Greece's offer to the EU

[FSL]

Dear President of the Eurogroup,

Over the last five years, the people of Greece have exerted remarkable efforts in economic adjustment. The new government is committed to a broader and deeper reform process aimed at durably improving growth and employment prospects, achieving debt sustainability and financial stability, enhancing social fairness and mitigating the significant social cost of the ongoing crisis.

The Greek authorities recognise that the procedures agreed by the previous governments were interrupted by the recent presidential and general elections and that, as a result, several of the technical arrangements have been invalidated. The Greek authorities honour Greece΄s financial obligations to all its creditors as well as state our intention to cooperate with our partners in order to avert technical impediments in the context of the Master Facility Agreement which we recognise as binding vis-a-vis its financial and procedural content.

In this context, the Greek authorities are now applying for the extension of the Master Financial Assistance Facility Agreement for a period of six months from its termination during which period we shall proceed jointly, and making best use of given flexibility in the current arrangement, toward its successful conclusion and review on the basis of the proposals of, on the one hand, the Greek government and, on the other, the institutions.

The purpose of the requested six-month extension of the Agreement΄s duration is:

(a) To agree the mutually acceptable financial and administrative terms the implementation of which, in collaboration with the institutions, will stabilise Greece΄s fiscal position, attain appropriate primary fiscal surpluses, guarantee debt stability and assist in the attainment of fiscal targets for 2015 that take into account the present economic situation.

(b) To ensure, working closely with our European and international partners, that any new measures be fully funded while refraining from unilateral action that would undermine the fiscal targets, economic recovery and financial stability.

(c) To allow the European Central Bank to re-introduce the waiver in accordance with its procedures and regulations.

(d) To extend the availability of the EFSF bonds held by the HFSF for the duration of the Agreement.

(e) To commence work between the technical teams on a possible new Contract for Recovery and Growth that the Greek authorities envisage between Greece, Europe and the International Monetary Fund which could follow the current Agreement.

(f) To agree on supervision under the EU and ECB framework and, in the same spirit, with the International Monetary Fund for the duration of the extended Agreement.

(G) To discuss means of enacting the November 2012 Eurogroup decision regarding possible further debt measures and assistance for implementation after the completion of the extended Agreement and as part of the follow-up Contract.

With the above in mind, the Greek government expresses its determination to cooperate closely with the European Union΄s institutions and with the International Monetary Fund in order: (a) to attain fiscal and financial stability and (b) to enable the Greek government to introduce the substantive, far-reaching reforms that are needed to restore the living standards of millions of Greek citizens through sustainable economic growth, gainful employment and social cohesion.

Sincerely,

Yanis Varoufakis

Minister of Finance

Hellenic Republic"


Germany rejected this offer already because according to them Greece needs to get a 3% primary budget surplus this year and not "appropriate primary fiscal surpluses, guarantee debt stability and assist in the attainment of fiscal targets for 2015 that take into account the present economic situation" which would allow room for smaller surpluses if 3% seems difficult (because of the elections the budget has been going pretty badly the first couple of months).



If I hear anyone saying "anti-austerity" ever again I'm going on a murderous rampage.

[PhoenixAsh]

In earlier debates about the austerity measures in the last years and the possible solutions you have rejected the idea and concept that Greece should leave the EU. Your own arguments could be summarized as: favoring the option of internal KKE-advanced revolution in Greece at a similar time frame of a pan-European revolution while leaving the EU at the current moment would be devastating to the Greek economy (correct me if I am oversimplifying).

Your arguments against SYRIZA are that they co-opt the capitalist system and won't deliver on their promises...or bring any real worker friendly change (again....correct me if I am oversimplifying).

What are your suggestions what should happen right now in the current context?

[Kill all the fetuses!]

FSL,

Since you are greek, could you maybe tell what's the general feeling in the country considering today's development? Any noticeable changes in the mood? What's the pro-Syriza media's reaction?

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I would just like to see SYRIZA and it's supporters be honest and stop trying to hide behind empty slogans, while at the same time doing what every critical voice said they would do before taking power. I don't personally have an issue with SYRIZA's tactics from a communist perspective, I'm just irritated by their PR campaign in the same fashion that I am with every bourgeois party. Aside from that I'm inclined to view them with the same apathy as any other group

[Creative Destruction]

Maybe I'm being optimistic here, but for all my criticisms of SYRIZA, this seemed like a political ploy. I have a feeling they knew the Germans would react the way they did and came up with this offer to frame the conversation as "Hey, we even backed off a little from our anti-austerity position and see what happened."

[Kill all the fetuses!]

I don't think they backed-off "a little" considering all their rhetoric up to now. But what are they gonna do? They removed an option of exiting the euro and defaulting unilaterally from the get-go, they refused to use it even as a bargaining chip. So what is that they have to offer the germans? Some morality tales about "look how bad and unreasonable they are"? The thing is that at this point, as far as I am concerned, by removing an option of the Grexit from the get-go, they didn't even attempt to prepare a worked-out plan of such a scenario, so it's unlikely they would leave. But besides that, what else can they bring on the table? I am not sure.

But the agreement is to be reached tomorrow and Syriza said the troika should either accept it or not and there is no other way. So let's wait for tomorrow and see if Syriza capitulates completely or will they do something "radical".

[FSL]

In earlier debates about the austerity measures in the last years and the possible solutions you have rejected the idea and concept that Greece should leave the EU. Your own arguments could be summarized as: favoring the option of internal KKE-advanced revolution in Greece at a similar time frame of a pan-European revolution while leaving the EU at the current moment would be devastating to the Greek economy (correct me if I am oversimplifying).
You're not oversimplifying, you're getting it wrong. I don't think any type of capitalist management can solve the workers' problems (or even make them slightly milder it would seem). That includes staying in the eu, leaving the eurozone or leaving the EU altogether to join the "eurasian union" or something similar.

What can solve the problems is a revolution that would socialize the means of production and establish a centrally planned economy in a Greece that leaves the EU, NATO and all sorts of imperialist alliances.

[FSL]

FSL,

Since you are greek, could you maybe tell what's the general feeling in the country considering today's development? Any noticeable changes in the mood? What's the pro-Syriza media's reaction?

Funny thing, all the media are pro-syriza. This is what happens when a bourgeoisie of one country "goes to war" against the bourgeoisie of another country. They claim Germany is being irrational and point to other more positive reactions. Not one is blaming syriza.

People weren't really reading into the concessions the government was making in the previous days (no debt write off, no immediate increase in the minimum wage). Remarkably, the first thing that annoyed many was syriza proposing a rightist for the post of the President of the Republic.
When news of this letter broke out this morning it was immediately considered "selling out" but then Germany's rejection again got some people excited thinking "Well if Germany rejects it it must be good!". Others are expressing disappointment with the developments, some are wishing for a drachma-euro referendum (which I don't think the government intends to hold).


The differences between this and what Germany (and many other countries) wants aren't really substantial. They're mostly symbolic. A surplus of 3% hurts and a surplus of 2.5% or 2% hurts just as much when you already have nothing.
We'll see what's decided tomorrow.

[ckaihatsu]

[L]eaving the EU at the current moment would be devastating to the Greek economy (correct me if I am oversimplifying).


Saw this at another site....





So, let’s take the status quo’s worst-case scenario, in which Greece ditches the euro and returns to the easy-to-manipulate drachma. It converts all its outstanding euro-denominated debt to drachmas and then devalues its new/old currency by 30 or so percent, pricing its hotel rooms, charter boats and restaurants back into attractive territory. That’s okay on balance for the Greek people, who benefit more from rising tourism than they’re hurt by devalued savings.

But it’s very bad for European banks and US hedge funds that now own tons of Greek debt and will therefore suffer big losses. More damaging still, once the precedent is set everyone will start looking around for the next domino to fall and will find plenty, with Italy (now in the throes of a political crisis of its own) leading the list. That’s a much bigger economy with way more euro-denominated debt, so an Italian exit from the eurozone would be apocalyptic for the whole global financial system.

Will it come to that in 2015? History says probably not. Remember, Greece has been on the verge of imploding for a decade, and each time the money has been found to save it. With the ECB inching towards a multi-year, multi-trillion euro debt monetization plan, the entire Greek economy could be tucked into that expanding balance sheet without a ripple. So expect another wealth transfer from Germany to Greece in the near future. And then perhaps one from Germany to Italy. But also expect some drama along the way.




http://dollarcollapse.com/currency-war-2/really-greece-again/


http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2816849&postcount=15

[FSL]

That’s okay on balance for the Greek people, who benefit more from rising tourism
Do people think that the "Greek people" own on average two or three hotels?
Because we don't.

Maids work on daily contracts and would be payed in drachmas by the hotel owner who would be getting euros.

[ckaihatsu]

Do people think that the "Greek people" own on average two or three hotels?
Because we don't.

Maids work on daily contracts and would be payed in drachmas by the hotel owner who would be getting euros.


Understood -- this was in response to an uncertainty about the Greek *economy* as a whole. Your mileage may vary depending on your class position in the economy.

[cyu]

The Messiah complex when someone else is the messiah: He'll save us! He's a great man! I'm rooting for him! Don't let us down! Let's see what he does! You have lost your agency, and given it to someone else. You have created a single point of failure - if someone gets to him, your cause is lost. Meanwhile, you do nothing about your problems, and wait for someone else to make everything perfect, and wait, and wait, and wait... You become a spectator in your own life.

The Messiah complex when you are the messiah: I'll save you all. I have all the answers. You are well-intentioned but don't really know what you're talking about. The fate of the world rests on everything I do. I must succeed at all costs. From my ivory tower, I can see it all. Your movement is nothing without me.

The Messiah complex when everyone is the messiah: We'll save everyone ourselves.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

"You couldn’t make this up. Apparently, Greece (http://www.theguardian.com/world/greece) sent the wrong letter on Thursday, German newspaper Bild reports, citing government sources.

The right version supposedly accepted bailout conditions agreed to by the previous Greek government.

According to the report, Tsipras, Juncker and Dijsselbloem jointly drafted a letter on Wednesday. However, Varoufakis sent an altered version of the letter that omitted the parts that said Greece will accept the bailout conditions.

Tsipras later told Merkel it was an “administrative mistake.”

The Eurogroup meeting is supposed to start any moment now."

- The Guardian

[Futility Personified]

So is this utter capitulation then?

[Kill all the fetuses!]

On its face value it seems so, but I have my doubts. It would rather seems to me that Syriza is merely trying to buy some time so that in the next 6 months it can put something more on the table, like Grexit, unilateral action in terms of default, potentiality of foreign lenders (Russia, China) or something to that effect. But that's my guess.

But what it really depends on and what I am interested in - and hopefully FSL will enlighten us on this subject as I can't seem to find any English info online - is what is happening inside Syriza? How far to the right has the Left Platform been dragged? Are they still representing 30% of CC members? Are they still pro-default? What are the debates happening inside the party at the moment? It would be wonderful if you could give your thoughts on this or direct me to some English sources.

[cyu]

If they can't win by cheating in elections, then they'll win with blackmail and physical intimidation. Support for capitalist economics is based on ignorance and lies, and as of now, the ruling class still has no plans to give up their power. And so the world continues to lurch on into darkness.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

Apparently, the accusation posted in the Guardian was false.

"Greece (http://www.theguardian.com/world/greece) has reacted with fury to suggestions that it sent the “wrong” letter outlining its request for a sixth-month extension of its bailout programme, our correspondent in Athens Helena Smith reports.

The Greek media is reporting that an irate Yanis Varoufis emerged from talks in Brussels this afternoon with fellow euro zone finance ministers to vehemently denounce the allegation - carried in the mass-selling German tabloid Bild (as reported earlier).

Aides to the Greek prime minister Alexis Tsipras described the story as “a fanciful scenario” cooked up by people with “unhealthy imaginations.”"

[Creative Destruction]

I just looked up Bild and it looks like a gossip rag with conservative leanings. How in the hell did the Guardian, of all places, think it would be a good story to run?

[Kill all the fetuses!]

I just looked up Bild and it looks like a gossip rag with conservative leanings. How in the hell did the Guardian, of all places, think it would be a good story to run?

Yeah, it was my bad not to check the source and post it here. Apologies.

It wasn't a story, it was a part of their live feed on the ongoing negotiations.

[ckaihatsu]

The Messiah complex


http://g.foolcdn.com/editorial/images/108177/083_matrixrevoln_neocrucified1_large.jpg
Neo sacrificing himself at the end of The Matrix Revolutions. (Source: Empireonline.com)

[FSL]

But what it really depends on and what I am interested in - and hopefully FSL will enlighten us on this subject as I can't seem to find any English info online - is what is happening inside Syriza? How far to the right has the Left Platform been dragged? Are they still representing 30% of CC members? Are they still pro-default? What are the debates happening inside the party at the moment? It would be wonderful if you could give your thoughts on this or direct me to some English sources.

My subjective view is that they'll say yes to anything, up to the point where they lose all legitimacy by continuing to do so. They exist to be the left alibi of syriza. Milios, who is somewhat of a 'marxian intellectual", the head of syriza's economics committee and who stands somewhere between Tsipras and the left platform (but who's also very pro-europe) said in a comment on facebook that this is not the time to whine or talk about how leftist you are because "the cause" is what's important.


There is it would seem an agreement in the eurogroup. No details yet.

[ckaihatsu]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/21/business/international/greece-debt-eurozone-finance-ministers.html


Greece Reaches Accord With European Officials to Extend Bailout

By LIZ ALDERMAN and JAMES KANTER

FEB. 20, 2015

BRUSSELS — European leaders agreed Friday to extend Greece’s bailout for four months after weeks of tense negotiations.

The deal, reached at an emergency meeting of eurozone finance ministers here, paves the way for Greece to unlock further financial aid from a 240 billion euro, or $273 billion, bailout deal, provide the country meets certain commitments laid out by its creditors.

“I’m glad to report to you that the work has paid off,” Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the head of the Eurogroup of finance ministers, said at a news conference. “We have established common ground again.”

The deal is likely to give Greece breathing room. But it will hardly put the country past the worst of its economic and financial troubles.

Niki Kitsantonis contributed reporting from Athens.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

It seems that the exact concessions/reforms are yet to be formally put forward by Greece on Monday so that the troika can evaluate how extensive they are.

The Guardian also reports that some greek analysts expressed deep dissatisfaction with concessions being made and "radicals" within the party as well as greeks themselves are likely to be dissatisfied by the development.

[FSL]

The agreement:

The Eurogroup reiterates its appreciation for the remarkable adjustment efforts undertaken by Greece and the Greek people over the last years. During the last few weeks, we have, together with the institutions, engaged in an intensive and constructive dialogue with the new Greek authorities and reached common ground today.

The Eurogroup notes, in the framework of the existing arrangement, the request from the Greek authorities for an extension of the Master Financial Assistance Facility Agreement (MFFA), which is underpinned by a set of commitments. The purpose of the extension is the successful completion of the review on the basis of the conditions in the current arrangement, making best use of the given flexibility which will be considered jointly with the Greek authorities and the institutions. This extension would also bridge the time for discussions on a possible follow-up arrangement between the Eurogroup, the institutions and Greece.

"The Greek authorities will present a first list of reform measures, based on the current arrangement, by the end of Monday February 23. The institutions will provide a first view whether this is sufficiently comprehensive to be a valid starting point for a successful conclusion of the review. This list will be further specified and then agreed with the institutions by the end of April.
Only approval of the conclusion of the review of the extended arrangement by the institutions in turn will allow for any disbursement of the outstanding tranche of the current EFSF programme and the transfer of the 2014 SMP profits. Both are again subject to approval by the Eurogroup.

In view of the assessment of the institutions the Eurogroup agrees that the funds, so far available in the HFSF buffer, should be held by the EFSF, free of third party rights for the duration of the MFFA extension. The funds continue to be available for the duration of the MFFA extension and can only be used for bank recapitalisation and resolution costs. They will only be released on request by the ECB/SSM.

In this light, we welcome the commitment by the Greek authorities to work in close agreement with European and international institutions and partners. Against this background we recall the independence of the European Central Bank. We also agreed that the IMF would continue to play its role.

The Greek authorities have expressed their strong commitment to a broader and deeper structural reform process aimed at durably improving growth and employment prospects, ensuring stability and resilience of the financial sector and enhancing social fairness. The authorities commit to implementing long overdue reforms to tackle corruption and tax evasion, and improving the efficiency of the public sector. In this context, the Greek authorities undertake to make best use of the continued provision of technical assistance.

The Greek authorities reiterate their unequivocal commitment to honour their financial obligations to all their creditors fully and timely.

The Greek authorities have also committed to ensure the appropriate primary fiscal surpluses or financing proceeds required to guarantee debt sustainability in line with the November 2012 Eurogroup statement. The institutions will, for the 2015 primary surplus target, take the economic circumstances in 2015 into account.

In light of these commitments, we welcome that in a number of areas the Greek policy priorities can contribute to a strengthening and better implementation of the current arrangement. The Greek authorities commit to refrain from any rollback of measures and unilateral changes to the policies and structural reforms that would negatively impact fiscal targets, economic recovery or financial stability, as assessed by the institutions.

On the basis of the request, the commitments by the Greek authorities, the advice of the institutions, and today's agreement, we will launch the national procedures with a view to reaching a final decision on the extension of the current EFSF Master Financial Assistance Facility Agreement for up to four months by the EFSF Board of Directors. We also invite the institutions and the Greek authorities to resume immediately the work that would allow the successful conclusion of the review.
We remain committed to provide adequate support to Greece until it has regained full market access as long as it honours its commitments within the agreed framework

Important changes are imo:

which is underpinned by a set of commitments
This is included in regards to the loan agreement, the government's line was that the loan and the terms are different things


refrain from any rollback of measures and unilateral changes to the policies and structural reforms that would negatively impact fiscal targets, economic recovery or financial stability, as assessed by the institutions.

The "as assessed by the institutions" part was added


The Greek authorities have also committed to ensure the appropriate primary fiscal surpluses or financing proceeds required to guarantee debt sustainability in line with the November 2012 Eurogroup statement. The institutions will, for the 2015 primary surplus target, take the economic circumstances in 2015 into account.
The deficit targets remain what they were, 3% and 4.5%, but this target is more relaxed for this year and the institutions will have the final say (as I said earlier because of the elections the budget execution was not going well at all this year).


Greece has until Monday to present the "reforms" it wants to enact based on the current arrangement, it then needs to specify them and won't receive money until April after a successful review.




PS Notice the use of the words arrangements and institutions. They replace the words memorandum/programme and troika.
It's probably the biggest difference but I'll let you be the judge.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

FSL, if you see any interesting development in the mood among greeks or greek media - let us know, I personally would massively appreciate that.

[cyu]

When Obama was elected in the US, it actually turned out to be a disaster for "liberal" movements in the country. What happened was that they basically said, "Hey look, one of us is in the White House now. We can finally go home." And so they went home, and nothing happened.

This is what is happening in Greece. Instead of seeing the election as "permission" for leftists to do what they've always wanted to do, they decide the "right" people are now in power, so they do nothing.

[blake 3:17]

@cyu -- I hear you on that. Just for the sake of historical record -- the Obama victory was one of the most carefully scripted from the ruling classes, though they had their money on and McCain and Palin too.

When he got elected I was like wtf who cares -- got to work that day -- and all these black women I worked with -- in Canada! -- were saying they'd never been prouder of being Black than that day.

I really appreciate the contributions of all those who are discussing this seriously -- the world is at a turning point. I don't put any faith in silly institutions. I do respect leadership when it happens and folks who tell the truth. We don't need to agree on 17 zillion points.

Peace up to those who struggle.

[Creative Destruction]

When he got elected I was like wtf who cares -- got to work that day -- and all these black women I worked with -- in Canada! -- were saying they'd never been prouder of being Black than that day.

Given how denigrated the black population has been in the North American continent for 4 some-odd centuries, this is, at least, an extremely understandable reaction. Especially when just a year prior to Obama's election, you had everyone -- even black folks, probably especially so -- saying that a black man would never be in the White House in their lives.

Symbolically, it was huge for the black community. No matter how radically we feel about it, or how radically fucked up Obama's tenure has been, that's not something that really should be questioned or trampled on, I don't think.

[ckaihatsu]

[P]eople weren't really reading into the concessions the government was making in the previous days (no debt write off, no immediate increase in the minimum wage). Remarkably, the first thing that annoyed many was syriza proposing a rightist for the post of the President of the Republic.





So is this utter capitulation then?





When Obama was elected in the US, it actually turned out to be a disaster for "liberal" movements in the country. What happened was that they basically said, "Hey look, one of us is in the White House now. We can finally go home." And so they went home, and nothing happened.

This is what is happening in Greece. Instead of seeing the election as "permission" for leftists to do what they've always wanted to do, they decide the "right" people are now in power, so they do nothing.


This shows how much the entire bourgeois electoral 'game' is glorified and celebrated, even to the point of it being *detached* from the underlying politics / economics itself.

Really this whole *system* of class-division just encourages everyone to come out of hibernation once in awhile and 'play politics' in the style of a junket at the casino.

[FSL]

FSL, if you see any interesting development in the mood among greeks or greek media - let us know, I personally would massively appreciate that.

It's too early for the reality to kick in I guess. There is disillusionment and the general idea is that this is "more of the same but maybe a bit better", for no real reason.
As I had said before, based on where we were in 2011-12 people turning to Syriza was a conservative turn exactly because they promised no clashes neither with the greek capitali class nor with the EU. They promised they would be better negotiators. Of course reality bites. Someone who thought that a better negotiation would be enough, will find out it isn't.

The greek media are supporting the outcome and interestingly I'm unaware of any concrete comments from the Left Platform. There is only one article late last night describing the new deal as an aenigma and saying "it leaves the room open for question marks, hopes and worries."

The way Syriza has tried to spin the news is disgusting. Last night Varoufakis shamelessly suggested that the greek government wants to do the reforms this agreement implies and that the only reason he is sending the letter on Monday is because the "institutions" are his buddies and he wants their opinion.

Today Syriza's paper came out with this front page:
http://www.frontpages.gr/data/2015/20150221/AugiI.jpg

which reads:

New era
without a memorandum and a troika


The austerity I get, the insult to everyone's intelligence though...

[Kill all the fetuses!]

Thanks, FSL, appreciated. The only comments that I can see in English are those of the Communist Tendency, but they are marginal as well as their position is very clear and unchanging and they don't tend to comment on the political dynamic within the party, so that's not of much use.

I remember seeing a screen-shot from Greek TV, which showed how many people support which party, i.e. "if election happened today, which one of these parties would you vote for?". How often do these come about in Greece nowadays? If it's frequent, it would be interesting to see how the support for Syriza is developing as the last time I saw that image, Syriza had 40%+ support from the electorate.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

The Guardian reports Tsipras addressing Greeks:

"“We kept Greece standing and dignified,” said Tsipras adding that the deal had ended the unrealistic primary surpluses demanded by the previous bailout plan signed by his predecessor. “In effect it cancels austerity … In a few days we have achieved a lot but we have a long road. We have taken a decisive step to change course within the eurozone. Now negotiations enter a new, effective stage.”"

I am just not sure if he's that cynical or he actually believes it was some sort of victory for Greece. Consider, for instance, that Schaeuble, German finance minister, said after the negotiations that Syriza will have to explain this deal to its electorate. Confusing rhetoric, isn't it? But then again, Syriza's rhetoric has always been confusing.

[FSL]

The Guardian reports Tsipras addressing Greeks:

"“We kept Greece standing and dignified,” said Tsipras adding that the deal had ended the unrealistic primary surpluses demanded by the previous bailout plan signed by his predecessor. “In effect it cancels austerity … In a few days we have achieved a lot but we have a long road. We have taken a decisive step to change course within the eurozone. Now negotiations enter a new, effective stage.”"

I am just not sure if he's that cynical or he actually believes it was some sort of victory for Greece. Consider, for instance, that Schaeuble, German finance minister, said after the negotiations that Syriza will have to explain this deal to its electorate. Confusing rhetoric, isn't it? But then again, Syriza's rhetoric has always been confusing.
He's that cynical.


The perpetually shocked communist tendency of Syriza (they're the greek section of the IMT and represent about 2% of the party) were the first -and so far the only ones- to voice their objection. They ask the MPs to not ratify the agreement and also for a congress to be held immediately to change the policies and party leadership.
I think they'll move their entryism elsewhere soon.

We get many polls, we'll have some tomorrow I bet but I think we need to get a glimpse of what the "reforms" will be on Monday before they matter. I think that the government has been somewhat dishonest about what these reforms would entail.

[Art Vandelay]

The perpetually shocked communist tendency of Syriza (they're the greek section of the IMT and represent about 2% of the party) were the first -and so far the only ones- to voice their objection. They ask the MPs to not ratify the agreement and also for a congress to be held immediately to change the policies and party leadership. I think they'll move their entryism elsewhere soon.

Obviously you have a much better understanding of the situation playing out within SYRIZA right now, but I would be quite surprised if that is the course of action the IMT takes. The Grantites are fairly renowned for their ability to repeatedly smash their head against a brick wall. Given the fact that, as an organization, they have a complete misunderstanding of the french turn, they have a fairly extensive history of liquidating themselves into outfits with some pretty despicable politics. I suspect that they'll continue to be the 'perpetually outraged' faction of SYRIZA, while repeating their mantra that when the workers move it will be through mass social-democratic parties.

[Per Levy]

for anyone who wants to read what this communist tendency of syriza has to say(in english), demands are at the bottom:

http://www.marxist.com/greece-no-more-retreats-the-government-must-go-on-the-offensive.htm

lets just ignore that nationalization as a concept has many problems on its own, everyone knows that none of these demands will even be considered by the leaders and leading tendencys in syriza, not even in their wildest dreams/nightmares.

i also think it is quite interesting to see what partys that saw/see syriza as a inspiring model, like podemos and left unity, would have to say about this, obvious betrayal. at least for podemos i assume if they actually will get power in spain they will go the same route as syriza in a heartbeat.

[Futility Personified]

I'll be honest, the idea of 'nationalizing a bank under worker's control' seems extremely confusing to me.

[Thirsty Crow]

I'll be honest, the idea of 'nationalizing a bank under worker's control' seems extremely confusing to me.It's gibberish, purposeful at that; the bit about "workers' control" is to calm down some hotheaded radicals.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

It's gibberish, purposeful at that; the bit about "workers' control" is to calm down some hotheaded radicals.

Well, they are rather explicit about what they mean by workers' control in their original paper on the socialist programme of Syriza, which can be found here: http://www.marxist.com/ten-programmatic-points-for-syriza.htm

[FSL]

Ok, so there was a poll today but it took place between 12 and 17 of the month so no real importance. The only notable thing about is that while it was ordered by Syriza's paper, Aygh, it asked people whether they felt "national pride" during the negotiations. 81% said yes.


So far the government and media narrative was that the government would send a list of reforms "to fight corruption, tax evasion and the humanitarian crisis". Today was the first time I saw a news site mention that the institutions might also want to see prerequisites related to the programme.

Last and more interesting, Manolis Glezos, who you might know as one of the two men that took down the nazi flag from the Acropolis during the nazi occupation and who is currently a MEP for Syriza, came out and in pretty blunt terms apologized for the renaming of the memorandum and the troika, said he was sorry he helped in this deceipt and called for meetings of all syriza organizations to decide if they accept this. He leads a small group called "Active Citizens" but syriza always had him at the forefront to reap gains from his reputation.

Glezos' politics leave a lot to be desired but at his age he probably doesn't share the cynicism of a Tsipras or a Varoufakis who have decades of a wonderful career ahead of them.

[PhoenixAsh]

You're not oversimplifying, you're getting it wrong. I don't think any type of capitalist management can solve the workers' problems (or even make them slightly milder it would seem). That includes staying in the eu, leaving the eurozone or leaving the EU altogether to join the "eurasian union" or something similar.

What can solve the problems is a revolution that would socialize the means of production and establish a centrally planned economy in a Greece that leaves the EU, NATO and all sorts of imperialist alliances.

That is what I said when I said when you are:


favoring the option of internal KKE-advanced revolution in Greece at a similar time frame of a pan-European revolution while leaving the EU at the current moment would be devastating to the Greek economy (correct me if I am oversimplifying).

Your arguments against SYRIZA are that they co-opt the capitalist system and won't deliver on their promises...or bring any real worker friendly change (again....correct me if I am oversimplifying).

My question was what should happen in the current context. I asked this question to lead to the following follow up question:

"what would the KKE have done had they had the same electoral results as Syriza"

The resulting position of the KKE would have invariably led them into a similar position where they were in Limbo between co-opting a capitalist mode of production heading a government or, if they chose the opposition, where they at the very least would have been in a position of shared responsibility to work within a capitalist frame work by being responsible for the resulting minority governments governing.

An internal revolution led by the KKE, even if possible and it currently is not, would have had no real effect on the situation in Greece unless you are of the opinion that Greece is self sufficient enough to support communism in one country. So the KKE would at the very least in the event of a revolution have to pay lip service to the capitalist mode of production. The situation would be more or less similar to the consequences of leaving the EU. Basically...like I said...in order for a revolution to succeed it needs to be pan-European, at the very least, or else there would be no real change.

[FSL]

That is what I said when I said when you are:

Quote:
favoring the option of internal KKE-advanced revolution in Greece at a similar time frame of a pan-European revolution
The pan-european revolution is something born our of your imagination.
Never did I say that a "pan-european revolution at a similar time frame" is a prerequisite and certainly not in that quote of mine. A revolution is the solution for Greece and it shouldn't sit around waiting for other countries, it should go for socialism.
Try to read people's answers.



Basically...like I said...in order for a revolution to succeed it needs to be pan-European, at the very least, or else there would be no real change.
Oh so it's you saying that and it's your stance that leaves everyone where Syriza currently is, not mine.
Glad we cleared that out.

[PhoenixAsh]

Actually those were your arguments in the past.

As it stands now you seem to be of the opinion that leaving the EU would devastate the Greek economy, unless the KKE leads a revolution in Greece alone. In that case you are under the impression that leaving the EU would be completely different because...socialism works in one country.

My position is that the KKE would be, and is, exactly the same as Syriza and has proven to be so in the past. My position in this thread is that KKE in the same electoral position as Syriza (remember that the KKE is a participant in the bourgeois parliamentary circuit) would have had no alternative than to co-opt capitalism and would have done so regardless of whether they chose to govern or chose opposition. I am openly wondering as to how you would argue when the KKE had been in that position.

This is not an endorsement of Syriza. It is simply wondering if you have more to offer than platitudes that come directly from the propaganda machine of the KKE.

It is also my position that a revolution in Greece alone would be similar in effect to its economy as would leaving the EU. Not only is it not possible to create socialism in one country to any meaningful extent unless the country is fully self sufficient, which Greece is not...not by a long shot, but the economy of Greece is entirely dependent on international trade and a revolution would result in its ejection from the EU. The revolutionary government in the Greek socialist utopian society would still have to mold itself to the international capitalist context in order to function...and would therefore not be socialist. Especially given the bureaucratic background of the party rooted in Stalinism...this will eventually result in at the very best...a state capitalist situation.

[FSL]

Actually those were your arguments in the past.


I'm 100% sure they weren't.



socialism works in one country
Of course it does.



My position is that the KKE would be, and is, exactly the same as Syriza and has proven to be so in the past. My position in this thread is that KKE in the same electoral position as Syriza (remember that the KKE is a participant in the bourgeois parliamentary circuit) would have had no alternative than to co-opt capitalism and would have done so regardless of whether they chose to govern or chose opposition. I am openly wondering as to how you would argue when the KKE had been in that position.

This is not an endorsement of Syriza. It is simply wondering if you have more to offer than platitudes that come directly from the propaganda machine of the KKE.
We've established that this is not an opinion, it is merely a fantasy.



It is also my position that a revolution in Greece alone would be similar in effect to its economy as would leaving the EU. Not only is it not possible to create socialism in one country to any meaningful extent unless the country is fully self sufficient, which Greece is not...not by a long shot, but the economy of Greece is entirely dependent on international trade and a revolution would result in its ejection from the EU. The revolutionary government in the Greek socialist utopian society would still have to mold itself to the international capitalist context in order to function...and would therefore not be socialist. Especially given the bureaucratic background of the party rooted in Stalinism...this will eventually result in at the very best...a state capitalist situation.
Saying a revolution has to happen "everywhere" is the easiest way of denying a revolution and not coming off as a reactionary.
Socialism isn't about "self-sufficiency" unless you agree with Kimilsungism. Ejection from the EU doesn't mean an embargo from the EU and if it did Greece would hope you can prevent it or stop it. Of course there would need to be trade and some uncertainty in production. But much less uncertainty than there is today. And also no capitalists.

[PhoenixAsh]

I'm 100% sure they weren't.

....


Of course it does.

Really? Because name one example.


We've established that this is not an opinion, it is merely a fantasy.

"we" have established nothing of that sort. In fact..."we" can establish objectively that the KKE has done so in the past. And while it says it won't ever do so again...the fact that they participate in the bourgeois parliamentary elections with the aim to gain seats will objectively lead to a contextual situation if they had the electoral results of Syriza where they would have no alternative than to co-opt capitalism one way or the other.



Saying a revolution has to happen "everywhere" is the easiest way of denying a revolution and not coming off as a reactionary.

I am not saying it has to happen everywhere. I am saying it needs to happen in an area large enough to be self sufficient and doesn't need to rely on trade with capitalist nations in order to bring some semblance to actual communism instead of the state capitalist bureaucratic perversion of something completely different except in name only.


Socialism isn't about "self-sufficiency" unless you agree with Kimilsungism.

No it isn't. But anybody with half a brain knows that when you need to trade with capitalist nations for things like...oil, vegetables and fruits...you need to have a profit and surplus oriented economic arrangement...which will invariably lead to exploitation....which is wholly unlike socialism as it is understood by anybody except the ones who promote bureaucratic state capitalism.


Ejection from the EU doesn't mean an embargo from the EU and if it did Greece would hope you can prevent it or stop it.

I can do anything when I feel like it....even change EU policy. It is just that I have been a bit lazy and preoccupied lately...

But I do get what you are saying. And you don't seem to get what I am saying. The fact is simply this...whether or not Greece has a revolution does not negate the necessity to adopt a system in which surplus value is created in order to be able to trade with the EU. This can't happen in a socialist country...leading to a trade deficit on import products. Resulting in a collapse of the economy. So a capitalist mode of production needs to be introduced to some extend. Similar to what would happen if Greece would leave the EU in its current state.


Of course there would need to be trade and some uncertainty in production. But much less uncertainty than there is today. And also no capitalists.

No. There would be capitalists. You would need to create surplus value in order to trade.

[FSL]

ut anybody with half a brain knows that when you need to trade with capitalist nations for things like...oil, vegetables and fruits...you need to have a profit and surplus oriented economic arrangement...which will invariably lead to exploitation
I'm not sure you know what you're talking about. To have imports you need to have exports. Greece would export vegetable and fruit (or tourist services) and import things like oil. Depending on the economy's state and on the need to not have a trade deficit -this is what's actually important- Greece might have to import less cars. Fine, more people would take the bus.
If that's our problem, than the improvement compared to today would be huge.



No. There would be capitalists. You would need to create surplus value in order to trade.
What? So olive oil from state farms and tourism services in hotels operated by the workers' state can't be traded? Why?

[PhoenixAsh]

You do not need exports to have imports. Although that would affect your trade balance.

The products I mentioned are in fact the current imports by Greece according to some site. But I'll settle for the category oil and food as well.

Oil is not only used for cars. Its main use is in industry and energy production. The solution is not as simple as "more people take the bus"...it would be more like...more people will stand in line for the bus which will only rarely be able to drive and suffer from rolling black outs at night and will have to use a whole lot more candles and fire wood....incidentally also two things Greece imports.

[FSL]

You do not need exports to have imports. Although that would affect your trade balance.
Exports give you foreign currency. You use foreign currency for imports.



The products I mentioned are in fact the current imports by Greece according to some site. But I'll settle for the category oil and food as well.

Oil is not only used for cars. Its main use is in industry and energy production. The solution is not as simple as "more people take the bus"...it would be more like...more people will stand in line for the bus which will only rarely be able to drive and suffer from rolling black outs at night and will have to use a whole lot more candles and fire wood....incidentally also two things Greece imports.
Why do imports go to 0 or near 0? Is there any economical reason?
Do you understand what you're saying?

[PhoenixAsh]

Exports give you foreign currency. You use foreign currency for imports.

Really? Because no. Usually foreign currency is bought and sold on the foreign exchange markets.


Why do imports go to 0 or near 0? Is there any economical reason?
Do you understand what you're saying?

Do they? And do you?

If Greece can't produce essentials like food, oil, fire wood, candles. This is a serious problem if there is no import of these products....which are needed by the population in order to maintain a living standard...or alive for that matter....or production capacity. This is not simply a matter of "Oh well...we do without it because look at our nice red flag".

At the same time. If you want to buy $100 worth of products then you need to have $100 to be able to do so. These $100 need to be produced. The $100 of products you are going to buy from a capitalist company has surplus value in its worth. How do you plan to get the $100 of production you need to buy the products with a socialist mode of production without creating either surplus value or a labor cost deficit and therefore scarcity and unequality.

[FSL]

Really? Because no. Usually foreign currency is bought and sold on the foreign exchange markets.



Do they? And do you?

If Greece can't produce essentials like food, oil, fire wood, candles. This is a serious problem if there is no import of these products....which are needed by the population in order to maintain a living standard...or alive for that matter....or production capacity. This is not simply a matter of "Oh well...we do without it because look at our nice red flag".

At the same time. If you want to buy $100 worth of products then you need to have $100 to be able to do so. These $100 need to be produced. The $100 of products you are going to buy from a capitalist company has surplus value in its worth. How do you plan to get the $100 of production you need to buy the products with a socialist mode of production without creating either surplus value or a labor cost deficit and therefore scarcity and unequality.
1) You can buy euros with dollars in the forex markets but other currencies aren't used as much or at all in the forex markets. The countries that have these currencies use a currency like dollar or euro for their foreign trade. They build foreign currency reserves through exports and use them for imports.

2) Products aimed to be exported are produced as commodities. A week's holiday could be free for every person in the country but tourists would need to pay obviously. Workers employed in the "export industry" would receive the same payment in kind or in labor vouchers that everyone else does. Of course these foreign tourist hotels would need to earn money and these money is used for imports. These imports are part of the "payment in kind or through labor vouchers" workers receive. No one is stealing the money these export companies make from them.

[cyu]

It's easy to make a nation obey once they replace mass politics with representative politics. Once they rely on representatives to do things, you have less people to deal with. If you can't bribe them, you blackmail them. If you can't blackmail them, you threaten their immediate family. Easy to do when you're the type to impose austerity on your own people and are willing to sacrifice half the Ukrainian population for NATO strategy.

On the other hand, a cynical citizenry is not a stable population.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

So there is deal, apparently. It's pretty much the same austerity, it's just that Greece now has a little bit more place to manoeuvre, at least theoretically. So for instance they agreed to not increasing pensions and public sector wages, but intend to take from higher earners and giving to the poorer ones thus leaving the bill as such not increased. They put more emphasis on tax evasion and soaking the oligarchs etc. They also claimed that minimum wage wouldn't be increased without consultation with the troika. Well, many things really, but ultimately little has changed apart from this theoretical space to manoeuvre, which will be quite different from practical space to manoeuvre.

Most notably, however, they agreed to go full speed ahead with privatisations, which was one of these red lines that the Left Platform drew. Apparently there is quite a bit of dissatisfaction within the ranks of Syriza, with at least 50 CC members requesting an urgent meeting, which would explain this deal (which just goes to show how autonomous the leaders are from the CC or the rest of the party). Most notable men from the Left Platform publicly condemned the outcome of the negotiation and ANEL doesn't seem too happy as well.

But as always, let's wait for FSL with his comments. I am particularly interested in how greeks themselves reacted to this and maybe some more details what's happening within the ranks of Syriza.

[FSL]

The government's promised programs for the very poor will go through in a "fiscally neutral manner" when prior to the elections they had predicted a cost of 1.9 billion euros. This means that they will either not go through at all, go through but with the addition of new taxes or just make it so that almost no one is eligible. In case you didn't know, there were benefits for the poor under the previous government as well (as I guess there are in every country under every government).


They also promise to
1) "rationalize" the value added tax, probably with increases in the islands where it's reduced
2) cut down on public employees "non-wage income" (overtime pay and stuff like that),
3) put barriers for getting pension early, they were told to do more
4) not protect residencies from auctions (instead they say they'll work with the bankers to avoid such phenomena),
5) Respect the privatizations and the ongoing competitions for further privatizations. Consider privatizations taking into account the valuations etc
6) Adopt the "best practices" for the labor market. No increase in the minimum wage without consultation with bussiness owners, the "institutions", the ILO and even a special committee that will be examining whether the increases in the minimum wage correspond to an increase in productivity.
IMF's head, Lagarde, asked for more specific reforms.
7) Remove barriers of entry for certain professions (again the IMF asked them to be more specific)
8) reduce the wages of high-earners in the public sector (for example people working in the finance ministry)
9) Fight tax-evasion and smuggling activities. I wouldn't get my hopes high.


All in all this is the same deal we had before. This list is a "starting point", these measures will need to be discussed with the institutions (and not the troika!), specified and then implemented. The final review will be in April as things stand.
The only thing that changed was that there is no definite commitment to reduce auxiliary pensions but that will probably change in a matter of weeks.


Many greeks are still in denial, they expect to see the "something better" part. Government's vagueness and doublespeak plays a part in this. The communist party brings a law to increase the minimum wage, reinstall collective labor agreements, pensions etc but it would seem that the "left majority" will refuse to vote it. There are also protests against the government scheduled for the next days by the communist party and antarsya (which until last week participated in pro-government rallies, encouraging them to be "tough" in the negotiations).

[Creative Destruction]

lol, bourgeois politics.

[cyu]

The New Obama

[FSL]

During the weekend, the government kept leaking that the list was only the program for the poor (without the "fiscally neutral" part) and point 9 about tax evasion and smuggling.
New Democracy and Pasok spoke out against syriza because according to them we have the same deal but we're in a worse situation (high bond yields, a rumored 3rd bailout in July), while to Potami has said it will support the reforms.

A government meeting took place earlier, afterwards Lafazanis (head of left platform) was asked by reporters if there had been any reservations and he replied "Objections as well".

[cyu]

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/02/syriza-greece-eurogroup-kouvelakis/

to make it abundantly clear that the use of the term “institutions” instead of the term “troika” is window-dressing, the text specifically reaffirms the tripartite composition of the supervisory mechanism, emphasizing that the “institutions” include the ECB (“against this background we recall the independence of the European Central Bank”) and the International Monetary Fund (“we also agreed that the IMF would continue to play its role”).

whatever the electoral result, no reversal of austerity is feasible within the existing European framework. As European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker stated, “there can be no democratic choice against the European treaties.”

Syriza’s Manolis Glezos was therefore right to speak of (http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2015/glezos220215.html) “illusion” and, rising to the occasion, apologize to the people for having contributed to cultivating it.

Afraid to do what Glezos has dared to do — i.e. acknowledge the failure of its entire strategy — the leadership is attempting a cover-up, “passing off meat as fish,” to cite the popular Greek saying.

But to present a defeat as a success is perhaps worse than the defeat itself. it turns governmental discourse into a string of clichés and platitudes. it prepares the ground for the next, more definitive, defeats, because it dissolves the criteria by which success can be distinguished from retreat.

we must look reality in the face and speak the language of honesty. “The truth is revolutionary,” to cite the words of a famous leader who knew what he was talking about.

[FSL]

People like Kouvelakis who find themselves in that position should -if there is an ounce of honesty in them- retire from politics and lock themselves in their home to protect everyone else from their awful judgement.

Instead they will either continue to give a radical alibi to syriza or -if things come to that- break away to propose the same thing, another version of an imaginary humane capitalism.

[cyu]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-25/how-far-it-kiev-athens

The IMF and EU make a lot of noise about all the conditions Greece has to address to get even a mild extension of support, while the same IMF and EU keep on handing out cash to Ukraine without as much as a whisper – at least publicly.

Spare no expense capturing the slave, but once you've got him, make sure you get your return on investment.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

For those interested, a couple of days ago there was a debate between Stathis Kouvelakis, member of Syriza’s central committee, representing the Left Platform and Alex Callinicos, editor of International Socialism.

I was eagerly waiting for the debate, expecting some sort of a direct clash, complete disagreement etc., considering some critical articles that Callinicos has published in the Internal Socialism journal etc. But what I got was... meh. I mean, I will listen to it again as I was rather tired yesterday, but I didn't really enjoy the vibe of the debate nor I learnt anything that I didn't know before. But be the judge yourself, here's the debate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV2jCTBjlpQ

[Creative Destruction]

The socialist movement seems to be a joke.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

The socialist movement seems to be a joke.

What socialist movement?

[Creative Destruction]

lol

[cyu]

I seem to remember someone asking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_E._Reed%2C_Jr. how things were going. He grinned, "We're winning."

The only thing is that when people like him are winning, the world is losing.

[cyu]

http://www.workersliberty.org/node/24769

Yesterday a crucial meeting of Syriza's group of MPs took place. A clear majority of speakers expressed criticisms of various forms and intensities about the agreement and the strategy followed by the government.

Although it was unclear whether a vote should take place, Tsipras finally asked one to be held. About 30 MPs (out of the 149) were out of the room at that moment. around 40 MPs abstained or voted against. the ranks of those rejecting the agreement went far beyond Leftplatform supporters.

As a result the government will almost certainly not bring the agreement to Parliament. To do so would risk seeing the government falling or standing thanks to the support of To Potami, PASOK and part of New Democracy.

[Futility Personified]

So does this mean that renegotiations will have to take place again?

[FSL]

http://www.workersliberty.org/node/24769

Yesterday a crucial meeting of Syriza's group of MPs took place. A clear majority of speakers expressed criticisms of various forms and intensities about the agreement and the strategy followed by the government.

Although it was unclear whether a vote should take place, Tsipras finally asked one to be held. About 30 MPs (out of the 149) were out of the room at that moment. around 40 MPs abstained or voted against. the ranks of those rejecting the agreement went far beyond Leftplatform supporters.

As a result the government will almost certainly not bring the agreement to Parliament. To do so would risk seeing the government falling or standing thanks to the support of To Potami, PASOK and part of New Democracy.

According to the left platform there were about 30 or more disagreements.
Accroding to the main tendency, there were 5 rejections and 5 blank votes. The vote took place by a show of hands in a meeting not covered by the press.

However, it's the left platform that says the agreement need not be brought to the parliament. Prominent members like Lafazanis and Stratoulis said so.



In other news, the government narrative currently goes like this:
1) The agreement was a huge success, better than they could have hoped.
2) Greece has basically no commitments
3) The reform list was written with "creative ambiguity" to make it seem like there are commitments so that the german parliament would vote for it
4) It was the europeans that asked Varoufakis to write the list in that vague manner so they wouldn't have to admit defeat

These things are said in the finance minister's daily interviews to the most respected greek journalists with not one questioning a word and are then repeated in the evening news.

Also, regarding the VAT rationalization Varoufakis says they'll just find a singe product no one cares about and raise the VAT on that "as a show of good will" and that this will be enough.



So Greece either brought the EU to its knees or there is some nazi-level propaganda going on here.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

FSL, how was the KKE-organised anti-government protest on Friday? I've heard only that a bunch of Anarchists were throwing molotovs at police or something.

[FSL]

FSL, how was the KKE-organised anti-government protest on Friday? I've heard only that a bunch of Anarchists were throwing molotovs at police or something.

The molotov-throwing anarchists were out on Thursday in a demo called by antarsya (just a week ago antarsya was participating in pro-government demos).

The Friday anti-government protest was strong but not extraordinary. I don't like saying it but the "masses", though way more suspicious than they were a few days ago, are still giving the government the benefit of the doubt. This isn't something we haven't seen before, it was like that in 2009 and it was like that even when Papadimos, a banker, was appointed primeminister. I also understand that the majority of the workers don't have the time or will to read the agreements themselves and rely on the news reports (that I described above), if that.
Things move more slowly than I'd like and it sometimes is so annoying but there are cracks in the near consensus we had a while ago and it should be breaking soon enough.

Some of the "rightists" within syriza's top ranks went as far as saying that it's shameful to hold anti-government protests when the global left firmly supports syriza and the government but this line of thought hardly found any supporters.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

Number-wise, how strong were the Thursday and Friday's protests?

[FSL]

I can't tell about Thursday.
These are from Friday.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-zltgTkyOuwQ/VPGinyLNMsI/AAAAAAAAX_Y/rfBaiSJyv-k/s1600/sygkentrosh-syntagma-28.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yV3XNg3hfP4/VPGiocM7DhI/AAAAAAAAX_c/bqhTHPpi6uY/s1600/panoramikh.jpg

Some here as well: http://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/2xdcya/there_are_thousands_of_marxistleninsts_protesting/

[cyu]

So Greece either brought the EU to its knees or there is some nazi-level propaganda going on here.

Judging by their history of involvement in other countries, it's par for the course for the IMF.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

http://www.ansamed.info/ansamed/en/news/sections/economics/2015/02/26/greeceminimum-wage-restored-to-751-euro-in-2016-minister_62c335f6-f6d8-4d68-8dd5-4654c73c4d65.html

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Syriza-Raises-Greek-Minimum-Wage-as-it-Begins-Euro-Debt-Tour-20150201-0004.html

Whilst the outcome of negotiations contained a lot of disappointments and obvious flip-flops by Tsipras in particular (Varoufakis strikes me as honest in his lack of ambition, whereas Tsipras as head of the party has to present a more optimistic, motivating message for the party's grassroots and the wider country), it looks as though the commitment to a lower budget surplus, plus the vague wording of the new agreement has given SYRIZA the political and budgetary space to still be able to bring through a raft of reforms, including minimum wage rises and some re-balancing of the ownership of the means of production away from the private sector.

I actually think that, for all the talk of naivety from SYRIZA in negotiations, they have played their hand well. They were never going to be able to act unilaterally, just as in Britain it is a UKIP and right-wing Tory fantasy to be able to act unilaterally re: British membership in the EU. By starting with quite ambitious rhetoric, SYRIZA have at least been able to gain some changes which should allow them to achieve their limited aim of introducing some humanitarian policies in Greece.

[FSL]

it looks as though the commitment to a lower budget surplus, plus the vague wording of the new agreement has given SYRIZA the political and budgetary space to still be able to bring through a raft of reforms, including minimum wage rises and some re-balancing of the ownership of the means of production away from the private sector.

Nice. Now, can you explain how "it looks as though" that might happen?
Unless blind faith is something you can't really explain but simply choose to feel?

In actual news, the new government has yet to bring any laws in the parliament. I'm guessing because it's stuck negotiating with the institutions even though no one is reporting anything.

[cyu]

As I mentioned elsewhere, in a democracy, the media tries to keep the public informed, because the public needs to understand what is going on in order to run the country.

When democracy has been subverted, it is no longer necessary for the public to be informed of anything. In fact, an informed public only gets in the way of the establishment. It then becomes the media's job to either distract the public with useless information or to sell official policy - "We decide, you agree."

It seems Greece is moving down the second path. It's no great shame to do so however, since most Western nations have moved down the second path.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Nice. Now, can you explain how "it looks as though" that might happen?
Unless blind faith is something you can't really explain but simply choose to feel?

In actual news, the new government has yet to bring any laws in the parliament. I'm guessing because it's stuck negotiating with the institutions even though no one is reporting anything.

If you read the links provided you would see quotes provided from ministers of the Greek government.

I'm guessing that as they only finished international negotiations last week, they won't have had time to consult on, draft, pass, and enact a raft of national reforms.

I'm all for criticism of the direction of the SYRIZA government, but you're just showing a typical attitude of many on the communist left of almost willing SYRIZA to fail in everything they do, so you can bask in the righteousness of your own, pure, irrelevancy.

[cyu]

Judging by what http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manolis_Glezos has been "allowed" to say, my impression is that Syriza is more truly leftist than most fake socialist parties that get in power. If it were the typical fake reformists, they'd go into full damage control after those "unscripted" comments - "oh he was having a bad day, oh he misspoke, oh he was misinterpreted." That doesn't mean party heads actually represent anybody though - even if they did once, bribery, blackmail, and intimidation can change many heads of state.

If I were a member of the ruling class, I'd just make a mental note to myself that in order to prevent future "outbursts" like that, we'd have to make sure Glezos is bribed, blackmailed, or intimidated before announcing the next proposed "reforms".

[Art Vandelay]

I'm all for criticism of the direction of the SYRIZA government, but you're just showing a typical attitude of many on the communist left of almost willing SYRIZA to fail in everything they do, so you can bask in the righteousness of your own, pure, irrelevancy.

The point is that SYRIZA can do nothing but fail - at least if your goal is to see the proletariat overthrow the capitalist mode of production. SYRIZA will do exactly what social-democrats always do, administer the bourgeois state, while providing capital with a safety valve on the development of class consciousness. We've seen it play out time and time again, for what, over a century now?

It never ceases to amaze me how anyone on this site who upholds anything resembling a principled communist position in regards to social-democracy gets labeled as sectarian and irrelevant, meanwhile everyone else gets a pass for tossing their support behind the left wing of capital, as they repeat their delusional mantra that maybe this time around things will be different.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

http://www.ansamed.info/ansamed/en/news/sections/economics/2015/02/26/greeceminimum-wage-restored-to-751-euro-in-2016-minister_62c335f6-f6d8-4d68-8dd5-4654c73c4d65.html

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Syriza-Raises-Greek-Minimum-Wage-as-it-Begins-Euro-Debt-Tour-20150201-0004.html

Whilst the outcome of negotiations contained a lot of disappointments and obvious flip-flops by Tsipras in particular (Varoufakis strikes me as honest in his lack of ambition, whereas Tsipras as head of the party has to present a more optimistic, motivating message for the party's grassroots and the wider country), it looks as though the commitment to a lower budget surplus, plus the vague wording of the new agreement has given SYRIZA the political and budgetary space to still be able to bring through a raft of reforms, including minimum wage rises and some re-balancing of the ownership of the means of production away from the private sector.

I actually think that, for all the talk of naivety from SYRIZA in negotiations, they have played their hand well. They were never going to be able to act unilaterally, just as in Britain it is a UKIP and right-wing Tory fantasy to be able to act unilaterally re: British membership in the EU. By starting with quite ambitious rhetoric, SYRIZA have at least been able to gain some changes which should allow them to achieve their limited aim of introducing some humanitarian policies in Greece.

Oh, look, yet another apologist for Syriza jumped in. I can't believe the shit that I am reading on a forum of revolutionary left - "played their hand well". Played their hand well! And Varoufakis strikes him as an "honest politician", what a fucking brilliant analysis of the situation! Bravo! Jesus fucking Christ, are you fucking blind? Syriza's leadership pretty much capitulated and agreed on almost exact same terms of austerity as previous government - German parliament approved the bill with the record approval rating, while Syriza's infighting got so intense that the bill was rejected by 41% of Syriza's CC member this Sunday. How's that for some fucking victory, how's that for "playing their hand well"! The left within Syriza are viciously critiquing the deal precisely because it abandons any pretence to reject austerity and implement even the basic policies of Thessaloniki program, precisely because it doesn't help to stop or alleviate the humanitarian crisis. Or are the Left Platform - which denounces those critical of Syriza as sectarian and are absolutely pro-Syriza as a project - as these people who are critiquing Syriza somehow "insignificant sectarians" as well? You literally have no idea what you are talking about, you obviously aren't even familiar with the situation at hand and come here to post some shitty apologism for Syriza with a couple of shitty links, ignoring everything that has been said and done thus far. You dishonest piece of shit. Just admit that your apologism for Syriza has been wrong, re-analyse the situation, re-evaluation your politics and move on.

How the fuck can someone on this forum say something like this is beyond me. History is literally full of examples of these sort of governments failing. But fear not - this time is fucking different! This time we have Varoufakis - this humble, honest politician, which will fix it! We don't need any analysis of material conditions and the sort of implications they have for Syriza, why the fuck would we need them, if we have this special snowflake Varoufakis or Tsipras or whatever. Guess what - this time is not different. It's just history repeating itself as farce - for a hundredth fucking time.

You say you are "all for critique of Syriza", while everything you ever said on the subject was pure apologism for it and denouncing everyone who dares to critique the party from a revolutionary perspective as a sectarian. "All for critique of Syriza" my fucking ass you coward.

Syriza ought to be opposed for sowing illusions in the parliamentary activity, for redirecting the struggle from revolutionary activity to parliamentary one, for failing to give the breathing space for working-class, for not revitalizing the movements etc. Now the Left Platform is a somewhat different story and it has somewhat different implication as far as these issues are concerned, but the problem is that you don't even fucking differentiate between the party's wings and groups. The fact that you can come here and defend Syriza's leadership for what they've done and apologise for it as if they "played their hand very well", when almost half of the party is rising against the deal, when many supporters of Syriza themselves are critical of it, you - a supposed revolutionary - come here and defend as if they "won", as if they "played their hand very well". This is just abhorent, absolutely. This is obviously a cowardly ass-covering, but if you truly believe what you say, if it's not some psychological defensive mechanism, if you really stand by the leadership of Syriza even now, then don't you fucking dare to call yourself a revolutionary, you cowardly piece of shit.

I am absolutely pissed off, because not only every social-democrat around me is pissing me off with unconditional support for Syriza's leadership regardless of what it does, but now I have to see the same bullshit on a revolutionary forum. This is fucking insane.

[FSL]

If you read the links provided you would see quotes provided from ministers of the Greek government.

I'm guessing that as they only finished international negotiations last week, they won't have had time to consult on, draft, pass, and enact a raft of national reforms.

I'm all for criticism of the direction of the SYRIZA government, but you're just showing a typical attitude of many on the communist left of almost willing SYRIZA to fail in everything they do, so you can bask in the righteousness of your own, pure, irrelevancy.
Let me read the links and see what new information they give me.


First link: Syriza Raises Greek Minimum Wage as it Begins Euro Debt Tour
Published on February 1st

Second link: Greece:'Minimum wage restored to 751 euro in 2016', minister
Published on February 26th

I wonder what can someone make of that.


No, you are all for the support of the syriza-anel government and you are all for criticizing workers' opposition to that government. This is because you don't give a rat's ass about syriza "failing" in everything they -don't even attempt to- do since apparently not being irrelevant is enough for you.
It's not for others.

[FSL]

Judging by what http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manolis_Glezos has been "allowed" to say, my impression is that Syriza is more truly leftist than most fake socialist parties that get in power. If it were the typical fake reformists, they'd go into full damage control after those "unscripted" comments - "oh he was having a bad day, oh he misspoke, oh he was misinterpreted."
They said he was misinformed.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

I wonder what can someone make of that.


That SYRIZA may make progress towards alleviating the worst effects of austerity on the Greek working class.


No, you are all for the support of the syriza-anel government and you are all for criticizing workers' opposition to that government.

Given that a great swathe of Greek workers voted for SYRIZA, you are not in a position to hold hegemony over 'workers' opposition' to SYRIZA.


This is because you don't give a rat's ass about syriza "failing" in everything they -don't even attempt to- do since apparently not being irrelevant is enough for you.
It's not for others.

I genuinely don't understand why other take pride in pursuing the failed communist program, party, and modus operandi, when the last 25 years or so have shown that this is a strategy that has zero practical chance of success. Nobody, I hope, holds any illusions that the leadership of SYRIZA are in any way revolutionary. That is why they have more chance of success: they have limited their aims to a very specific set of reforms and, whilst we can strongly critique this from a revolutionary perspective, we can also see that to an extent they have put left-wing politics back on the table in Europe. So whilst we don't need to cheerlead SYRIZA and certainly not their leadership, we can at least see their election (and period of government) as a useful tool to have a proper discussion about left-wing politics for the first time in a long time.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Also I did respond to Kill all the fetuses! but I spent so much time on the reply that it logged me out.

Given Kill all...'s lack of respectful language i'm not inclined to spend the time re-hashing my reply. If they want to continue the debate (which I would like to do) they are welcome to PM me.

[FSL]

That SYRIZA may make progress towards alleviating the worst effects of austerity on the Greek working class.
And they can do so by backtracking on their promises. Impressive.




Given that a great swathe of Greek workers voted for SYRIZA, you are not in a position to hold hegemony over 'workers' opposition' to SYRIZA.
British workers will vote for tories and labor. I'm sure you'll be shutting your mouth as a result.




I genuinely don't understand why other take pride in pursuing the failed communist program, party, and modus operandi, when the last 25 years or so have shown that this is a strategy that has zero practical chance of success. Nobody, I hope, holds any illusions that the leadership of SYRIZA are in any way revolutionary. That is why they have more chance of success: they have limited their aims to a very specific set of reforms and, whilst we can strongly critique this from a revolutionary perspective, we can also see that to an extent they have put left-wing politics back on the table in Europe. So whilst we don't need to cheerlead SYRIZA and certainly not their leadership, we can at least see their election (and period of government) as a useful tool to have a proper discussion about left-wing politics for the first time in a long time.
The past 25 years were full of bolshevism, weren't they?
Let's reject that and go for this new, untested thing: leftists saying they'll make capitalism great for everyone.

My hope is that no one holds any illusions that people parroting this line are in any way "revolutionary" simply because they say so.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

And they can do so by backtracking on their promises. Impressive.

Like I said, it's not the leadership of SYRIZA that is impressive, but the greater political consciousness that the wider party's rise has brought out of Greek workers. Critical support for the leadership during negotiations is because it would really be self-defeating to cut off the head of the snake if you see some potential in the snake's body.


British workers will vote for tories and labor. I'm sure you'll be shutting your mouth as a result.

But British workers have always done this. The lack of engagement and high number of abstentions at British general elections points towards antipathy towards the status quo parties. If British workers suddenly voted, for example, for Left Unity or TUSC or whoever, then you would certainly be at least excited that their collective political consciousness has awakened, even if you accept that the likes of Left Unity, TUSC are not revolutionary and in the case of the latter, hold horrific politics.


The past 25 years were full of bolshevism, weren't they?
Let's reject that and go for this new, untested thing: leftists saying they'll make capitalism great for everyone.

To be fair, no party is going to get elected on a message of "hey, we can only offer you a tiny bit of hope but not much".


My hope is that no one holds any illusions that people parroting this line are in any way "revolutionary" simply because they say so.

So what is your hope? Or rather, what do you realistically hope to achieve? Like i've said, everytime I ask this question of what other communists hope to achieve by following the same failed party- and movement-building tactics and programmes, and having the same old tired historical debates, that have failed for so long, it's impossible to get an honest answer.

[FSL]

Like I said, it's not the leadership of SYRIZA that is impressive, but the greater political consciousness that the wider party's rise has brought out of Greek workers. Critical support for the leadership during negotiations is because it would really be self-defeating to cut off the head of the snake if you see some potential in the snake's body.



But British workers have always done this. The lack of engagement and high number of abstentions at British general elections points towards antipathy towards the status quo parties. If British workers suddenly voted, for example, for Left Unity or TUSC or whoever, then you would certainly be at least excited that their collective political consciousness has awakened, even if you accept that the likes of Left Unity, TUSC are not revolutionary and in the case of the latter, hold horrific politics.
No, I would certainly not be a tiny bit excited.
What political consciousness? If syriza was perfectly successful in spreading its message, the result would be everyone thinking that "honest politicians are standing up to Merkel and her inane economics".
Which is nonsense. It's not a bad representation of reality, it's a deliberate misrepresantation.




To be fair, no party is going to get elected on a message of "hey, we can only offer you a tiny bit of hope but not much".


So what is your hope? Or rather, what do you realistically hope to achieve? Like i've said, everytime I ask this question of what other communists hope to achieve by following the same failed party- and movement-building tactics and programmes, and having the same old tired historical debates, that have failed for so long, it's impossible to get an honest answer.
You seem like an odd communist if you feel like you need to repeat the word "fail" ten times in a sentence.
In my opinion it's not communism or the communist movement that failed. It's the bastardization of communism with the ideas of an utopian humane capitalism. It's the conservative Soviet Union that failed, it's the eurocommunists that failed, it's the modern day leftists that keep on failing.

What communists and the communist movement did was absolutely remarkable in the short amount of time they had to achieve things.
And what is the priority for today in my opinion is to start having a communist movement once again instead of staying on that dead-end road of chasing a better capitalism.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

No, I would certainly not be a tiny bit excited.
What political consciousness? If syriza was perfectly successful in spreading its message, the result would be everyone thinking that "honest politicians are standing up to Merkel and her inane economics".
Which is nonsense. It's not a bad representation of reality, it's a deliberate misrepresantation.

Surely for it to be a deliberate mis-representation, the conclusion of such a view would be that the Greek electorate have been duped. I guess only time will tell but I'm not sure we're going to agree here or, if we do assume that Tsipras and the leadership are up to something nefarious, I still don't think it should change our position of critical support - support for SYRIZA and in particular its communist left, and criticism of any and all dubious actions taken by the leadership.



You seem like an odd communist if you feel like you need to repeat the word "fail" ten times in a sentence.

Oh stop, I said it twice.


In my opinion it's not communism or the communist movement that failed. It's the bastardization of communism with the ideas of an utopian humane capitalism. It's the conservative Soviet Union that failed, it's the eurocommunists that failed, it's the modern day leftists that keep on failing.

What is communism if not the embodiment of human-created political philosophy? It's odd to say that communism and the communist movement haven't failed, and then proceed to lay blame at every different shade of communist actor. Surely, that every 'socialist state' hitherto has failed/ceased to exist, and given the state of all 'pure' communist parties and movements around the world today, we can admit that communist movements/parties are hopelessly failing to deliver on their revolutionary promises?



And what is the priority for today in my opinion is to start having a communist movement once again instead of staying on that dead-end road of chasing a better capitalism.

It's not like communist parties and movements around the world haven't been trying to do this since 1991, though. And what has been the sum total of their achievements? Very little. It's ahistoric to think that everything up to 2015 has been some utopian deformation of 'real' communist thought and action when, in reality, communists have been trying and failing to achieve their objectives for decades.

[FSL]

What I see communists doing for the past 25 years and for many years before that as well is what you're doing now. You even speak of a "communist left" within syriza so it's easy to see how you abuse the word.

I don't feel the least close to you or any of those communists and their actions not only have nothing to do with what I want, they oppose what I want to do and form an obstacle in my way.
There is a problem in many communist parties, they tolerated and keep tolerating non-communist politics to the point of adoption even. You suggest to do away with the parties altogether and keep the non-communist politics intact. I suggest the exact opposite.

[PhoenixAsh]

What I see you doing is having your cake and eating it too and being a hypocrite in the process...as per usual.

1. You criticise the lack of a left revolutionary movement while supporting a party which throughout its entire history has done everything in its ability and power to frustrate such a movement....including assassination and collaboration.

2. You criticise SYRIZA for not full filling their promises....think about that for a second...when I go for point three

3. You criticise SYRIZA for collaborating within capitalism....hose a strategy...you can't do point 2 with any honesty when you also backtrack repeatedly to point 3.

4. You continue to refuse to answer anything that should, within the current context happen in your opinion...

5. You keep making platitudes about revolution...which is completely unrealistic within the current context...given the barely awakening workers consciousness...which you also seem to berate them for repeatedly

6. You refuse to accept the reality of the fact that KKE when in the utopian situation faced with a miraculous voter victory (while participating in bourgeois parliament) would not be able to do.much else.

So do you want a honest debate or do you want to keep making platitudes?

[Sharia Lawn]

I knew it was just a matter of time before PhoenixAsh would jump in with a semi-literate, rambling diatribe in defense of social democracy. Look, if you don't get it by now, you're probably never going to get it.

Political reality for you might consist of a range of electoral options from which everyone must take a pick. For actual revolutionaries, it consists of working class struggle on the ground. When all parliamentary or electoral options harm the development of working class struggle on the ground, because they all betray the struggle, we reject all electoral options and continue to work in and build working class struggle on the ground. It's not about revolution tomorrow. It's about defending the movement from illusions that will destroy what little it has already developed in terms of consciousness and mobilization.

Cue the next string of invectives from Phoenix.

[PhoenixAsh]

I knew it was just a matter of time before PhoenixAsh would jump in with a semi-literate, rambling diatribe in defense of social democracy. Look, if you don't get it by now, you're probably never going to get it.

Political reality for you might consist of a range of electoral options from which everyone must take a pick. For actual revolutionaries, it consists of working class struggle on the ground. When all parliamentary or electoral options harm the development of working class struggle on the ground, because they all betray the struggle, we reject all electoral options and continue to work in and build working class struggle on the ground. It's not about revolution tomorrow. It's about defending the movement from illusions that will destroy what little it has already developed in terms of consciousness and mobilization.

Cue the next string of invectives from Phoenix.

What you don't seem to get is that the option FSL is defending is the options and opinions of the KKE. Which is pretty much not only a fervent participant in the parliamentary system for the last 5 decades, not only participated in bourgeois government, not only collaborated against the revolutionary movement but pretty much betrayed them by using strategies including assassination of actual revolutionaries....like Trotskyists for example (weren't you one of those?)...

What we want to know (before you and your "omg somebody wants an intelligent discussion about class consciousness and revolutionary politics instead of platitudes of how there should be a revolution"- mentality...made a complete fool of yourself....yet again...) is what his actual suggestions are of what should be done in the current political context that would actually 1). work 2). realistically 3). is not a complete hautain dismissal of workers consciousness that oozes disdain for the proletariat.

Now...what "movement" were you talking about again? Because as it stands..."the" movement you were trying to protect...and praise exists mainly because of SYRIZA and chose in droves for supporting SYRIZA. Rather than....you know....the KKE Stalinist bureaucrats who betrayed them again and again...In other words...the ones FSL supports.

But you don't seem to get it.

Which is why you are an irrelevant bookworm...who has surprisingly little to add to the debate...

[Sharia Lawn]

Now...what "movement" were you talking about again? Because as it stands..."the" movement you were trying to protect...and praise exists mainly because of SYRIZA and chose in droves for supporting SYRIZA.

Oh, so syriza created the movement rather than the other way around. I see. And yeah, workers get things wrong sometimes. When they do, the goal of revolutionaries is to explain patiently what happened so they can learn as a result of the outcome of their mistake and weigh their experience against a revolutionary socialist explanation, not to tail them into the seventh circle of reformist Hell. You wouldn't be aware this, though, since you aren't a revolutionary.

[PhoenixAsh]

So far you have done little than insult the proletariat and lend your support to somebody who supports a collaborationist Stalinist Party which has on more than one occasion opposed revolutionaries, the proletariat and escalation of revolutionary situations....not to mention participated in bourgeois government. Seeing that that is your definition of being a revolutionary...then no...I am definately not a revolutionary.

Now...aside from the platitudes you and FSL seem to share....what are your actual suggestions that work in the here and now...you know...more or less instantly...within the current context that would actually benefit workers and their families...before they starve?

Because it is nice and of course really revolutionary to continue to shout "omg revolution" but that really hasn't worked....ever. So far you are skipping a few steps and ignore pretty much the entirety of any reality. Not that that is surprising coming from somebody like you...you pretty much have no fucking clue what we are actually talking about and first need to consult some books before you can actually think fo yourself. Rather than....you know...actually engage in struggle with workers and understand their pressing needs.

Now....answer the question...

[PhoenixAsh]

Ah....I see...no repely in 32 minutes from you. Seems all you are good for is two ad hominem posts but are too politically impotent to answer a simple question.

Now...could you point out for the non revolutionary posters and members here (according to your definition):

1). what the mass revolutionary parties are in Greece that are not participating in parliament or beholden to it through some form of alliance within it?

2). Where the large mass of politically revolutionary conscious workers are in Greece that operate outside the parliamentary system? (in other words...where is your revolutionary mass movement??)

3). What should effectively be done now to relief the situation of the working class after years of austerity within the current political, non revolutionary, context in Greece? Or are you of the "fuck them until they want revolution" opinion?

4). How do you see a revolution in one country succeeding to a point where an alternative to capitalism was even possible in the current economic and sources reality within Greece?

5). Are you of the opinion, like FSL, that Greece should stay in the EU constellation?

6). What are your suggestions for the resource deficits Greece will encounter when they abandon capitalism at this very moment (if it were even possible) within the global mare system Greece completely relies on fo essential resources.

[PhoenixAsh]

We would of course also like your suggestions on how to organized a mass movement within the current political reality in Greece...and out of what do you want to build it?

[cyu]

Protect employees that take over their workplaces (and protect the unemployed who take over unused means of production). It is especially important for transparent democracy in the mass media. Allow police officers and soldiers to vote out their commanding officers, if they so choose. Allow neighborhoods to establish their own armed patrols, if they so choose. Allow all producers to issue their own paper notes, if they so choose - ultimately I'd advocate a gift economy, but if fruit producers want to trade in fruit notes (for example, a note redeemable for 10 apples for 5 days) instead of Euro or Drachma until the economy calms down enough for a gift economy to work, so be it.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Oh, so syriza created the movement rather than the other way around. I see. And yeah, workers get things wrong sometimes. When they do, the goal of revolutionaries is to explain patiently what happened so they can learn as a result of the outcome of their mistake and weigh their experience against a revolutionary socialist explanation, not to tail them into the seventh circle of reformist Hell. You wouldn't be aware this, though, since you aren't a revolutionary.

This is such a fucked up way of thinking.

"Workers get things wrong sometimes". As if there is some 'correct' historical path that we are all on, and only those naughty 99% of workers who haven't been tailing the correct line for the past few decades need to be brought into line by the enlightened 1% of intellectuals.

This is not only an extreme reading of Marx's ideas on historical determinism but, to anybody with an ounce of critical thinking ability, a stupid and wrong analysis. You're right that tailing the working class is the best strategy to pursue, but then neither is arguing for the opposite extreme; if we are to uphold (or create) the link between socialism and genuine workers' democracy, then we do actually need to engage with the current ideas, concerns, and thoughts of workers. Instead, what we tend to see from the most dogmatically orthodox of communists, is that 'pure' ideology is seen as an end, rather than the means. The purer the better, regardless of the efficacy of said strategy.

[Sharia Lawn]

This is such a fucked up way of thinking.

"Workers get things wrong sometimes". As if there is some 'correct' historical path that we are all on, and only those naughty 99% of workers who haven't been tailing the correct line for the past few decades need to be brought into line by the enlightened 1% of intellectuals.

Are you saying that workers never get politics wrong? When some workers vote for bourgeois political candidates or entertain joining a fascist group, I guess they're just being correct in a different way?

The last part about "intellectuals" is a strawman, as I never said anything about intellectuals. I did, however, mention the topic of what revolutionaries should do. Revolutionaries. As in revolutionary workers. A topic most inconvenient for social democrats such as yourself. Yes, I think the proper role of revolutionaries is to openly express their analysis of the current political conjuncture, point out how it diverges from other analyses, and advocate that others judge their line on the basis of how well their arguments measure up against experience. This obviously implies disagreement among revolutionaries, and between revolutionaries and reformists. But what's so bad about that? It's never stopped social democrats like you from vehemently and openly disagreeing with revolutionaries, has it?

[PhoenixAsh]

Again I see you completely failed to answer the simple questions that were put before you and still have not pointed out anything other than your complete disdain for the working classes emerging class consciousness. As VIL stated you completely fail to create any link to socialism and workers contemporary and short term demands/needs.

You also seem to talk a lot about experience....of which it is glaringly obvious that you have extremely little. Otherwise your "fuck the working class needs until they are actually demanding revolution" attitude would not be your primary, and so far only, position.

So answer the questions. Right now you simply come off as a highly arrogant, one line spouting ad hominem machine.

[PhoenixAsh]

Now it is extremely comical and speaks to your complete lack of understanding that you talk about mass movements and revolution outside the parliamentary system while lending your entire support for a proponent of a Stalinist bureaucratic party which has for decades worked entirely within the bourgeois system. It I laughable that you, or anybody for that matter,....take you serious when you jump in a thread demanding action outside of parliament and berating VIL and me fo being "social democrats"...While we are pointing towards that very fact and the bankruptcy of parliamentary action within the bourgeois state. And being slightly optimistic that at least some gains are made that will alleviate the problems the working class faces...at this point in time within the current context and eco-political constellation.

You seem to not get the simple facts however that within the current context....no party in Greece operates outside the parliamentary constraints, that there is no unified class conscious mass movement outside the one backing SYRIZA, that workers have needs NOW and not in some distant future...

So again....what are your alternatives for the working class NOW...at this very moment? Because all you do is use platitudes and ad hominem but your politics are completely absent, bankrupt or oozing disdain fo the working class....and boil down to "fuck them for being wrong".

So answer the questions...

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

We would of course also like your suggestions on how to organized a mass movement within the current political reality in Greece...and out of what do you want to build it?

We don't organise it.

Either revolution or meaningful reform requires three things - a revolutionary leadership, a revolutionary programme and the movement of the most advanced layers of the proletariat. A socialist organisation - and at this stage the most we have are fighting propaganda groups - can provide the second, and the first to some extent, but the third one we can't. The most we can do is call for workers' militancy, but of course nothing guarantees that the workers will respond.

But what is being asked here is probably how to build a mass social-democratic party. Who knows. There are "theoreticians" on RevLeft who have dedicated their lives to the question, perhaps you could ask them. But for us - the only thing that comes out of social-democracy is betrayal.



Now...aside from the platitudes you and FSL seem to share....what are your actual suggestions that work in the here and now...you know...more or less instantly...within the current context that would actually benefit workers and their families...before they starve?

So how is SYRIZA "actually benefiting workers"? I mean good god, they are currently presiding over a government that is enforcing austerity, despite its "radical" rhetoric. One can't even blame them, really - they don't have any other option, as long as they are administering the bourgeois state.

If the Greek workers want meaningful reform, they will not be given that reform by the bourgeois state, "even" if SYRIZA is in power. They will have to fight for it. So those who are concerned with the position of the working class in Greece need to fight for rank-and-file militancy (among other things), not derail the struggle into electoral channels.

[PhoenixAsh]

And that is what our main criticism is against FSL. They criticise SYRIZA while supporting KKE...which operates along the same electoral lines.

Hence the questions I asked FSL at the start of the thread: what are your suggestions to what should happen now...and whether he realizes KKE would have been in exactly the same position.

There is currently no revolutionary politically class conscious mass workers movement in Greece and there is no extra parliamentary platform to lead the proletariat (or serve as a road sign) to create a revolutionary potential in the short term. (remember that the KKE official position is NOT to have a revolution right now and has actively worked to that effect over the last years)

What is however happening in Greece is the creation of a mass movement and budgeoning class consciousness through continued strive that is currently moving behind SYRIZA. A choice made by workers simply because of the KKE's position and politics in the last decades and the necessities of the current plight of the working class that needed an alternative to much worse austerity.

The move away from traditional parties and search for alternative political organizaton and politics is a positive move and sign of growing class consciousness. This is an evolution of workers consciousness and increased politicalization.

But even when considering that all this takes place in a capitalist context and even considering that these are mere reforms they do offer a form of solution to a lot of pressing and urgent problems workers face.

As you rightly say: SYRIZA has no choice...Our point was....neither would the KKE have any other choice in the same electoral situation. That's the entire point.

There is no revolutionary movement and no political party outside of the parliamentary system calling for one. Not only that but a revolution in Greece when it is still a member nation within the EU and with its current dependency for essential resources on international trade would imminently lead to the collapse of the entire Greek economy...Greece is too damned dependent on import and export to remain economically operational.

And in the extremely unlikely event a revolution would somehow take place right now...It would still have to operate in the global market context and would therefore be unable to implement any meaningful definition of socialism. Would it do so...Greece would be occupied within days or, given the current political context, degenerate in protracted civil war. Greeces working class has no allies to support them in either a war or civil war...nor do they have the means to even put up a fight.

That said. The working class has pressing issues. Issues it has in common with the working class in several other countries that seem to create similar movements behind similar SYRIZA-like parties. IMO the solution to Greece problems is quiting the EU....which will negatively impact European economy....which will lead to an increase of support to SYRIZA-like parties that will garner international solidarity between workers.

Because right now...The voices in the entire North of Europe are that Greece brought this upon themselves and that we are paying for their privileges and that we will get our tax money back one way or the other. Why? Because austerity here is argued to be the result of having to carry the southern economies. The hardlone position of the liberals is that as long as Greece will recover...Our economies would be boosted. As soon as Greece abandons the EU....These arguments will fail and perceptions will change.

That said....the current context is far from revolutionary and is still very much a bourgeois political game. As workers grow weary of SYRIZA there needs to be an alternative or the workers will indeed go back to traditional parties....or worse...GD. Which already is bigger than KKE.

So in that context a debate should take place about the short term goals.

[cyu]

In any country were austerity is used to threaten the poor, all the poor really need are weapons. Even better if they are Greek weapons.

As Marx might say, capitalism creates the conditions of its own demise.

[Sharia Lawn]

We have three social democrats who have crawled out from under their rocks to apologize for SYRIZA in this thread. Two are moderators, and one was a moderator in the recent past. Anybody here notice a pattern?

[PhoenixAsh]

You mean the pattern of your continued ad hominem attacks in posts you make without any substance in this thread which is trolling?

Yes....we all noticed that pattern.

Izvestia...This is the fourth post you make that actually dodges the quetions and contains little more than ad hominem insults. The questions are simple so your inability and unwillingnes to actually answer them only underscores your "fuck the proletariat"-mentality that has been a bright shining beacon throughout your posts.

Now...It is extremely simple...given the absence of a revolutionary class conscious mass of workers; given the absence of any revolutionary party operating outside of the parliamentary system and given the eco-political reality of the current situation Greece is in...what should happen to alleviate the immediate concerns that face the Greek workers that would actually work to reduce their burden?

You have failed to provide any answer that does not constitute platitudes and ad hominem attacks. We can safely deduce from that mentality that you don't actually care and that you lack any experience with engaging workers. Nor do you have any answers how to link the emerging class consciousness to any direction towards a socialist solution that resembles socialism and workers democracy.

This is nor a surprise to anybody who read your posts on this forum.

[cyu]

If German and French banks are afraid that they will collapse if Greece doesn't repay their loans, the obvious thing to do would be to not repay their loans. If those banks collapse, then all the better.

No doubt pro-capitalists would see that as a disaster. On the other hand, some anti-capitalists may fear that would be a disaster as well. As a result, neither group wants to even contemplate what would happen if German and French banks collapsed. But as anti-capitalists, it is precisely our job to envision the post-capitalist world. From http://www.revleft.com/vb/crashing-mediums-exchange-t175288/index.html?p=2566910#post2566910

Depends what you replace it with. For example, I could say, let's kick out all politicians and replace them with fascists - and that would indeed cause an unholy amount of pain to everyone. However, I'm sure you'd agree that if they were replaced by people friendlier to leftists, people would be better off.

The same is true of crashing stock markets. If employees seize control of their companies, the stock market is definitely going to crash - it's just a side effect of stocks no longer having their stated purpose. However, would you oppose seizing the means of production simply because it would crash the stock market?

As for replacing the medium of exchange - what we currently have is a wealthy class with vast amounts of economic power - and part of that power (besides resource ownership) derives from them holding more money than everyone else. If you replaced the medium of exchange (which would almost surely crash the old medium of exchange), then that removes another plank from the economic structure that gives capitalists undue power.

[ckaihatsu]

If German and French banks are afraid that they will collapse if Greece doesn't repay their loans, the obvious thing to do would be to not repay their loans. If those banks collapse, then all the better.

No doubt pro-capitalists would see that as a disaster. On the other hand, some anti-capitalists may fear that would be a disaster as well. As a result, neither group wants to even contemplate what would happen if German and French banks collapsed. But as anti-capitalists, it is precisely our job to envision the post-capitalist world. From http://www.revleft.com/vb/crashing-mediums-exchange-t175288/index.html?p=2566910#post2566910

Depends what you replace it with. For example, I could say, let's kick out all politicians and replace them with fascists - and that would indeed cause an unholy amount of pain to everyone. However, I'm sure you'd agree that if they were replaced by people friendlier to leftists, people would be better off.

The same is true of crashing stock markets. If employees seize control of their companies, the stock market is definitely going to crash - it's just a side effect of stocks no longer having their stated purpose. However, would you oppose seizing the means of production simply because it would crash the stock market?

As for replacing the medium of exchange - what we currently have is a wealthy class with vast amounts of economic power - and part of that power (besides resource ownership) derives from them holding more money than everyone else. If you replaced the medium of exchange (which would almost surely crash the old medium of exchange), then that removes another plank from the economic structure that gives capitalists undue power.



While I agree in principle with this fuck-all-of-it line, I think we *may* need to 'translate' it into a more-concrete *strategy* for the short-term....

(I'll note, btw, that I have tangible fuck-it-all *cred*, with the following framework that shows a particular 'how' for a feasible post-capitalist, liberated-labor political economy.)




labor credits framework for 'communist supply & demand'

http://s6.postimg.org/nfpj758c0/150221_labor_credits_framework_for_communist_su.jp g (http://postimg.org/image/p7ii21rot/full/)


So, with that formality out of the way I'll continue, to say that, at this point, it may be enough to simply *mention* the 'Grexit', since the basic act of detaching Greece from the larger European economy would cost international holdings in Greece debt quite dearly, from the consequential sharp devaluation of Greece's economy and its currency (back to the drachma). It would be equivalent to an economic secession, in an environment where the people of Greece (or any other European country) are receiving *very* questionable value from the whole 'euro' scheme, if any.

In other words one would necessarily have to already have interests in foreign-currency exchanges (Marx's 'money capitalists') to enjoy the euro as a *convenience*, perhaps as against other global currencies. For the average person / worker in any given country such economics are extremely rarefied compared to more meat-and-potatoes concerns like wages and benefits, however denominated in currency.

Often the hysteria of 'hyperinflation' is invoked at this point, to project anxiety onto the working class with the fear that a too-detached economy would see a massive devaluation in hard-currency terms (meaning in comparison to established major currencies).

But, as cyu is pointing out, the working class only cripples itself by retaining a psychological dependence on established bourgeois currencies and their capital-based valuations. What's more-to-the-point for the working class is raw productivity and how that production is distributed, perhaps on much-more local scales of magnitude, initially. This *shift* to working class material independence and intra-dependence would *not* rely on capital or capital-based valuations, as with existing currencies.

Many alternative approaches, for a proletarian-based political economy, have been proposed, including my own at the illustration above.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

And that is what our main criticism is against FSL. They criticise SYRIZA while supporting KKE...which operates along the same electoral lines.

The point is that their criticism of SYRIZA is still correct. Now if they had said, in addition to that, that voting for the KKE is the answer, then that could be criticised. But they didn't - and for that matter, the KKE has been backtracking on the issue of parliamentarianism since the debacle in 1989 (this has predictably led people on RevLeft to call them "ultraleft Brezhnevites").


What is however happening in Greece is the creation of a mass movement and budgeoning class consciousness through continued strive that is currently moving behind SYRIZA.

Where is the mass movement? Where is the class consciousness? SYRIZA was able to attract many of the voters of the hopelessly compromised PASOK, but voting is not indicative of a movement of the masses, particularly not the sort of movement of the masses that means a revolutionary situation is possible. And it is even less indicative of class consciousness when workers give their political support to a bourgeois party.


The move away from traditional parties and search for alternative political organizaton and politics is a positive move and sign of growing class consciousness. This is an evolution of workers consciousness and increased politicalization.

That is an extremely odd thing to say. In most bourgeois parliamentary systems, parties come and go. Was the replacement of the Radical Civic Union by the Peronists a sign of "growing class consciousness"? No, it was a sign of the change in the relative strength of various bourgeois factions.

And of course, SYRIZA did not come out of nowhere. In the main, it is the continuation of the Eurocommunist KKE (Interior) and several minor liberal parties (EDA, EDIK etc.).


But even when considering that all this takes place in a capitalist context and even considering that these are mere reforms they do offer a form of solution to a lot of pressing and urgent problems workers face.

And what solutions are those? SYRIZA has managed to replace the rightly hated memorandum... with an agreement whose main points are the same as the memorandum. Only the name has changed - it's childish. It's as if the Russian revolutionaries, a mere few weeks after deposing the emperor, decided to institute a permanent hereditary autocratic president.


There is no revolutionary movement and no political party outside of the parliamentary system calling for one. Not only that but a revolution in Greece when it is still a member nation within the EU and with its current dependency for essential resources on international trade would imminently lead to the collapse of the entire Greek economy...Greece is too damned dependent on import and export to remain economically operational.

And in the extremely unlikely event a revolution would somehow take place right now...It would still have to operate in the global market context and would therefore be unable to implement any meaningful definition of socialism. Would it do so...Greece would be occupied within days or, given the current political context, degenerate in protracted civil war. Greeces working class has no allies to support them in either a war or civil war...nor do they have the means to even put up a fight.

This is where it all gets confusing because, a few paragraphs ago, you criticised the KKE for saying revolution is impossible at this moment, yet now you're saying the same thing. And the argumentation is quite strange. Yes, an isolated Greece could not institute socialism. Most of us would say that no country can institute socialism by itself - that socialism requires the global defeat of capital. The reverse idea - socialism in one country - is of course a Stalinist idea (in fact it defines Stalinism, in serious political discussion at least). And of course revolution leads to civil war. But why not finish the thought? Who would the workers fight in the civil war? Who was the main enemy of the workers in nearly every revolution? It was not the parties of the bourgeois right, made irrelevant by the development of the revolutionary situation, but precisely the social-democrats themselves, the mssrs. Mensheviks, Esers, the SPD, MSZDP, etc. etc. If there were soviets in Greece, it is SYRIZA who would be crushing them, having taken the responsibility and function over from the previous social-democratic formation, PASOK.


That said....the current context is far from revolutionary and is still very much a bourgeois political game. As workers grow weary of SYRIZA there needs to be an alternative or the workers will indeed go back to traditional parties....or worse...GD. Which already is bigger than KKE.

Oh you can't be seriously using that argument? Why don't you support New Democracy, then? After all, as voters (I wonder how anyone is able to analyse the class composition of ND/ACh/SYRIZA voters based on the election results alone) grow tired of ND, support for Golden Dawn grows.

But pardon, what do you think ACh would do, even if elected to lead the government? Open concentration camps for immigrants? There are already concentration camps in Greece, and the one who manages them is the coalition between SYRIZA and the LAOS-light ANEL. So who is the more direct danger to immigrants in Greece, the bourgeois government or some bunch of boneheads the bourgeoisie dangles every now and then to scare "leftists" into supporting the bourgeoisie?

[PhoenixAsh]

I am on a German computer and the keyboard lay out is giving me problems. So...


The point is that their criticism of SYRIZA is still correct. Now if they had said, in addition to that, that voting for the KKE is the answer, then that could be criticised. But they didn't - and for that matter, the KKE has been backtracking on the issue of parliamentarianism since the debacle in 1989 (this has predictably led people on RevLeft to call them "ultraleft Brezhnevites").

They did say that repeatedly in the recent past as well as his entire support for the election program & rhetoric of the KKE he repeats here.

Backtracking? Goddamn you have eviscerated users here over less than backtracking. Backtracking merely means in this case that they refuse to participate in government...they however still participate in elections and parliament...and still do their level best at electoral events. And given enough votes they would have jumped at the opportunity. So no. Backtracking here is worthless rhetoric given the fact that they are nowhere near the electoral backing for it to have any effect at all.

That compared with open sabotage of the KKE of any cohesion across the revolutionary left and repeated position to not work with any revolutionary party out of sectarian propaganda leaves the party in even more of a dubious position when it comes to their role in the bourgeois system.

But the point is that there is no revolutionary party operating in Greece outside of parliament. And we seem to agree on this.

That realization holds a few important conclusions:

1). There is no alternative at the current moment outside of parliament
2). The only short term option is through parliament
3). And unless you think bourgeois parties (among which I calculate the KKE) will bring socialism through the parliamentary route....the call for revolution as a solution on the short term is a misguided, fantastical platitude.
4). Within the current social-political reality Greece will not be able to become socialist on the short term. Especially not within a EU constellation (like FSL repeatedly argued)


Where is the mass movement?

My point exactly. Aside from the massive pro-SYRIZA rallies in the past months there is no mass movement.



Where is the class consciousness? SYRIZA was able to attract many of the voters of the hopelessly compromised PASOK, but voting is not indicative of a movement of the masses, particularly not the sort of movement of the masses that means a revolutionary situation is possible. And it is even less indicative of class consciousness when workers give their political support to a bourgeois party.

Again...my point exactly about the mass movement. But I will explain how there is an increase in class consciousness...

Because the key element here is that they move away from traditional parties towards a relatively young party that promised radical changes. Radical changes that apparently appealed to the vast majority of workers who have been struggling and been increasingly active for years. To such an extend that they radically shifted the political landscape. This is not something that happens election after election. Usually changes are marginal where the shift is between a few previously existing parties. And the workers continue to put pressure through direct action on this party and do not abandon struggle even in the face of that parties failure to deliver on their promises. And all this in the light of any alternative outside of the bourgeois system.

Even the Oktober revolution did not happen overnight and took years and years to develop. To expect class consciousness to develop in two/three years....is really stretching it.



That is an extremely odd thing to say. In most bourgeois parliamentary systems, parties come and go. Was the replacement of the Radical Civic Union by the Peronists a sign of "growing class consciousness"? No, it was a sign of the change in the relative strength of various bourgeois factions.

That depends on what measures radical leftists take what it will become.



And of course, SYRIZA did not come out of nowhere. In the main, it is the continuation of the Eurocommunist KKE (Interior) and several minor liberal parties (EDA, EDIK etc.).

No it didn't. Most parties don't. But it is not about the party...it is about the motivations of those who vote for them and how they progress in their struggle. And that is where critical errors in thought are made in this thread...rejecting this step as part of increasing class consciousness is disdainful towards how workers become class consciousness and leads to misguided ways of communicating with them. It comes off as berating them rather than increasing their radicalization.


And what solutions are those? SYRIZA has managed to replace the rightly hated memorandum... with an agreement whose main points are the same as the memorandum. Only the name has changed - it's childish. It's as if the Russian revolutionaries, a mere few weeks after deposing the emperor, decided to institute a permanent hereditary autocratic president.

Yeah...they kind of did create a system of reducing workers democracy. So not much difference there. But lets not rehash that debate...we will never get to any conclusive end because we vary too much on opinion on the Bolsheviks.




This is where it all gets confusing because, a few paragraphs ago, you criticised the KKE for saying revolution is impossible at this moment, yet now you're saying the same thing.

Hmmm. I repeatedly stated that as a 'what if' scenario.



And the argumentation is quite strange. Yes, an isolated Greece could not institute socialism. Most of us would say that no country can institute socialism by itself - that socialism requires the global defeat of capital. The reverse idea - socialism in one country - is of course a Stalinist idea (in fact it defines Stalinism, in serious political discussion at least). #

Hence why I made the exact same argument earlier in the debate...se a few pages back.


And of course revolution leads to civil war. But why not finish the thought? Who would the workers fight in the civil war? Who was the main enemy of the workers in nearly every revolution?

Right now they would be fighting each other. If that clarifies it.



It was not the parties of the bourgeois right, made irrelevant by the development of the revolutionary situation, but precisely the social-democrats themselves, the mssrs. Mensheviks, Esers, the SPD, MSZDP, etc. etc. If there were soviets in Greece, it is SYRIZA who would be crushing them, having taken the responsibility and function over from the previous social-democratic formation, PASOK. No contestation here.




Oh you can't be seriously using that argument? Why don't you support New Democracy, then? After all, as voters (I wonder how anyone is able to analyse the class composition of ND/ACh/SYRIZA voters based on the election results alone) grow tired of ND, support for Golden Dawn grows.

But pardon, what do you think ACh would do, even if elected to lead the government? Open concentration camps for immigrants? There are already concentration camps in Greece, and the one who manages them is the coalition between SYRIZA and the LAOS-light ANEL. So who is the more direct danger to immigrants in Greece, the bourgeois government or some bunch of boneheads the bourgeoisie dangles every now and then to scare "leftists" into supporting the bourgeoisie?

I can't seriously be using the argument that there needs to be an outside of parliament alternative when workers grow tired with SYRIZA? That is an odd thing to say for somebody who repeatedly proven themselves to be a vanguardist....

If there is no alternative then voters will look for other easy alternatives. This is Trotsky one on one of false class consciousness. So you can't seriously have a problem with this paragraph unless you didn't interpret it correctly.

[Art Vandelay]

@ FSL

I was reading through the new edition of Worker's Vanguard - which reprinted a statement by the Trotskyist Group of Greece - and was wondering if you could comment on a couple things. Perhaps this is all common knowledge and I just haven't been following the situation as closely as I should be, but how accurate are the following statements:


With no such crumbs in hand, Syriza has played up it's nationalist populism domestically as an ideological prop for its capitalist government of "social salvation." Having fallen two seats short of a parliamentary majority, Syriza predictably proceeded to form a government coalition with the virulently anti-immigrant and nationalist Independant Greeks (ANEL), who are only a step removed from Golden Dawn on the Greek political spectrum.

This was the culmination of more than a year of repeated collaboration in parliament between Syriza and ANEL. Their collaboration began with a joint front over the 2013 economic crisis in Cyprus and included populist campaigns, for example in opposition to the proposed privatization of the public power company DEI. Among the concessions Syriza made to the bourgeoisie and the likes of ANEL before the election was to renounce its opposition to NATO, make overtures to the reactionary Orthodox church, come out against adoption by gay parents and assure the fascist-infested police that they would get more resources if Syriza were elected.
As well as:


Syriza gave "Left Platform" leader Panagiotis Lafazanis the ministry in charge of privatizations, and he has gone from calling the proposed privatization of the Greek natural gas company a "national crime" to admitting that its partial privatization is proceeding
Thanks in advance.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

We have three social democrats who have crawled out from under their rocks to apologize for SYRIZA in this thread. Two are moderators, and one was a moderator in the recent past. Anybody here notice a pattern?

Why don't you fuck off then?

I would display some courtesy - and indeed I have continued to display courtesy to others who are genuinely trying to get their point across in debate with me - but you are showing such dis-regard for working people that it makes me think you don't really give a shit about workers as people, you just think of them as some abstract mass to be controlled by the revolutionary whim.

The reason you will keep banging your head against a brick wall is that you don't seem to understand the needs, wants, and desires of working people, and more importantly you don't seem to display and desire to do so. Your theoretical ideas are stuck in the cold war, and show no understanding of contemporary issues.

There is no such thing as people getting politics 'wrong'. People have different ideas. That is what socialist democracy should be about. There will always be a plurality of ideas about - some we agree with, some we don't. Our aim is to win workers over to our point of view, and to engage on an equal footing with them. If we don't bother to try and have the argument, then we won't win it. And if we don't win the argument, then we shouldn't just blame workers for making the 'wrong' choice.

[Sharia Lawn]

Your theoretical ideas are stuck in the cold war, and show no understanding of contemporary issues.


There is no such thing as people getting politics 'wrong'. People have different ideas. That is what socialist democracy should be about. :rolleyes: There is no such thing as people getting politics "wrong" ... except when it comes to the ideas of actual revolutionary socialists, who "are stuck in the cold war" and "show no understanding." There is no such thing as wrong or bad politics, but you'll be damned if you let this opportunity pass without commenting on how wrong my politics are.

Like the typical social democrat, your desire for respecting diversity in your ranks is cited as a golden virtue when there's an opportunity to coddle liberals and boost illusions in the bourgeois state, but is repudiated the second a revolutionary enters the picture. Can there be any doubt about the underlying class alignment of your politics?


Why don 't you fuck off then?I have a better idea. Why don't you stop being a social democrat?

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

[QUOTE=Izvestia;2823313]:rolleyes: There is no such thing as people getting politics "wrong" ... except when it comes to the ideas of actual revolutionary socialists, who "are stuck in the cold war" and "show no understanding." There is no such thing as wrong or bad politics, but you'll be damned if you let this opportunity pass without commenting on how wrong my politics are.

There is a clear difference between me highlighting areas where we, as individuals, disagree about philosophical ideas, and you belittling the entire group of people's upon whose interests our politics is meant to rest upon as 'wrong'.


Like the typical social democrat, your desire for respecting diversity in your ranks is cited as a golden virtue when there's an opportunity to coddle liberals and boost illusions in the bourgeois state, but is repudiated the second a revolutionary enters the picture. Can there be any doubt about the underlying class alignment of your politics?

You're not really making any sense. If you're saying that an appreciation of diversity makes somebody pro-capitalist, then you're even more of a fucking tool than I first thought.

[Sharia Lawn]

There is a clear difference between me highlighting areas where we, as individuals, disagree about philosophical ideas, and you belittling the entire group of people's upon whose interests our politics is meant to rest upon as 'wrong'.Here the strain of the impressively large contradiction in your previous post is showing up. You try to reduce our disagreement into a philosophical matter, so that you can claim that politically our differences don't amount to either of us claiming that the other is in error. Well, guess what? We aren't talking about "philosophical issues." We're talking about distinct approaches to politics. According to your feel-good approach, neither of our approaches can be wrong, yet you think I don't understand contemporary political reality or working-class life. It necessarily follows from this that you think my understanding is wrong, and that my political approach to the present, based as it is on my supposedly faulty understanding, is therefore also wrong. Wrong in a moral sense? No, but an erroneous approach to advancing revolutionary working class struggle. Conversely, I think you're in error.

You seem to think a major problem confronting The Left is that too many of us sectarian types are going around hurting people's feelings by saying we think their politics are misguided or wrong. Apparently a revolutionary line is just too front and center in struggles today, and this has the potential to scare people away on their path to ... revolution.

I, on the other hand, think the biggest problem with the political left is that it is dominated by people who, even if they are anti-capitalist, don't have the spine to announce it openly and pursue the political practice consistent with working-class independence.

[PhoenixAsh]

:rolleyes: There is no such thing as people getting politics "wrong" ... except when it comes to the ideas of actual revolutionary socialists, who "are stuck in the cold war" and "show no understanding."

You are not an actual revolutionary socialist. You are a mere internet poser who read a few books and repeats them ad nauseum without actually contributing. You are merely trolling this thread. On top of that fact you ooze disdain for the working class and really do not understand. You don't understand the arguments. You don't understand the context of the arguments. You don't understand the struggle of workers (you are not an activist nor have you worked within workers struggles...that much is made extremely clear) and you do not understand how class consciousness develops.

This has nothing to do with:



There is no such thing as wrong or bad politics, but you'll be damned if you let this opportunity pass without commenting on how wrong my politics are.


You have no politics in this thread. Nobody is criticizing your politics...since you merely express platitudes and ad hominem. Those are not politics. Those are your mentality. So the criticism is personal...about your attitude and lack of understanding. Philosophy =/= Politics.



Like the typical social democrat, your desire for respecting diversity in your ranks is cited as a golden virtue when there's an opportunity to coddle liberals and boost illusions in the bourgeois state, but is repudiated the second a revolutionary enters the picture. Can there be any doubt about the underlying class alignment of your politics?

Awesome ramblings of a deranged mind. But nice of you to further illustrate your "fuck the working class mentality" and take a huge shit on the entirety of socialism and the basis of Marxism. ;)

Kind of disproves your ludicrous attempt to paint yourself a revolutionary socialist.

Now...either contribute to the thread or fuck off.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

You are not an actual revolutionary socialist. You are a mere internet poser who read a few books and repeats them ad nauseum without actually contributing. You are merely trolling this thread. On top of that fact you ooze disdain for the working class and really do not understand. You don't understand the arguments. You don't understand the context of the arguments. You don't understand the struggle of workers (you are not an activist nor have you worked within workers struggles...that much is made extremely clear) and you do not understand how class consciousness develops.

Why do you keep bringing this activism thing in every second post of yours? This is literally a logical fallacy in so far as there many people who are much older than you, have been "activists" for much longer and have participated in many more different forms of class-struggle throughout their lives compared to you, and yet these people could come here and repeat the exact same arguments as Izvestia...

I mean really dude, you are a prime example of someone being engaged in activism and yet having abhorrent politics...

[Sharia Lawn]

Why do you keep bringing this activism thing in every second post of yours? This is literally a logical fallacy in so far as there many people who are much older than you, have been "activists" for much longer and have participated in many more different forms of class-struggle throughout their lives compared to you, and yet these people could come here and repeat the exact same arguments as Izvestia...

I mean really dude, you are a prime example of someone being engaged in activism and yet having abhorrent politics...

Phoenix's accusations about my involvement in politics, something about which he would have no clue, has to be viewed in the context that Phoenix is incapable of having serious debates on this forum. This is why he has made about 5 or so rambling posts directed at me in this thread, and I haven't responded to them. Unlike the social democrats in this thread, I learn from past experience. And one of the things past experience has taught me is that, whatever Phoenix does on this forum, it is not debate and is therefore not worth responding to. I advise you take the same approach.

[cyu]

labor credits framework for 'communist supply & demand'

Not really on topic but, are images working for you?

In any case, I'd say a lot of the problems result from not understanding money - some from ignorance, and others suffering from too-afraid-to-say-the-emperor-is-naked syndrome.

In the ignorance camp, I would put the people who believe gold is money. The people who believe in bitcoin have about the same amount of understanding, since it is based on a concept similar to how gold is introduced into an economy.

In another camp are those who believe money is debt. If I promise the bank that my business will succeed, and eventually fulfill my promises, then wealth has been created. This is what leads to fear of bank collapse. If major debtors fail (or refuse) to pay back their debts, then the entire system may collapse.

In fact, my earlier suggestion is a kind of debt-money - if fruit producers issue notes that can be redeemed for 10 apples for 5 days, they are essentially issuing debt: "I owe the bearer of this note 10 apples, as long as you redeem it within 5 days."

One of the major fallacies held by the rich is that they see wealth in terms of how much cash, stocks, and other investments they hold. If banks collapse, if the stock market crashes, if the value of their other assets plummet, they believe that "wealth" has been destroyed. They've been staring at the "value" of their investment portfolios for so long that it has turned into a new kind of ignorance.

You could zero out all investment portfolios tomorrow and no real wealth would have been destroyed - only the illusion of wealth.



What's more-to-the-point for the working class is raw productivity and how that production is distributed


Yes, this is what "normal" humans actually use to create wealth. You could burn up all the paper money in the world, shoot all the gold into space, and crash all the bitcoin computers, and humanity can still move on. But if you destroy all the farmland, blow up all the factories, and set fire to all the raw materials, then you'll have real problems.

[FSL]

And that is what our main criticism is against FSL. They criticise SYRIZA while supporting KKE...which operates along the same electoral lines.
If KKE did that, you'd be supporting it.
It doesn't and so you ramble on and on against it.

[FSL]

Why don't you fuck off then?

There is no such thing as people getting politics 'wrong'. People have different ideas.
No, it's you who should really "fuck off".
There is no capitalist superstructure, there is no cultural hegemony and if workers want to be subjects well that's their prerogative! They came to that conclusion freely, nothing to see here!




@ FSL

I was reading through the new edition of Worker's Vanguard - which reprinted a statement by the Trotskyist Group of Greece - and was wondering if you could comment on a couple things. Perhaps this is all common knowledge and I just haven't been following the situation as closely as I should be, but how accurate are the following statements:


As well as:


Thanks in advance.
All these things are true but the reality is worse. Just in the last week:

1) Kasidiaris, a nazi MP, was acquited for his assault on Liana Kanelli, a KKE MP. In 2012 in a live TV programme Kasidiaris first threw a glass of water on Rena Dourou, now the "governor" of Attiki, Greece's largest administrative subdivision, with Syriza and then slapped Liana Kanelli as she tried to put him off. Rena Dourou didn't even show up in the trial as a witness for the prosecution.Hilariously in that same panel there was the conservative Prokopis Pavlopoulos who barely moved a finger in this whole ordeal and is the new President of the Republic, with Syriza's backing.
2) Nikolopoulos, an MP for the independent Greeks, held a TV show last Sunday, a few days before the verdict on Kasidiaris' trial with Kasidiaris as his guest to let him talk about his plight in prison.
3) Zoi Konstantopoulou, the president or Parliament with Syriza, said in a press conference that the jailed MPs of Golden Dawn should be given time off prison to participate normally in the parliamenary functions.
4) A municipal council member, elected with Golden Dawn, called Gerakopoulos left that party to join the Independent Greeks. As I read now, they didn't accept him in the end but I'm not sure if this is after the backlash or before.


In other news Syriza's 1.9 billion spending programme to fight the "humanitarian crisis" was cut to 200 million financed by EU cohesion funds after the promise to not vote anything that would have a negative fiscal effect. 310 million euros were also payed to the IMF this week as the first of 3 installments for this month alone totalling 1.4 billion euros.

Syriza also proposed another 10 billion euros in tax cuts and spending increases but all this is to be pursued after the current arrangement ends, even though the government is already requesting a new EU-IMF loan for June they aptly name "contract for growth and recovery".

Lastly, Monday's Eurogroup is going to be rather fun. The minister of foreign affairs Kotzias threatened Europe that if they didn't give Greece money it would collapse and their buffer state against jihadism would cease to exist.
If they resort to that, they must be at a loss.

[PhoenixAsh]

Why do you keep bringing this activism thing in every second post of yours? This is literally a logical fallacy in so far as there many people who are much older than you, have been "activists" for much longer and have participated in many more different forms of class-struggle throughout their lives compared to you, and yet these people could come here and repeat the exact same arguments as Izvestia...

I mean really dude, you are a prime example of someone being engaged in activism and yet having abhorrent politics...

Izvestia has no politics nor arguments in this thread.The only thing Izvestia has brought to the table is ad hominem attacks and platitudes which hold no water in the current context...not to mention a sheer volume of which are completely disdainful of working class struggle and completely miss the development of class consciousness. Most of their platitudes even completely reject Marxist foundations and socialist democratic principles. To equate such platitudes with any form of coherent politics, much less proletarian oriented politics, is laughable.

[PhoenixAsh]

If KKE did that, you'd be supporting it.
It doesn't and so you ramble on and on against it.

Wauw.

Really dude....the KKE has been doing exactly this for the last decades.

And I think we firmly established over the years what I think of the KKE.

So...yeah...no.

[PhoenixAsh]

Phoenix's accusations about my involvement in politics, something about which he would have no clue, has to be viewed in the context that Phoenix is incapable of having serious debates on this forum. This is why he has made about 5 or so rambling posts directed at me in this thread, and I haven't responded to them. Unlike the social democrats in this thread, I learn from past experience. And one of the things past experience has taught me is that, whatever Phoenix does on this forum, it is not debate and is therefore not worth responding to. I advise you take the same approach.

And yet your first post in this thread adressed me directly. So you are also a lying hypocrite. But that was already apparent from your first post.

Now....If you are at any point interested to actually start making arguments and answer the questions....feel free to come back. In the mean time take your anti worker and anti social ist mentality to OI.

[Sharia Lawn]

Izvestia has no politics nor arguments in this thread.The only thing Izvestia has brought to the table is ad hominem attacks and platitudes which hold no water in the current context...not to mention a sheer volume of which are completely disdainful of working class struggle and completely miss the development of class consciousness. Most of their platitudes even completely reject Marxist foundations and socialist democratic principles. To equate such platitudes with any form of coherent politics, much less proletarian oriented politics, is laughable.

Pointing out your unreconstructed devotion to social democracy is not the same as debating you. You've served your purpose and I have no interest in allowing you to try to play your little game of burying the scathingly obvious criticisms of your social democracy beneath nested layers of your ad hominems and beside-the-point back and forth as you desperately try to change the topic to anything and everything else. Proceed with your typical dysfunctional behavior. :)

[PhoenixAsh]

Pointing out your unreconstructed devotion to social democracy is not the same as debating you. You've served your purpose and I have no interest in allowing you to try to play your little game of burying the scathingly obvious criticisms of your social democracy beneath nested layers of your ad hominems and beside-the-point back and forth as you desperately try to change the topic to anything and everything else. Proceed with your typical dysfunctional behavior. :)

This is what you actually said:



And one of the things past experience has taught me is that, whatever Phoenix does on this forum, it is not debate and is therefore not worth responding to.Yet you did. Twice now. Hence the fact that you are a lying hypocrite.

Now aside from the fact that your entire participation in this thread has consisted of nothing but ad hominem attacks...and you thus far failed to move beyond the platitudes of "workers are wrong" and "we need revolution hurdur"

You have not actually adressed many of the facts. Facts and arguments brought up long before your first post in this thread. Now point out exactly what is social democrat about:

1). There is no revolutionary mass
2). Workers are just beginning to develop class consciousness
3). Socialism not possible in one country
4). No revolutionary party working outside of parliament and the bourgeois system.
5). Remaining within the EU will mean subjecting to the EU
6). Given the previous 5 points the current outcome is not only logical it is the only possible outcome in the current circumstances where there is no revolutionary alternative
7). Criticism of SYRIZA by a supporter of KKE who a). wishes to remain in the EU b). supports a party which is thoroughly beholden to the same parliamentary system is hypocritical
8). KKE would have had the same problems in the current context when they had a parliamentary majority rather than SYRIZA.
9). Support for SYRIZA by workers is a logical outcome of the fact that there is no revolutionary alternative since this is currently the only party proposing to do something and not yet have a long history of betraying the working class like the KKE
10). Rather than criticiziong workers for voting wrong the current events should be seen as a developing class consciousness and responses should be aimed at that development

These are the facts. Simple. Now...I will be happy to see you try to not be a complete idiotic asshole who denies the development of class consciousness and berate the working class and lecturing them on how infantile they are while at the same time shitting on the foundations of Marxism and socialism....by trying to actually bring forth a coherent argument as to why these arguments are social democrat.

But you can't. Hence your repeated refusal to answer simple questions, actually adress the topic being debated and making no contribution beyond mere ad hominem attacks. So far you have been nothing but a hypocritical lying troll.

Since I repeated these positions throughout this thread and actually tried repeatedly to get you to be something else than a fucking troll asshat your assertion that I am trying to burry anything under anything is simply pittyful and laughable.

Now...like I said before...either participate and answer the points or fuck off out of this thread.

[cyu]

Socialism not possible in one country

Depends on the economy I think. If all you have is a banana republic, then you rely too much on imports, so your economy is affect by what happens outside your country. If socialists took over the entire world, except one unknown island in the Pacific, just because there is slavery on that one island, doesn't mean socialism doesn't exist in the rest of the world. Obviously I'd still encourage overthrowing the slave masters on that one island (assuming it's found), since that's on the same level of morality as freeing kidnapped people and stopping murders.

Part of the problem with capitalism is that forced competition means you don't want other countries to succeed. For example, if you are a banana producer, and another country is able to produce better bananas or more efficient bananas, then it would actually be in your business interest for your competition to fail, despite the fact that better or more efficient bananas is good for the world as a whole.

What really should happen is that everyone, including your banana republic, should welcome the fact that better bananas are being produced elsewhere, or bananas are being produced more efficiently elsewhere, since that means the wealth of the world has increased. The fact that your "competing" banana republic is not happy about these developments is one of the major weaknesses of capitalism and its associated enforcement of "property" with violence.

[Antiochus]

Progressive movements virtually never survive "in one country". Socialism in one country is a Stalinist drivel with no basis. Socialism is international.

Even Capitalism couldn't really "survive" in one country. Look at how readily the nations of Europe ganged up on France. I suppose there might be an exception in a country like the U.S, with no natural enemies and huge resources at its disposal. But generally speaking, no, it just won't work.

[cyu]

[Not completely about Greece, but then again, these days Greece isn't completely about Greece...]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-08/europe-morally-bankrupt-union

The union that was supposed to put an end to all fighting across the continent, is about to be the fuse that sets off a range of battles.

Europe has joined the US and NATO very enthusiastically in creating not just a failed state, but a veritable imitation of Hiroshima, in Ukraine, right on its own borders. The consequences of this will haunt the EU (or if it doesn’t last, which is highly plausible, its former members) not just for weeks or months or years, but for many decades.

The carefully re-crafted relationship with Russia, which took 25 years to build, was destroyed again in hardly over a year.

That US warmongers would try and set this up, is something Moscow has long known and expected. all other EU countries that have behaved in the insane ways they have over the past year will receive that same bill, or worse.

If you allow yourself to be an active accomplice in the death of over 6000 East Ukrainians, and you simply look away as thousands of migrants die in the seas off your shores, it should not be surprising that you just as easily allow for a humanitarian crisis, like the one in Greece, to develop within your own borders.

It’s like the US, which once (post WW) had an enormous moral high ground in the world to walk on, and it’s completely gone. Nobody trusts anything America says anymore. America has lost its place in the world as guardian of freedom and democracy, and so has Europe. All they can do now to exert influence is to engage in political scheming and military sabre rattling. Everything else is gone.

inside a union, you cannot let thousands of people go without food and health care while others, a few hundred miles away, drive new Mercs and Beamers over a brand new Autobahn. That’s not a union. That’s a feudal society. And those don’t hold.

Europe’s leaders across all of its institutions are completely lost, whether it comes to intelligence, morals or simple decency. They’re all too willing to trample upon their own people in order to have access to power. And that can only lead to more misery.

[Alexios]

Interesting to see PhoenixAsh break all the established rules about name-calling and flaming while at the same time being a global mod. Whether or not Izvestia is a "complete idiotic asshole" shouldn't be up for your to declare. Rather your arguments should be attempting to challenge his points, which for you is usually a lost cause from the beginning.

But I guess this what passes for moderation nowadays.

[PhoenixAsh]

I could have of course given him three infractions for trolling (which is also a bannable offense) and ad hominem attacks and derailing of the thread by making posts without substance pertinent to the thread.... Like yours. Which ironically is very much against forum rules.

Good of you to point this out. Next time I will hand out infractions & bans like a good little global mod should according to Alexios rather than calling somebody who behaves like and idiotic asshat an idiotic asshat...because apparently this is what you want me to do.

Now....did you have any comments regarding the actual debate and dicuss on topics? Especially on any of these points:

1). There is no revolutionary mass
2). Workers are just beginning to develop class consciousness
3). Socialism not possible in one country
4). No revolutionary party working outside of parliament and the bourgeois system.
5). Remaining within the EU will mean subjecting to the EU
6). Given the previous 5 points the current outcome is not only logical it is the only possible outcome in the current circumstances where there is no revolutionary alternative
7). Criticism of SYRIZA by a supporter of KKE who a). wishes to remain in the EU b). supports a party which is thoroughly beholden to the same parliamentary system is hypocritical
8). KKE would have had the same problems in the current context when they had a parliamentary majority rather than SYRIZA.
9). Support for SYRIZA by workers is a logical outcome of the fact that there is no revolutionary alternative since this is currently the only party proposing to do something and not yet have a long history of betraying the working class like the KKE
10). Rather than criticiziong workers for voting wrong the current events should be seen as a developing class consciousness and responses should be aimed at that development


Or were you just passing through acting like a complete and total asshat yourself by adding no substance to the thread and breaking forum rules?

[cyu]

So the Weimar Republic started printing money to survive, and now the world's central banks are doing QE in order to survive. Last ditch chemotherapy in an attempt to save terminal capitalism?

Just when it seemed communists would sweep in and save the day, the ruling class resorted to their last last ditch attempt to save terminal capitalism: fascists.

Can't expect too much if most economists are little more than propagandists for the status quo - they're good at propaganda, but don't actually understand economics.

[Alexios]

I could have of course given him three infractions for trolling (which is also a bannable offense) and ad hominem attacks and derailing of the thread by making posts without substance pertinent to the thread.... Like yours. Which ironically is very much against forum rules.

Good of you to point this out. Next time I will hand out infractions & bans like a good little global mod should according to Alexios rather than calling somebody who behaves like and idiotic asshat an idiotic asshat...because apparently this is what you want me to do.

Or were you just passing through acting like a complete and total asshat yourself by adding no substance to the thread and breaking forum rules?

Nobody but you has done anything of that sort. If "trolling" to you is when someone rightfully calls you out on your social democratic sympathies, then you have a very shallow understanding of the term. If you are that offended when someone calls you a social democrat, then argue against it rather than hiding cowardly behind accusations of ad-hominem (and, in fact, you are the only one in this thread using ad-hominem attacks.)

In my own time here I've noticed that you very rarely engage in substantive debates and choose instead to derail a thread into some kind of semantic argument that would allow you to ramble on for five pages while some poor bastard plays along. This particular case is exceptionally bad in that you're breaking all the rules you're expected to enforce.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

Now....did you have any comments regarding the actual debate and dicuss on topics? Especially on any of these points:

1). There is no revolutionary mass
2). Workers are just beginning to develop class consciousness
3). Socialism not possible in one country
4). No revolutionary party working outside of parliament and the bourgeois system.
5). Remaining within the EU will mean subjecting to the EU
6). Given the previous 5 points the current outcome is not only logical it is the only possible outcome in the current circumstances where there is no revolutionary alternative
7). Criticism of SYRIZA by a supporter of KKE who a). wishes to remain in the EU b). supports a party which is thoroughly beholden to the same parliamentary system is hypocritical
8). KKE would have had the same problems in the current context when they had a parliamentary majority rather than SYRIZA.
9). Support for SYRIZA by workers is a logical outcome of the fact that there is no revolutionary alternative since this is currently the only party proposing to do something and not yet have a long history of betraying the working class like the KKE
10). Rather than criticiziong workers for voting wrong the current events should be seen as a developing class consciousness and responses should be aimed at that development

As far as I am concerned, there is Antarsya working pretty much exclusively out of parliament, which gets 1-2% of national vote and has disproportionally strong presence in labour-union and student movements. It's full of militant activists etc. Not precisely a mass movement, but it's still something, it's still some sort of a basis for revolutionary activity. After let's not forget that only several years ago Syriza itself had only several percentage points of votes. But you are missing the point. It's not that KKE or Syriza or X party can do much more in the short-term that participate in the parliament and hope for the best. With the euro, without the euro, with the EU, without the EU... these are pretty much meaningless questions in so far as austerity is a necessary condition of current global capitalism. It doesn't matter which party is in the parliament, they will be forced to make the same decisions by the virtue of working in the bourgeois state. Under such conditions the bourgeois state will always conquer the "socialists" rather than the other way around. There is no "short-term" solution in so far as the logic of capitalist system forces one to make the decisions; it's not as if there would be no austerity without evil Germany etc. Let's not forget the famous U-turn to austerity of Mitterrand etc...

Having this in mind, the point is to continue building a revolutionary movement; raising class-consciousness etc. It's not as if revolutionary movements come out of the ass, they must be actively being built etc. If the CNT or the Bolsheviks or whatever would have said at the end of 19th century: "gais, there is no revolution in sight and no revolutionary movement so let's go and join the government for short-term solutions and for building class-consciousness this way", then we would have never any revolutions. The revolutionary movements must be actively built and saying "well, there are no revolutionary movements, so let's support left-reformist government in hopes that something will happen" does not only ignore all the lessons of history, but is precisely social-democratic in essence.

Your problem and confusion also lies in the fact that you have a peculiar understanding of what class-consciousness is. Voting for progressive politics or parties, being against austerity etc. doesn't mean shit for class-consciousness. Class-consciousness is specifically about workers recognising themselves as a class and recognising their enemies based on class view. Syriza not only dampened class-consciousness of the workers in the years leading up to their election by chanting social-democratic pseudo-nationalist rhetoric instead of revolutionary rhetoric, it continues to do so when talking about "government of national salvation", "saving capitalism from capitalists" and putting the issue in terms of nations as opposed to classes etc. Thinking that electing Syriza somehow represents rising class-consciousness is utterly confused way of thinking.

But then, on top of all of it, you claim that pointing out the limitations of left-reformism and parliamentary activity is somehow the same as taking "anti-working-class stance" etc. is just so confused and absurd that it's beyond words... But then again, I guess you share the view of our revolutionary comrade VIL, who says that "there are no bad politics", so it wouldn't be surprising. It's not that revolutionaries should go to Greek workers laughing at them, pointing fingers and shouting how stupid they are - the point is to simply recognise the limitations of left-reformism, drawing on lessons of history and "patiently explaining"... If that amounts to "anti-working-class" stance, if that's "hateful towards workers" or whatever else you are gonna draw out of your sleeve, then I have nothing else to tell you.

[FSL]

Political negotiations are now over with everyone else being rather angry at Greece for wasting time. A few of the finance ministers walking in the eurogroup even mentioned a "troika" just to spite us I guess.

Negotiations are now to be held between Greece and the institutions in Brussels starting Wednesday and not in Athens to protect our national sovereignity and dignity. People from the Commision, the IMF and the ECB will visit ministries in Athens however to gain access to data.
First there is to be a complete agreement on how the extended program will be concluded, than the implementation of whatever's decided must start and after that payments will follow.

[PhoenixAsh]

Nobody but you has done anything of that sort. If "trolling" to you is when someone rightfully calls you out on your social democratic sympathies, then you have a very shallow understanding of the term. If you are that offended when someone calls you a social democrat, then argue against it rather than hiding cowardly behind accusations of ad-hominem (and, in fact, you are the only one in this thread using ad-hominem attacks.)

In my own time here I've noticed that you very rarely engage in substantive debates and choose instead to derail a thread into some kind of semantic argument that would allow you to ramble on for five pages while some poor bastard plays along. This particular case is exceptionally bad in that you're breaking all the rules you're expected to enforce.

As you, being a member since 2013, should be well aware of the term social democrat on this site is considered offensive, a slur and flame. And is, in this case meant, purely as an ad hominem. As you are obviously well aware in your one sided persuit of lecturing on the rules...this is against the rules. This is not an merely an accusation. This is observable fact and you pretty damned well know it, making your little show here an act beyond hypocracy.

Also against the established forum rules is making posts that derail the thread and/or are devoid of any content related to the thread topic. Subsequent posts constitute Trolling. And since you so far have failed to provide any topic related content in both your posts...this is exactly what you are doing. Apparently you consider yourself to be above the forum rules. Which is totlally in line with the established hypocracy you display in the paragraph above.

Now your very suspicious argument that I should argue against unfounded accusations is of course ridiculous. Rather than having to defend against unsubstantiated accusations those accusations should be substantiated by the one making them. And the one making them continuously refuses the actually adress arguments, the topic of the thread and simply repeats the ad hominem. But yes. We have already established that you are a mere hypocrite...so it is not really surprising that you take this position.

Now as you are also well aware there is a guidline where mods do not moderate threads they participate in. Nor do I particularly feel the need to harshly enforcing rules on a community of adults. You on the other hand seem to be arguing that I should take an extremely litteral attitude towards applying the rules. The consequence of that would have been that both you and Izvestia would have gotten two or three infractions each based on the rules you continue to refer to and to which you apparently feel they do not apply to you or in fact anybody except for mods. You do not seem to realize this even after I pointed this out to you as is evident from your continued topic unrelated posts.

My position however is that since you are lucky enough that I am not handing out infractions and bans left and right based on the rules...you do not get to complain if I give as good as I get.

Now...I would like to draw your attention to this little sentence in the forum rules:


Excessive flaming is not permitted on RevLeft.

Calling somebody an idiotic asshat is not excessive by any means.

Now...before you ever try to lecture anybody on the rules again; I suggest you actually read them.

Now fuck off unless you actually want to adres the topic being discussed. To remind you:

Provide an argumentative basis how any of these arguments made since page one, by me...repeatedly, are social democrat or untrue:

1). There is no revolutionary mass
2). Workers are just beginning to develop class consciousness
3). Socialism not possible in one country
4). No revolutionary party working outside of parliament and the bourgeois system.
5). Remaining within the EU will mean subjecting to the EU
6). Given the previous 5 points the current outcome is not only logical it is the only possible outcome in the current circumstances where there is no revolutionary alternative
7). Criticism of SYRIZA by a supporter of KKE who a). wishes to remain in the EU b). supports a party which is thoroughly beholden to the same parliamentary system is hypocritical
8). KKE would have had the same problems in the current context when they had a parliamentary majority rather than SYRIZA.
9). Support for SYRIZA by workers is a logical outcome of the fact that there is no revolutionary alternative since this is currently the only party proposing to do something and not yet have a long history of betraying the working class like the KKE
10). Rather than criticiziong workers for voting wrong the current events should be seen as a developing class consciousness and responses should be aimed at that development

[PhoenixAsh]

As far as I am concerned, there is Antarsya working pretty much exclusively out of parliament,

They participated in elections since 2009 and they did not get enough votes to operate in parliament. They however aim to do so. Not do mention the fact that antarsya constitutes of several parties which have operated in elections of have operated in some form within parliament or heavilly allied themselves with parties that did (list coalitions fe.).


which gets 1-2% of national vote and has disproportionally strong presence in labour-union and student movements. It's full of militant activists etc. Not precisely a mass movement, but it's still something, it's still some sort of a basis for revolutionary activity.

Nobody here argued against revolutionary activity. What we did argue is that there currently is no party operating outside of the parliamentary system or is otherwise beholden to that system. Nor is there any party which can raise a maningfull mass movement of class conscious workers at the moment.

Both these areguments still stand.

The conclusion is that at the moment (so in the right here and now) any outcome will be a parliamentary outcome and not a revolutionary one bound by capitalist restraints.

Within these restraints socialism implemented right now or in the immediate future is an illusion.


After let's not forget that only several years ago Syriza itself had only several percentage points of votes. But you are missing the point. It's not that KKE or Syriza or X party can do much more in the short-term that participate in the parliament and hope for the best. With the euro, without the euro, with the EU, without the EU... these are pretty much meaningless questions in so far as austerity is a necessary condition of current global capitalism. It doesn't matter which party is in the parliament, they will be forced to make the same decisions by the virtue of working in the bourgeois state. Under such conditions the bourgeois state will always conquer the "socialists" rather than the other way around. There is no "short-term" solution in so far as the logic of capitalist system forces one to make the decisions; it's not as if there would be no austerity without evil Germany etc. Let's not forget the famous U-turn to austerity of Mitterrand etc...

Our point exactly. You do not mention anything new since this is what both I and VIL have been arguing from the start. It is rather strange that you actually say that we are missing the point when you almost litterally paraphrase my arguments from the argument I had with FSL on the first few pages.



Having this in mind, the point is to continue building a revolutionary movement; raising class-consciousness etc. It's not as if revolutionary movements come out of the ass, they must be actively being built etc.

Again...you litterally repeat what I argued. So still nothing new.

We might differ on opinion on how mass movements should be build...and THAT is exactly the questions VIL and I have been asking. Questions which are not answered, except by a precious few, beyond mere platitudes of "hurdur revolution"and "hurdur continue to build a revolutionary movement"

Now I don't see ANY constructive initiative from supposed revolutionary parties working within a bourgeois parliamentary system in building a revolutionary mass movement because of the fact that they operate within bourgeois parliament. Expecting socialism from parties endentured to the bourgeois system, regardless of the flags they wave and their rhetorics, is imo a pipe dream. For me the solution should be outside of parliament, by groups and individuals operating outside of established or new parties and should come from within the working class organization and struggles.


If the CNT or the Bolsheviks or whatever would have said at the end of 19th century: "gais, there is no revolution in sight and no revolutionary movement so let's go and join the government for short-term solutions and for building class-consciousness this way", then we would have never any revolutions.

Nobody is actually arguing anything of that sort. At all.
I will get back to this.


The revolutionary movements must be actively built and saying "well, there are no revolutionary movements, so let's support left-reformist government in hopes that something will happen" does not only ignore all the lessons of history, but is precisely social-democratic in essence.

Again. Nobody said anything of that sort. What we did say is that given the absence of a revolutionary alternative...this is the logical outcome the working class will automatically select. And since SYRIZA promissed a whole range of changes...that selection is not only to be expected but it is a decision based on the promisses of radical change as compared by the status quo...especially since it is the only option that promissed to alleviate the position of the working class.


Your problem and confusion also lies in the fact that you have a peculiar understanding of what class-consciousness is. Voting for progressive politics or parties, being against austerity etc. doesn't mean shit for class-consciousness. Class-consciousness is specifically about workers recognising themselves as a class and recognising their enemies based on class view. Syriza not only dampened class-consciousness of the workers in the years leading up to their election by chanting social-democratic pseudo-nationalist rhetoric instead of revolutionary rhetoric, it continues to do so when talking about "government of national salvation", "saving capitalism from capitalists" and putting the issue in terms of nations as opposed to classes etc. Thinking that electing Syriza somehow represents rising class-consciousness is utterly confused way of thinking.

And here is where we utterly differ in opinion.

Class consciousness is a slow change in attitude and mentality. Changes in attitude and mentality take time, come about through conflict, struggle and mistakes. This is basic human psychology.

We both look at the situation from radically different angles. You work from the position "OMG a bourgeois party therefore no class consciousness". We look from the position of "The party promissed radical change and is a breach with traditional voting patterns and behaviour. It is a surge to the left of politics based on the promisses and programs before the election. Hence this is a sign of class consciousness developing"

Both VIL and I see this as a step. A step which should be exploited and further build on. As with any step on a developmental increase...this is not a certainty and hence we ask the question: how to exploit it and how to react towards the working class.

But it is undeniably the case that people already looking for solutions outside of their normal patterns and moving towards the left are more open for further radicalisation towards left revolutionary positions than people who continue to vote traditionally or move to the far right.

Denying this is nothing short of Ostrich politics.



But then, on top of all of it, you claim that pointing out the limitations of left-reformism and parliamentary activity is somehow the same as taking "anti-working-class stance" etc.

Please provide a link to where I did that...rather than saying that it is an insult to the working class when you state that they should be led into class consciousness and should be berated for their mistakes....and above all that there should not be plurality of opinion within the revolutionary movement. This last position is anti-working class and anti-socialist.



is just so confused and absurd that it's beyond words... But then again, I guess you share the view of our revolutionary comrade VIL, who says that "there are no bad politics", so it wouldn't be surprising.

I don't think there are bad politics. I think there are politics whose few I oppose. But politics serve a goal. Based on that goal the politics make sense. I think there are confused positions...and positions guided by fundamentalist dogma...and I rather think those are displayed here in this thread...except of course we differ on opinion who displays them.



It's not that revolutionaries should go to Greek workers laughing at them, pointing fingers and shouting how stupid they are - the point is to simply recognise the limitations of left-reformism, drawing on lessons of history and "patiently explaining"... If that amounts to "anti-working-class" stance, if that's "hateful towards workers" or whatever else you are gonna draw out of your sleeve, then I have nothing else to tell you.

The entire debate started over the position of KKE supporter calling for parliamentary votes for KKE mere weeks ago now deriding SYRIZA for being a praliamentary party betraying the working class when they support a party with a long history of betraying the working class. As you rightly opointed out when you repeated my exact same argument...ANY party would have faced the same obstacles and would have been forced to make the same decisions. Preaching to the chorus is not really helpfull. What is however helpfull is thinking of specific initiatives and support for exploiting the current move towards the left.

[Kill all the fetuses!]

They participated in elections since 2009 and they did not get enough votes to operate in parliament. They however aim to do so. Not do mention the fact that antarsya constitutes of several parties which have operated in elections of have operated in some form within parliament or heavilly allied themselves with parties that did (list coalitions fe.).

Nobody here argued against revolutionary activity. What we did argue is that there currently is no party operating outside of the parliamentary system or is otherwise beholden to that system. Nor is there any party which can raise a maningfull mass movement of class conscious workers at the moment.

Both these areguments still stand.

The conclusion is that at the moment (so in the right here and now) any outcome will be a parliamentary outcome and not a revolutionary one bound by capitalist restraints.

Within these restraints socialism implemented right now or in the immediate future is an illusion.

So, because a group participates in parliamentary elections, it automatically means that it is not operating outside the parliament and doesn't prioritise that activity? How about Antarsya rejecting the proposal to join Syriza in the parliament and maintaining its independence? The way you write-off the argument in order to jump back to your assumptions is nothing short of utmost intellectual laziness.


Again. Nobody said anything of that sort. What we did say is that given the absence of a revolutionary alternative...this is the logical outcome the working class will automatically select. And since SYRIZA promissed a whole range of changes...that selection is not only to be expected but it is a decision based on the promisses of radical change as compared by the status quo...especially since it is the only option that promissed to alleviate the position of the working class.

And here your confusion starts. You know what is also expected and what is "the logical outcome"? Well, people voting. Or fascists rising to power after degeneration of capitalism and its ideology as well failure of Communist revolution. Or some of workers being racists bigots... Many things are "expected" as well as they are "logical outcomes" of particular circumstances. The point of the revolutionaries, however, is precisely to be above these circumstances in a sense of clearly understanding the situation and providing an analysis as to why this or that choice is good or bad, as to what we should and shouldn't do under such and such circumstances etc.

Now what are these "radical promises"? There was radical rhetoric, which was already softened years ago so there is nothing left of it. Have you read the Thessaloniki program? Can you point out the "radical change" of Syriza and more importantly what is left out of it after the negotiations?

Every party offers alleviation for the working-class! New Democracy pledged to end austerity and revive Greek economy, Hollande, Obama, Lulla... every politician and party must and do offer to help the workers. If you want to make that argument, you need to tell how exactly is Syriza fundamentally different from all the other bourgeois parties that offered the same or even more radical things both now and in the past. Because now you have no argument, but a nonsensical claim.



We both look at the situation from radically different angles. You work from the position "OMG a bourgeois party therefore no class consciousness". We look from the position of "The party promissed radical change and is a breach with traditional voting patterns and behaviour. It is a surge to the left of politics based on the promisses and programs before the election. Hence this is a sign of class consciousness developing"

You again just show that you don't understand what class-consciousness means. People voting for left-reformist parties isn't an indication of rising class consciousness. If you keep repeating yourself, it won't make it true. Supporting end to austerity, because your life has been shit for years now isn't an example of class-consciousness. People electing politicians on populist rhetoric isn't an example of class-consciousness. People supporting parties that say "capitalism is bad" isn't an example of class-consciousness. People saying "we are 99% and want to rip 1% apart" isn't an example of class-consciousness. They are indications of dissatisfaction with the status-quo and a move towards progressive politics, which isn't an indication of class-consciousness nor does it necessarily lead closer to it. You just don't understand what you are talking about.


Both VIL and I see this as a step. A step which should be exploited and further build on. As with any step on a developmental increase...this is not a certainty and hence we ask the question: how to exploit it and how to react towards the working class.

But it is undeniably the case that people already looking for solutions outside of their normal patterns and moving towards the left are more open for further radicalisation towards left revolutionary positions than people who continue to vote traditionally or move to the far right.

Denying this is nothing short of Ostrich politics.

Hahaha. Well, one of the ways how you exploit a supposed increase in class-consciousness is by not supporting and sowing illusions in bourgeois parties, providing clear analysis as to why people are mistaken in their support for Syriza, drawing lessons from history etc...


Please provide a link to where I did that...rather than saying that it is an insult to the working class when you state that they should be led into class consciousness and should be berated for their mistakes....and above all that there should not be plurality of opinion within the revolutionary movement. This last position is anti-working class and anti-socialist.

"Led to class-consciousness"? "Berated for their mistakes"? What are you even talking about at this point? Revolutionaries should be explaining why workers are mistaken in their support for Syriza, why austerity and their poverty can only be ended by the abolition of capitalism, why it is necessary to build revolutionary movement, why parliamentary activity leads nowhere etc. If that's "leading workers to class-consciousness" and "berating workers for their mistakes", then you are simply confused beyond words.

But I can't believe what I am reading now - not being "for plurality" within the revolutionary movement is now anti-working-class and anti-socialist. This is just incredible. What the fuck does that even mean? What plurality are you talking about? Do I think we ought to have some social-democrats in the revolutionary movement for the sake of "plurality"? No! Fuck that sort of plurality. Jesus...


I don't think there are bad politics. I think there are politics whose few I oppose. But politics serve a goal. Based on that goal the politics make sense. I think there are confused positions...and positions guided by fundamentalist dogma...and I rather think those are displayed here in this thread...except of course we differ on opinion who displays them.

Preaching to the chorus is not really helpfull. What is however helpfull is thinking of specific initiatives and support for exploiting the current move towards the left.

I find it hilarious as to how people think that "revolutionaries" who support social-democratic politics are somehow being nuanced, complex, un-dogmatic etc and those taking a clear revolutionary line not least due to all the lessons drawn from history are somehow being dogmatic and are simply "preaching to the chorus"...

[Sharia Lawn]

But I can't believe what I am reading now - not being "for plurality" within the revolutionary movement is now anti-working-class and anti-socialist. This is just incredible. What the fuck does that even mean? What plurality are you talking about? Do I think we ought to have some social-democrats in the revolutionary movement for the sake of "plurality"? No! Fuck that sort of plurality. Jesus...

I find it hilarious as to how people think that "revolutionaries" who support social-democratic politics are somehow being nuanced, complex, un-dogmatic etc and those taking a clear revolutionary line not least due to all the lessons drawn from history are somehow being dogmatic and are simply "preaching to the chorus"...

Welcome to the juncture where social democracy meets anarchism: neither tendency invests any practical weight in a making a long-term push toward overthrowing the capitalist state, and instead are interested in building pluralist "scenes." With the dominant strain of what passes for anarchism, this takes the form of rejecting the political, and opting instead to create diverse multicultural lifestyle scenes at a local level. (Class-struggle anarchists are less overt in this movie, but are functionally wedded to it with a kind of workerist-wobbly twist.) With social democracy, the pluralism assumes the form of the highly touted party of the whole class, where all elements of the working class will struggle side by side in the national parliamentary arena and also in local movements.

As FSL hinted earlier, the problem is that both options reduce politics to a consumerist mentality of pure "choice" abstracted from class content or the social structures that ensure the uneven and layered development of class consciousness within all classes, but especially the proletariat. (One social democrat in this thread called this pluralist abstract choice "socialist democracy." In reality, it is social democracy.) Responsible for this uneven consciousness is an immense superstructure that reproduces and reinforces social experiences tending toward the perpetual fracturing of the working class. This superstructure includes the horse-trading rationale that underlies parliamentary campaigns aimed primarily at influencing, winning, or exercising bourgeois state power, which is why the dream of revolutionary class unity recedes into the distance with every parliamentary victory achieved with the aim of harnessing the bourgeois state. Owing to the way the bourgeois electoral process functions, with its quantitative emphasis on numbers to the exclusion of proletarian quality, the achievement of proletarian unity on its terms means the hallowing out of an independent proletarian program that might be controversial to (as an example) the better-paid, skilled proletarians as opposed to unskilled ones. And this is why revolutionaries opt instead for the revolutionary project of overthrowing bourgeois state power: they understand the material realities and experiences responsible for the way people actually think, and don't treat them as individual democratic choices that should be respected in their full diversity as equally correct examples of pluralism.

The social democrats in this thread are just taking the epoch-old social democratic model of entire-class parties, and extending this logic to SYRIZA in the hopes that it might become such a party because there are a lot of angry workers supporting it already. The logic remains unmistakeable, and like every previous iteration of it, unmistakeably mistaken. And as noted earlier, this is apparent in the very way in which the calls for pluralism are ignored the moment a mean revolutionary comes into the picture. Suddenly vehement condemnations are issued, and some forms of being political turn out to be unwelcome after all. It just so happens that it is the revolutionaries interested in smashing the bourgeois state that are unwelcome interlopers in their project of perpetual subcultural opposition within anarchist co-ops and defanged factions of popular front electoral campaigns. But hey, it's okay, at least they can pat themselves on the back for issuing trigger warnings. Which reminds me. Maybe the revolutionaries on this forum should issue trigger warnings before posting, so as not to frighten the mass of social democrats who post here at the highest levels of the staff.

It's not a coincidence that the anarchists on this forum, and those inspired by them, sound overwhelmingly like social democrats when they speak about concrete politics.

By the way, you'll have better luck arguing with your goldfish than you would with Phoenix.

[Alexios]

As you, being a member since 2013, should be well aware of the term social democrat on this site is considered offensive, a slur and flame. And is, in this case meant, purely as an ad hominem. As you are obviously well aware in your one sided persuit of lecturing on the rules...this is against the rules. This is not an merely an accusation. This is observable fact and you pretty damned well know it, making your little show here an act beyond hypocracy.

Is it? Marxists have been accusing one another of reformism for as long as Marxist polemics have been written.


Also against the established forum rules is making posts that derail the thread and/or are devoid of any content related to the thread topic. Subsequent posts constitute Trolling. And since you so far have failed to provide any topic related content in both your posts...this is exactly what you are doing. Apparently you consider yourself to be above the forum rules. Which is totlally in line with the established hypocracy you display in the paragraph above.


I'm operating fully within the rules, as is everyone in this thread but you. The hilarity of this is only compounded by your own position as a global moderator.



Now your very suspicious argument that I should argue against unfounded accusations is of course ridiculous. Rather than having to defend against unsubstantiated accusations those accusations should be substantiated by the one making them. And the one making them continuously refuses the actually adress arguments, the topic of the thread and simply repeats the ad hominem. But yes. We have already established that you are a mere hypocrite...so it is not really surprising that you take this position.


Defending a reformist party (if it can even be called that) will open you up to criticism by people who support communism. If you can't live with this possibility, and will only rebuke such criticism through childish tantrums, then you shouldn't open your mouth in the first place.



Now as you are also well aware there is a guidline where mods do not moderate threads they participate in. Nor do I particularly feel the need to harshly enforcing rules on a community of adults. You on the other hand seem to be arguing that I should take an extremely litteral attitude towards applying the rules. The consequence of that would have been that both you and Izvestia would have gotten two or three infractions each based on the rules you continue to refer to and to which you apparently feel they do not apply to you or in fact anybody except for mods. You do not seem to realize this even after I pointed this out to you as is evident from your continued topic unrelated posts.

My position however is that since you are lucky enough that I am not handing out infractions and bans left and right based on the rules...you do not get to complain if I give as good as I get.

This might have some credence to it if you didn't have a recent history of flaming during civil debates:

http://i.imgur.com/WoXPvEtm.png (http://imgur.com/WoXPvEt)

And that's only one example. So again: why are you a global mod if you can't even abide by the rules that you're expected to enforce?

[Kill all the fetuses!]

For those interested, a couple of days ago there was a debate between Stathis Kouvelakis, member of Syriza’s central committee, representing the Left Platform and Alex Callinicos, editor of International Socialism.

I was eagerly waiting for the debate, expecting some sort of a direct clash, complete disagreement etc., considering some critical articles that Callinicos has published in the Internal Socialism journal etc. But what I got was... meh. I mean, I will listen to it again as I was rather tired yesterday, but I didn't really enjoy the vibe of the debate nor I learnt anything that I didn't know before. But be the judge yourself, here's the debate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV2jCTBjlpQ

For those who didn't bother watching the debate, there is a very short summary of the point made by Stathis, which might give a better ideas as to what the Left Platform is up to, what's its mentality etc. Here's the link: http://socialistworker.co.uk/art/40099/Syriza+and++socialist++strategy+-+part+one

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

^What would one expect from Callinicos? A totally bankrupt "intellectual" academic who presided over one of the dirtier sexism scandals in the British far-lefts history. I wouldn't trust the usefulness of his political judgement as far as I can throw it.

Having said that - and with that caveat - I look forward to watching the full debate later. Thanks for the link..

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Also:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-31831694

Either a hint of genuine radical action from SYRIZAs leadership, or a sign that either:

a) Eurozone talks are breaking down, or
b) SYRIZA is under pressure from its own Left Platform tendency.

Either way, I think it probably needs bigger threats to extract some juice from the Eurozone. They really should be putting a Grexit, or at least a currency exit and the formation of an alternative trade bloc, on the table, even if it's clear they would never act on it.

[FSL]

Or Syriza-Anel are simply trying to stir up nationalism to take the spotlight away from the technical negotiations with the institutions formerly known as troika and currently named "the brussels group".

Double-edged sword, a very defiant neo-nazi MP accused the government and Varoufakis today of not using the great argument of WW2 reparations during the political negotiations.

[Redwood]

Its bullshit. Expect nothing more.

[Redwood]

Honestly, the excitement over SYRZIA is depressing to me. Nothing more. It is NOT a good sign comrades. Dont lie to yourself, its not worth it, for you, or 'the revolution'.
'

[Die Neue Zeit]

Double-edged sword, a very defiant neo-nazi MP accused the government and Varoufakis today of not using the great argument of WW2 reparations during the political negotiations.

They did use that argument, though. :confused:

[FSL]

They did use that argument, though. :confused:

The political negotiations ended on Monday and the WW2 reparations thing became a big issue after that.
Bottom line is there will always be a way to act more "patriotic".

[cyu]

The difference with WW2 Germany is that they decided it was a one-off thing. They didn't expect (and were preparing to prevent) more war from Germany.

With the EU, it's not a one-off thing. If you expect to establish debt-colonies the world over, you're not supposed to let your debt-colonies off the hook.

[cyu]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-12/daniel-hannan-explains-how-euro-killed-democracy

After the Greek election results came in, the German finance minister said "elections change nothing." As Jean Claude Juncker put it the next day, "there can be no democratic choice against the European treaties."

As the former president of the European Commission Barroso puts it, "democratic governments are often wrong. If you trust them too much they make bad decisions." And so we have this system in Europe where power is deliberately vested in the hands of people who are invulnerable to public opinion.

[cyu]

Considering the amount of support the foreign policy establishment gives to various questionable elections in Third World countries (not to mention actively anti-democratic institutions like ones above), I'd say that one of the first things someone with enough security clearance learns, is that Western elections have been rigged for generations - probably starting at around the time these regimes first started supporting questionable elections in other countries.

So the question is, why bother with stuff like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC and other measures to give money an advantage, when the elections are rigged anyway? One of the main things you have to do is make the election results believable. Faking a victory when 95% of the people are against you, is a lot harder versus when only 60% are against you. First you have to ensure you can sway public opinion enough to at least to make the results plausible, or least make people think there are lots of people who would vote for their oppressors.

[PhoenixAsh]

So, because a group participates in parliamentary elections, it automatically means that it is not operating outside the parliament and doesn't prioritise that activity? How about Antarsya rejecting the proposal to join Syriza in the parliament and maintaining its independence? The way you write-off the argument in order to jump back to your assumptions is nothing short of utmost intellectual laziness.


This is a pretty big endorsement of social democracy...parliamentarism is the hallmark of social democracies reformism and gradualism.

Ironic.

So don't get me wrong....but since you are unable to distinguish between supporting actual social democracy (like you are doing here) and saying that workers voting en masse for leftist parties is a sign of growing class consciousnes I can't actually be bothered with replying to your post.

[PhoenixAsh]

Is it? Marxists have been accusing one another of reformism for as long as Marxist polemics have been written.

And it has always been intended as an insult. So don't give me the bullshit about it not being one.



I'm operating fully within the rules, as is everyone in this thread but you. The hilarity of this is only compounded by your own position as a global moderator.

Actually no you are not as I have repeatedly pointed out to you by quoting those rules you are violating....as well as quoting the rules you misused to try and fake having a point here. Now I suggest you cut your losses.



Defending a reformist party (if it can even be called that) will open you up to criticism by people who support communism. If you can't live with this possibility, and will only rebuke such criticism through childish tantrums, then you shouldn't open your mouth in the first place.

Could you point out where I am defending a reformist party and why you are not leveling the same criticism to somebody who actually defends the hallmarks of social democracy a few posts above? Hypocracy much? Hmmm? Or are you persuing your own agenda?



This might have some credence to it if you didn't have a recent history of flaming during civil debates:[/quyote]

You don't have to quote me you asshat...I use insulting language quite frequently when somebody insults me (OMG I AM DOING IT AGAIN RIGHT THERE).

[quote]
And that's only one example. So again: why are you a global mod if you can't even abide by the rules that you're expected to enforce?

Why are you still persisting in trying to have an actual point when you were already proven with quotes from the rules to be absolutely and completely wrong on the matter.

In fact...I do believe it is a sign of insanity if you do the same thing over and over, especially knowing you are wrong, expecting different results.

Now I am more than willing to enforce the rules...and since you have broken 4 already...that are four infractions. I can hand out a couple to Izvestia as well. Trolling, flaming, derailing threads.... Want them? I'll trade you for two or three I'll give myself for flaming :)