! And only when SYRIZA governs, will the stupid ass people who voted for it understand this.

[KokkinoTsakali]

SYRIZA Honest? Nice one. Before the elections the said "FUCK THE GOD DAMN MEMORANDUM ITS BAD LOLZ " and now they are conversating about renegotiating it! Nice honesty in SYRIZA's positions.

I was hoping that you'd say that. You just prove how deeply misinformed you are, or how delibarately you want to misinform everyone reading this. Which part of cancellation don't you understand? By saying that SYRIZA altered its stance between the election days you just support what Tremi, Pretenteris, Kapsis and every other dog of ND and PASOK said.



So a party that is against Golden Dawn PASOK ND and the two European "left" parties, is a bourgeois party? Of course for SYRIZA fans, this is a bourgeois party.

Still not communist enough for me. If you were truly a communist party, you would go for a Front along with the more 'reformists' at least to fight the fascists. Of course everyone in Greece knows that you are not communists, but stalinists, and that makes a huge difference.


In no way, would capitalism be abolished by SYRIZA. Don't you damn understand? SYRIZA IS PASOK! And only when SYRIZA governs, will the stupid ass people who voted for it understand this.

Are you kidding me? I never supported that SYRIZA would be the one to overthrow the capitalists, mainly due to the many reformists of SYN. However, it is the only party along with ANTARSYA that actually do something to radicalize the people. They try to organise the people in every neighborhood, convince them to participate in popular struggles and fight the fascists. Revolution and abolishing of capitalism cannot be achieved by Greece. You are delusional if you think that socialism can exist in only one country. European people must be united if they want to overthrow the capitalists in Europe.

[FSL]

I was hoping that you'd say that. You just prove how deeply misinformed you are, or how delibarately you want to misinform everyone reading this. Which part of cancellation don't you understand? By saying that SYRIZA altered its stance between the election days you just support what Tremi, Pretenteris, Kapsis and every other dog of ND and PASOK said.

Personally, I don't understand this part:

In Greece we must first and foremost stop the fall. We must abandon in cooperation with our partners (ie other member states) this non-viable plan"

I don't understand what sort of cancellation can happen in cooperation with our EU partners. You not answering didn't help me at all.
I do understand that you're a complete waste of time though.

[hashem]

PASOK has moved from center-left to right and SYRIZA has occupied PASOKs former position while rightist extremists (Golden dawn) are advancing.

this is not a victory.

[Lev Bronsteinovich]

A SYRIZA government would make plausible this overthrow of the capitalists, little by little. Then, starting from the Southern countries of the EU the class consciousness should be awaken. For all this to happen, it will take years. KKE thinks that if Greece revolts, then the European countries would too. Or would they? I mean, the northern and central European countries are much farther than the Southern ones from socialism and revolution. Unless you think that class consciousness could be developed overnight.

Probably not. A Syriza government will likely demoralize the hell out of the Greek and EU proletariat. Because they are about stabilizing capitalism. I think your idea about a Syriza electoral victory leading to a slow movement toward class consciousness in the EU is schematic, at best. I agree with MH that the leftists that are critically supporting Syriza are barking up the wrong tree. Critical electoral support to the KKE at least makes some kind of sense, even though we know they will not carry out their paper program.

[KokkinoTsakali]

I don't understand what sort of cancellation can happen in cooperation with our EU partners.

You hang on to several words just to support your argument. SYRIZA has a specific programme. It is clear that "the first action by the government of the Left, right after the new Parliament is formed, will be the cancellation of the Memorandum and its applying laws". Also SYRIZA supported only unilateral actions and not negotiating for the Memorandum.

However, they also supported negotiations considering the pause of the austerity policy across Europe. Something like this lays not in the hands of a soon-to-be Greek leftist leader, and negotiations are critical. I don't think that SYRIZA could affect the decisions of the pro-austerity forces, but at least they would stop them in Greece.

[Kornilios Sunshine]

However, it is the only party along with ANTARSYA that actually do something to radicalize the people. They try to organise the people in every neighborhood, convince them to participate in popular struggles and fight the fascists.
OK this is just funny. Yes I agree ANTARSYA does a really nice job but it's pretty weak to radicalize people but SYRIZA does that too? SYRIZA is just lying that they will cancel the memorandum. I think it's unfair to say that KKE does not try to make people revolute fight capitalism and fascism. And however you wanna call it (Stalinist) it's the only party that states its true positions.

Revolution and abolishing of capitalism cannot be achieved by Greece
This is so regressive to say. While all European countries should revolute it does never mean that Greece should wait for some country to do so, and then revolute itself. Now if you are stating it in the way that Greece truly is unable to fight capitalism and revolute what can I say...

[FSL]

You hang on to several words just to support your argument. SYRIZA has a specific programme. It is clear that "the first action by the government of the Left, right after the new Parliament is formed, will be the cancellation of the Memorandum and its applying laws". Also SYRIZA supported only unilateral actions and not negotiating for the Memorandum.

However, they also supported negotiations considering the pause of the austerity policy across Europe. Something like this lays not in the hands of a soon-to-be Greek leftist leader, and negotiations are critical. I don't think that SYRIZA could affect the decisions of the pro-austerity forces, but at least they would stop them in Greece.

It had a programme. A programme of rejecting the loan agreement.
Then it changed that and the loan agreement was necessary, it was just the austerity that needed changing.
And now the programme changed again and even the austerity will only go away not "unilaterally" but "in cooperation with our partners".


Unluckily for you these aren't just words, they're words spoken by Syriza's head in a room packed with capitalists. You of course don't mind, it must have become clear by now that you're just another conservative or maybe a blind follower of the glorious leftist leader.
A waste of time as I said before.

[KokkinoTsakali]

It had a programme. A programme of rejecting the loan agreement.
Then it changed that and the loan agreement was necessary, it was just the austerity that needed changing.
And now the programme changed again and even the austerity will only go away not "unilaterally" but "in cooperation with our partners".

Seriously? The last change of the programme was a few days before the last elections. I believe you can read, so here's the same part that I quoted above, in Greek:

Θέλω επίσης να ξεκαθαρίσω ότι πρώτη πράξη της κυβέρνησης της Αριστεράς, αμέσως μόλις συγκροτηθεί η νέα Βουλή, θα είναι η ακύρωση του Μνημονίου και των εφαρμοστικών νόμων του.


OK this is just funny. Yes I agree ANTARSYA does a really nice job but it's pretty weak to radicalize people but SYRIZA does that too? SYRIZA is just lying that they will cancel the memorandum. I think it's unfair to say that KKE does not try to make people revolute fight capitalism and fascism. And however you wanna call it (Stalinist) it's the only party that states its true positions.

Oh, is it now? Tell me, when was the last time that KKE participated in anti-fascist and anti-racist initiatives. Up until 10 years ago it was supporting "jobs for all Greeks". As for the cancellation of the Memorandum, I'm done trying to make you understand. If you don't believe what SYRIZA suggest they'll do, it's fine from me, but don't expect that I will trust a party with the worst betrayals in the history of the Left in Greece.



This is so regressive to say. While all European countries should revolute it does never mean that Greece should wait for some country to do so, and then revolute itself. Now if you are stating it in the way that Greece truly is unable to fight capitalism and revolute what can I say...

One country on it's own cannot fight capitalism. Every country that attempted to do this ended up on having state capitalism. If Greece was to revolute and then after some months the rest European countries were to revolute as well, then I would totally support it. However, as I have stated above, European countries are not ready for a revolution, yet. I don't say that we should sit back and wait, I'm just saying that we should fight along with the other European people to achieve this overthrow of capitalism.

[Kornilios Sunshine]

but don't expect that I will trust a party with the worst betrayals in the history of the Left in Greece.
Is betrayal for you the Meligalas conflict where EAM members killed the Greek Nazis? Or maybe the struggles of KKE in the Junta period in Greece? So the strikes and demonstrations KKE organizes for the workers to stand for the rights are making the party betrayal?

Also

Θέλω επίσης να ξεκαθαρίσω ότι πρώτη πράξη της κυβέρνησης της Αριστεράς, αμέσως μόλις συγκροτηθεί η νέα Βουλή, θα είναι η ακύρωση του Μνημονίου και των εφαρμοστικών νόμων του.
Translation

I also want to make it clear that the first duty of the Left Goverment, right after the New Parliament is formed, will be the cancellation of the Memorandum and its applied laws.
Tsipras also said that he wants Greece inside the EU. Don't you think it's a little bit surreal for EU to "tolerate" Greece inside it, without the Memorandum? The only solution for the cancellation of the Memorandum for Greece, is to get the fuck out of the EU.

[KokkinoTsakali]

Is betrayal for you the Meligalas conflict where EAM members killed the Greek Nazis? Or maybe the struggles of KKE in the Junta period in Greece? So the strikes and demonstrations KKE organizes for the workers to stand for the rights are making the party betrayal?

I didn't say that KKE was all about betrayals. I aknowledge and respect the struggles of its people. However, KKE's problems have been, for many years, its party line, its leadership and its ideology, with rare exceptions.
From the Civil War and Varkiza, to the riots of December of '08 and the Squares Movement of '11, KKE has made many mistakes.

Organization of the workers is nice and all, but, I haven't seen KKE actually trying to dispose of the Nazis. Their solution for tackling the GD fascists is not giving them attention. KKE has at least 8 years to participate in an antiracist and/or antifascist demonstration. And that's why many workers voted for GD, while they were ex-voters of the KKE. By not emphasizing on why should the workers ward off the nazis or why should they not hate the immigrants for unemployment, the workers have falsely chosen a party (GD) which holds the same stance against EU and emphasizes on Greek workers and not the immigrants.



Tsipras also said that he wants Greece inside the EU. Don't you think it's a little bit surreal for EU to "tolerate" Greece inside it, without the Memorandum? The only solution for the cancellation of the Memorandum for Greece, is to get the fuck out of the EU.

Well, if you consider that if Greece gets out from the Eurozone, the Euro will collapse in comparison to the dollar, and that the capitalists don't want something like that to happen, we can easily assume that Troika and the ESM will necessarily accept our demands. I agree with getting out of the EU and NATO, and also support the slogan "No sacrifice for the Euro" as stated by SYRIZA the past months.

[A Marxist Historian]

MH, instead of commenting on your post, I'd like you to read the following reply of the United Secretariat of the Fourth International (USFI) to OKDE-Spartakos, which before the 6th May elections supported the slogan "Vote to KKE, no vote to SYRIZA".




This answer by the USFI was based on a statement of the Executive Bureau of the FI, which can be found here (http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article2626).

Did they? I had heard that they were for voting for ANTARSYA, which they are a part of, not the KKE.

-M.H.-

[A Marxist Historian]

You hang on to several words just to support your argument. SYRIZA has a specific programme. It is clear that "the first action by the government of the Left, right after the new Parliament is formed, will be the cancellation of the Memorandum and its applying laws". Also SYRIZA supported only unilateral actions and not negotiating for the Memorandum.

However, they also supported negotiations considering the pause of the austerity policy across Europe. Something like this lays not in the hands of a soon-to-be Greek leftist leader, and negotiations are critical. I don't think that SYRIZA could affect the decisions of the pro-austerity forces, but at least they would stop them in Greece.

Nonsense. How could SYRIZA possibly not carry out austerity measures vs. the workers and balance the budget, without stepping outside the bounds of capitalism and the EU? They can't, and it is an absolute fantasy to think that they could.

Perhaps some SYRIZA leaders actually think they could square the circle in this fashion, but they would find out otherwise after a week in office.

So they would then have to capitulate to the EU whether in fact they wanted to or not. And the right wing of SYRIZA, which is after all some 85% of the organization, is ready to capitulate to the bankers already.

-M.H.-

[Kornilios Sunshine]

I haven't seen KKE actually trying to dispose of the Nazis. Their solution for tackling the GD fascists is not giving them attention
Here
4Vv3cuVpIAM
You are probably Greek so you will understand, that Papariga says KKE was the only party that attacked GD on parliament. Not even SYRIZA did! In addition, she says that everyone should worry about the fascist attacks of GD against immigrants which isn't something that gives the impression KKE does not give a fuck about how people perceive GD.

[A Marxist Historian]

Here
4Vv3cuVpIAM
You are probably Greek so you will understand that KKE was the only party that attacked GD on parliament. Not even SYRIZA did! In addition, she says that everyone should worry about the fascist attacks of GD against immigrants which isn't something that gives the impression KKE does not give a fuck about how people perceive GD.

This is exactly the problem. The KKE attacked GD--in parliament. Verbally.

The Golden Dawn needs to be swept off the streets. The KKE and PAME have the forces to do this, and if they took this course, the masses drifting away from KKE to the fool's gold of SYRIZA's high vote totals would come back (and pseudo-left critics like Kokkino would be shut up, but this is of course much less important.)

Instead, it denounces GD in parliament, and--seeks to win back voters from GD instead of fighting them.

I think the KKE deserved a vote in the last election as they were the only serious party calling for socialism and revolution, but this is the most crying example of the contradiction between word and deed. In practice, the KKE are still parliamentary reformists as well, the difference being that at least they are trying to use reformist methods, running for parliament and one-day strikes, for the socialist goal and not just an "anti-austerity front."

-M.H.-

[Delenda Carthago]

This is exactly the problem. The KKE attacked GD--in parliament. Verbally.

The Golden Dawn needs to be swept off the streets. The KKE and PAME have the forces to do this, and if they took this course, the masses drifting away from KKE to the fool's gold of SYRIZA's high vote totals would come back (and pseudo-left critics like Kokkino would be shut up, but this is of course much less important.)

Instead, it denounces GD in parliament, and--seeks to win back voters from GD instead of fighting them.

I think the KKE deserved a vote in the last election as they were the only serious party calling for socialism and revolution, but this is the most crying example of the contradiction between word and deed. In practice, the KKE are still parliamentary reformists as well, the difference being that at least they are trying to use reformist methods, running for parliament and one-day strikes, for the socialist goal and not just an "anti-austerity front."

-M.H.-
Yes cause the perfect thing to do when the bourgeois are talking about a new "Weimar Republic" and "the rise of the far-right and far-left"is to turn a communist party to a street gang in order to prove them right. Stop fighting the Capital, we have fascists to worry about.

You will defend yourself, and KKE members have done that many times against the nazi thugs, but the solution will come through working class struggles, not street gangs.

[A Marxist Historian]

Yes cause the perfect thing to do when the bourgeois are talking about a new "Weimar Republic" and "the rise of the far-right and far-left"is to turn a communist party to a street gang in order to prove them right. Stop fighting the Capital, we have fascists to worry about.

You will defend yourself, and KKE members have done that many times against the nazi thugs, but the solution will come through working class struggles, not street gangs.

No! Not street gangs, but mobilization of the masses, and a united front of all leftists, unionists and opponents of fascism--on the streets, not in parliament. This, unlike the elections, is where it would be appropriate to call on SYRIZA to join a common front to sweep Golden Dawn off the streets. If they refuse to, that exposes them as the non-struggle reformists that they are.

But here it is SYRIZA, or at any rate people like Kokkino in SYRIZA's "left wing," who are calling for the right thing, and the KKE is interested only in defending itself from the Golden Dawn, not the immigrants and non-KKE workers. There is no struggle against the Golden Dawn menace by KKE and PAME. There was even a Golden Dawn speaker who managed to speak at a steelworkers' rally in the steel strike, to the displeasure of the rank and file steelworkers, as the eyewitness report from Greek Spartacists from the picketlines confirms.

http://www.icl-fi.org/english/wv/1005/greek-steel.html

-M.H.-

[Delenda Carthago]

No! Not street gangs, but mobilization of the masses, and a united front of all leftists, unionists and opponents of fascism--on the streets, not in parliament. This, unlike the elections, is where it would be appropriate to call on SYRIZA to join a common front to sweep Golden Dawn off the streets. If they refuse to, that exposes them as the non-struggle reformists that they are.


-M.H.-
KKE participated in the last demo some leftists and some immigrants organisations organised. Other than that, the antifascist struggle, as any other anticapitalist struggle, is a matter of the working class itself and KKE struggles to organise it. Other than that, yesterday PAME organised a big antiracist festival with the partisipation of many immigrants.

[A Marxist Historian]

KKE participated in the last demo some leftists and some immigrants organisations organised. Other than that, the antifascist struggle, as any other anticapitalist struggle, is a matter of the working class itself and KKE struggles to organise it. Other than that, yesterday PAME organised a big antiracist festival with the partisipation of many immigrants.

A step in the right direction I guess, but what is needed to deal with Golden Dawn is something a lot more serious than street festivals and protest demos.

-M.H.-