Tsipras: Their plan was to end hope for a different policy in Europe

[nomoba]

The Greek PM, Alexis Tsipras, gave an interview to the Greek public broadcaster - ERT.


Key points:

Greeks will survive even without program and they will go to vote.


We will not drop democracy.

We did everything to achieve an agreement.

The target of the other side was to make us fully adopt their positions, not to negotiate.

They will not drop us out of euro because the cost will be enormous, this is my estimation. Their plan was to end hope that there could be a different policy in Europe.

They gave us an 48 hours ultimatum, so now we should ask people. People should decide.

Their choice to block referendum by cutting the program will be written in the dark pages of history.

Referendum is the continuation of the negotiations in other terms.

We expect first of all from the European leaders to respect the democratic right of the people to vote.

IMF didn't supply Greece with liquidity since the summer of 2014, but wants all the money back.

If the Greek people want a humiliated president they can choose. There are many out there, but not me.
The creditors will retreat on a powerful will by the Greek people.


http://failedevolution.blogspot.gr/2015/06/now-tsipras-says-greeks-will-go-to-vote.html

[Solarstone]

I do not know the result of this referendum; however, I do believe that it is about time. Greeks need to be able to choose whether to accept failed neoliberal policies, or to try a different strategy. It is time for the Greek people to decide their future, not European bureaucrats and Greek negotiators.

[ckaihatsu]

The referendum in Greece and the struggle against austerity

http://www.fightbacknews.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/article-lead-photo/KKE.jpg

Commentary by Kosta Harlan

Millions of Greek voters go to the polls July 5, in a referendum that will have important implications for the country's future. The prime minister Alexis Tsipras, of the governing SYRIZA (Coalition of the Radical Left), announced the referendum last week after a breakdown in negotiations with the so-called Troika (the International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank, and the European Commission). The referendum basically asks: do you accept the Troika's proposed austerity measures ("yes" or "nai" in Greek) or do you reject them ("no" or "oxi")?

But the referendum has taken on a much larger meaning than this. Sensing an opportunity, the Greek capitalist class is throwing its weight behind a yes vote; their TV, radio and newspaper outlets which dominate the country's media are clamoring for "yes" and warning of disaster if "no" prevails. There are even reports of employers forcing their workers to turn out to the "yes" rally that took place in Athens on July 3. A win for the "yes" vote would mean favorable conditions for the old center-left and center-right parties of PASOK and New Democracy to come back to power - these are the parties that signed on to the austerity agreements of the last five years. A "yes" vote is important for the capitalist class because it deals a blow to the anti-austerity movement, and also brings some stability into the economy in the form of badly needed funds for the cash-starved banking system. Those in the "yes" camp skew heavily towards being older and more conservative.

On the other side is the "no" camp, and here you will find those from the ranks of the poor, the working class, the youth and the unemployed, as well as the pensioners struggling to survive, those without healthcare, and students with no prospect for employment. A victory for the "no" vote would send a strong message to the IMF, the ECB and the EC that Greece refuses to submit to humiliating and poisonous austerity measures that will enslave the country to massive debt payments for generations to come. A victory for "no" would offer encouragement for those forces that are struggling against austerity. Instead of turning back towards the old politics of austerity, a "no" vote provides more favorable conditions for struggle.

The problem is that SYRIZA is not in a position to lead this struggle. SYRIZA has already shown it is not going to deliver on its promises to end the austerity measures. Instead the party is proposing their own milder version of the Troika's austerity measures (an "honorable compromise" they call it), which does things like push back implementation of some of the measures (e.g. phasing in the retirement age of 67 later on, rather than immediately) instead of rejecting them outright. More broadly, SYRIZA isn't prepared to, and doesn't have the objective of, confronting the monopolies and the capitalists who run the country, or breaking with the European Union -- preconditions for building a more just economy and society.

To break the chains of austerity, Greece needs a rupture with the Troika and the European Union. To have an economy that serves the people, the big industries and monopolies which dominate economic life must be in the hands of the working class. These questions are not on the referendum, of course. So while the "no" vote is important if only for its symbolic value, it's also understandable why the Communist Party of Greece (KKE) has urged workers to reject both the "yes" and "no" vote - because the choice should not be between SYRIZA's milder austerity and the Troika's dictates: the choice should be between working people running society or monopoly rule; between producing according to people's needs or producing for capitalist profit, and between distributing wealth fairly or allowing millions to suffer so a tiny handful prosper without measure.

No matter what happens with the referendum, one can only hope that the struggle in Greece will continue to strengthen and build people's organizations while keeping their eyes on the prize: a society where working people rule and social justice is the law of the land.

Read more News and Views from the Peoples Struggle at http://www.fightbacknews.org. You can write to us at [email protected]

[BIXX]

I do not know the result of this referendum; however, I do believe that it is about time. Greeks need to be able to choose whether to accept failed neoliberal policies, or to try a different strategy. It is time for the Greek people to decide their future, not European bureaucrats and Greek negotiators.

It doesn't really make sense to take this stance imo. It's not so much that I have a stance to offer as "more correct" but that I don't think any stance on this issue makes any sense, as it all has to do with the management and movement of capital. It doesn't really make it easier to destroy capital, and in fact I'd be willing to say it will.make it harder, as this (whatever the result) is a process of increasing capital's efficiency.

[ckaihatsu]

It doesn't really make sense to take this stance imo. It's not so much that I have a stance to offer as "more correct" but that I don't think any stance on this issue makes any sense, as it all has to do with the management and movement of capital. It doesn't really make it easier to destroy capital, and in fact I'd be willing to say it will.make it harder, as this (whatever the result) is a process of increasing capital's efficiency.


Unfortunately we can't just be abstentionist from the perspective of class consciousness -- this is a major turning point in geopolitical / world affairs, and the immediate situation is that the EU arrangement isn't working out for Greece (and other European countries as well).

What happens at the geopolitical and economic levels filters down to workers and people, through state policies of austerity, etc. Certainly the EU economic dictatorship needs to be fully overthrown on a class basis, but in the present the world can see a moment of critical democratic expression from the people of Greece themselves -- not a bad thing, and also a real precedent-setter for the future.

[Comrade Jacob]

Well, now that the Greek people have rejected austerity hopefully Tsipras can step up a be a genuine socialist.

[BIXX]

Unfortunately we can't just be abstentionist from the perspective of class consciousness -- this is a major turning point in geopolitical / world affairs, and the immediate situation is that the EU arrangement isn't working out for Greece (and other European countries as well).

What happens at the geopolitical and economic levels filters down to workers and people, through state policies of austerity, etc. Certainly the EU economic dictatorship needs to be fully overthrown on a class basis, but in the present the world can see a moment of critical democratic expression from the people of Greece themselves -- not a bad thing, and also a real precedent-setter for the future.

Yes I get all that, what with the implied improvement of everyone's lives and whatnot, but this seems to me to be a discussion of, again, how to increase the lifespan of capital, with leftists at the helm of this discussion. I think the questions TFU raised in the gay marriage thread are relevant here: what will this do to help us smash capitalism? I don't think this really do that at all. In fact all this seems to have accomplished is to get folks who supposedly oppose capital (leftists) to engage in discussions of how it ought to be continued. All of which will only serve to give capital neweans for survival. It seems to be, from the perspective of capital itself, an intelligent move designed to reform the resistance and attacks against capital into a push for the "improvement" of capital.

[ckaihatsu]

Yes I get all that, what with the implied improvement of everyone's lives and whatnot, but this seems to me to be a discussion of, again, how to increase the lifespan of capital, with leftists at the helm of this discussion. I think the questions TFU raised in the gay marriage thread are relevant here: what will this do to help us smash capitalism? I don't think this really do that at all. In fact all this seems to have accomplished is to get folks who supposedly oppose capital (leftists) to engage in discussions of how it ought to be continued. All of which will only serve to give capital neweans for survival.




It seems to be, from the perspective of capital itself, an intelligent move designed to reform the resistance and attacks against capital into a push for the "improvement" of capital.


Empirically I actually *can't* agree with you here -- from what I can tell the austerity / neoliberal attack has been going on for *decades* now and what's happened today is just an incidental milestone on that continuous road.

You're essentially giving more credit to the Troika than is due, since they're merely on the other side of the class divide, constantly pushing for more givebacks from the working class, etc. -- they certainly don't have the autonomous, monolithic reach that you're ascribing to them.

[BIXX]

I'm not separating the troika or any of that, I'm talking about results in general. The whole process is the issue I have. The whole process (which includes every political party there, whether radical or conservative) is basically the research and development of a more adaptable capitalism that can survive longer.

Here is a question regarding the vote: what will any of this do to further the goals of smashing capitalism? From an anti-capitalist perspective, why do we care which way people vote in this?

[ckaihatsu]

I'm not separating the troika or any of that, I'm talking about results in general. The whole process is the issue I have. The whole process (which includes every political party there, whether radical or conservative) is basically the research and development of a more adaptable capitalism that can survive longer.


Sure, I hear ya.





Here is a question regarding the vote: what will any of this do to further the goals of smashing capitalism? From an anti-capitalist perspective, why do we care which way people vote in this?


Well, at *best*, I guess, we could say that the vote is indicative of how class-conscious the people of Greece are, in that they're rebuffing the class-war dictates of the Troika.

[PhoenixAsh]

You have to think beyond class politics and look at the bigger picture.

The idea whatever happens within capital doesn't truly matter unless it is aimed at the destruction of capital directly makes no sense unless there is a strategy for the time that capitalism is still a force.

What matters about this vote is it will weaken the EU. It will weaken the political dominant line currently being sold in Europe that the EU should be preserved at all costs. It will strengthen anti-austerity movements. And it is destabilizing the current balance of political power. It has also shown that currently resistance movements and political activism do pay off to some extent and institutions like the EU can be resisted.

[hexaune]

I'm not separating the troika or any of that, I'm talking about results in general. The whole process is the issue I have. The whole process (which includes every political party there, whether radical or conservative) is basically the research and development of a more adaptable capitalism that can survive longer.

Here is a question regarding the vote: what will any of this do to further the goals of smashing capitalism? From an anti-capitalist perspective, why do we care which way people vote in this?

Personally I think it can help radicalise the working class by showing them that battles can be won (i.e. we can use this as a proganda tool and to develop more and more radical demands) against what feels like an unbeatable enemy most of the time and if the slog of daily life gets a bit easier for people they might have more energy and strength to take the fight further.

[Rafiq]

I'm not separating the troika or any of that, I'm talking about results in general. The whole process is the issue I have. The whole process (which includes every political party there, whether radical or conservative) is basically the research and development of a more adaptable capitalism that can survive longer.


That is absolutely true, but what you fail to understand is that this only concerns present conditions of capitalism, i.e. and the superstructure it entails. The alternative, at this present moment (i.e. if it does not survive), to our present condition of capitalism, is the Golden Dawn. What this means is that, in the absence of an organized, revived Left, the victory of austerity and the collapse of the system would entail a victory for Fascism.


From an anti-capitalist perspective, why do we care which way people vote in this?

Because, here's a thought: It has direct implications as to the political future of anti-capitalism. Anti-capitalism is not some kind of abstraction, it must be ingrained into the movement itself. The movement does not exist - and will never exist if the Left incessantly continues to fear power.

[BIXX]

Well, at *best*, I guess, we could say that the vote is indicative of how class-conscious the people of Greece are, in that they're rebuffing the class-war dictates of the Troika.

By assisting the state, elements in capital, etc... Come up with new ways for capital to survive?

[Rafiq]

What matters about this vote is it will weaken the EU. It will weaken the political dominant line currently being sold in Europe that the EU should be preserved at all costs.

On the contrary, the vote is the only thing that is a semblance close to saving the EU. That is because the anti-austerity politics of the proletariat are necessarily ingrained with the pre-supposition of accepting the reality of Europe as a political entity - only the cynics and the reactionaries will hark this on as a victory for the Euroskeptics.

[PhoenixAsh]

On the contrary, the vote is the only thing that is a semblance close to saving the EU. That is because the anti-austerity politics of the proletariat are necessarily ingrained with the pre-supposition of accepting the reality of Europe as a political entity - only the cynics and the reactionaries will hark this on as a victory for the Euroskeptics.

And this vote challenges the current perceptions of Europe. There are two ways to go:

1). The entire line that has currently been sold in Northern Europe turns out to be false. Which means restructuring, Greece within the EU and a political downturn for the ruling parties in the North. Either way the EU's position to dictate policy in the eyes of the people (which is an abstract) will weaken.
2). Greece will leave the EU...opening the door for more exits and restructuring the EU as an entity as well as weakening its power structure.

That is not a victory for the Eurosceptics but for the anti-austerity movements on the ground outside the political structures.

[Thirsty Crow]

You have to think beyond class politics and look at the bigger picture.

The idea whatever happens within capital doesn't truly matter unless it is aimed at the destruction of capital directly makes no sense unless there is a strategy for the time that capitalism is still a force.

What matters about this vote is it will weaken the EU. It will weaken the political dominant line currently being sold in Europe that the EU should be preserved at all costs. It will strengthen anti-austerity movements. And it is destabilizing the current balance of political power. It has also shown that currently resistance movements and political activism do pay off to some extent and institutions like the EU can be resisted.
On the contrary, I think class politics is the bigger picture - in the sense of the irreducible antagonism of class forces, and the ways of organizing social production that give rise to it.

I don't think that a simplistic insistence that there is no direct, sustained, international attack upon capital as suchshould be considered as the fundamental aspect of class politics in its (pro)revolutionary form.

I think it's quite plausible to conclude that this will weaken the dominant political line, but we simply can't forget that austerity is just one aspect of the overall situation; for instance, the issue of austerity polciies doesn' directly relate to that of the creeping outspread of temporary and precerious forms of work contracts. In fact, can say that there are "national strategy documents" I've been translating personally that actually imply this subterfuge, the many legal-political frameworks to facilitate this kind of work. Behind it is the correct assessment that tax cuts and cuts to welfare provision might not be enough (in fact, good parts of the ruling class already question austerity as an effective strategy of restoring conditions forprofitable massive investment resulting in work).

That's one part of the bigger picture; another is that it is a simple matter of fact that this, while beinga definite step forward for the European working class*, is also a step forward for political elements that will never do anything else than either a) offer fantasies about a wonderful management of capitalist social relations or b) actually manage it as part(s) of goverments.

What I'm trying to do is to do justice to the complexity of the situation; and I think that there is argument to be made in case of the latter idea. SYRIZA, for instance, can be seen as nothing else than a hub for any future resistance against and crushing of independent, and more radical working class action. Be it directly ecopnomic and/or political (e.g. strikes and political actions aiming at undermining the grip of this new social democracy - one would be tempted to say, social democracy reborn) or more strictly organizational (e.g. hampering the formation of independent workers' bodies and organizations, not least by means of the party serving as a black hole sucking every social movement into the singularity of bourgeois parliamentary politics). Of course, it is possible that certain sections of SYRIZA could abandon this class compromise and class conciliation. But in the bigger picture, communists ought to be clear that this is no simple victory that isn't simultaneously a potential defeat, or a basis for future defeats, so to speak.

For instance, I think it's fair to assume that in the next period it will be much harder to present a principled, communist criticism when it comes to SYRIZA; and the very situation could tip the balance in favor of existing communist org's moves towards stances and actions that would rightly be called opportunist. People will probably want to ride this wave as skillfully as possible, but ultimately the surfer takes a dive.

And in connection to what I said about flexible labor and the political-legal aspects of it, it could very well turn out that, if the fiscal crisis is transcended, the class will suffer this austerity-by-other-means. But there is a much more fundamental question, more fundamental in relation ot issues of national debt and the access to foreign debt markets, and that's the rate of profit. It's entirely possible that any long term economic upswing is simply not an option; in fact, that's the position many Marxists are taking, some like Andrew Kliman at least partly due to a rigorous economic analysis undertaken. Other people are of the opinion that the next upswing is juist round the corner (I remember Aufheben arguing in 2011 or 2012 that literally the next couple of years will see a return to the massive investment resulting in employment bussines-as-usual).

This is far from a scholastic issue and a thing for nerds to rage over in FB groups; it's vital, in my opinion, insofar as communists ought to be prepared for the coming round of change in work and employment patterns (it's much different to engage with the class and work on organizing when there's an official rate of unemployment at almost 10% with many people working in the grey economy).

And sure as hell, I don't have the answers. From what I've read, it seems entirely plausible that Kliman and co. are right and that there's still a massive amount of capital value to be annihilated, which spells disaster for the working class one way or the other. It's definitely not inevitable that this will end in a cataclysmic way as it did at the end of the 1930s as well. But then again, under these conditions, pretty much anything is on the table.

What I think communists should never loose from sight - also in their very practical and day-to-day activities as communists - is the fact that tailing the populist and social democratic elements of the broader social movements against austerity ca't and won't do anything about capital; and this is not a matter of ideological purity. It's a matter of clarity in seeing the current patterns of social-economic development in close relationship with clarity in thinking about kinds of platforms and activities which are strategically viable for communists as an intransigent opposition to the current order.

[PhoenixAsh]

What that line means is that what is happening right now is not class politics but the outcome of strategy between two conflicting interests of bourgeoisie factions at war with each other. Looking at it from a class perspective loses focus on what is happening between these factions and what that means for the respective positions and power structures.

[BIXX]

You have to think beyond class politics and look at the bigger picture.

The idea whatever happens within capital doesn't truly matter unless it is aimed at the destruction of capital directly makes no sense unless there is a strategy for the time that capitalism is still a force.

What matters about this vote is it will weaken the EU. It will weaken the political dominant line currently being sold in Europe that the EU should be preserved at all costs. It will strengthen anti-austerity movements. And it is destabilizing the current balance of political power. It has also shown that currently resistance movements and political activism do pay off to some extent and institutions like the EU can be resisted.

But it is still a process that increases the capacity for capital to sustain itself. That's the fundamental issue, not that it isn't aimed at destruction but that it inherently supports the continued reconstruction of capital.


Personally I think it can help radicalise the working class by showing them that battles can be won (i.e. we can use this as a proganda tool and to develop more and more radical demands) against what feels like an unbeatable enemy most of the time and if the slog of daily life gets a bit easier for people they might have more energy and strength to take the fight further.

But when those battles are based in acceptable changes for capital who gives a shit if those battles can be won? This is a way to do two things: reduce dissent within capitalism, and to limit the spectrum of resistance.


That is absolutely true, but what you fail to understand is that this only concerns present conditions of capitalism, i.e. and the superstructure it entails. The alternative, at this present moment (i.e. if it does not survive), to our present condition of capitalism, is the Golden Dawn. What this means is that, in the absence of an organized, revived Left, the victory of austerity and the collapse of the system would entail a victory for Fascism.
So I understand this correctly: we must support capitalism because it is better than fascism? I don't buy that logic. It's never so black and white.


Because, here's a thought: It has direct implications as to the political future of anti-capitalism. Anti-capitalism is not some kind of abstraction, it must be ingrained into the movement itself. The movement does not exist - and will never exist if the Left incessantly continues to fear power.

Why a movement though? I think again we are looking at examples of homogenizing struggles that cannot be homogenized.

When you say power, what do you mean? Do you mean in the sense of political power or individual power?

[Rafiq]

But in the bigger picture, communists ought to be clear that this is no simple victory that isn't simultaneously a potential defeat, or a basis for future defeats, so to speak.

Better the possibility of being defeated in the first place, then to not even have a platform for existing at all. It is entirely possible that if Syriza succeeds in spreading a wave of a "new social democracy" across Europe, they will become another institutional part of capital. But it is easy to see that in the long term, any such victory is contingent upon a more radical pan-European working class movement to fail in the first place in securing power, for a "moderate" Syriza across Europe is simply not possible. In another thread, I pointed out how a Syriza in the United States or Germany is impossible precisely for this reason, and that electoral politics for executive power in both countries is futile (i.e. unless we're talking about DNZ's "crazy" ideas of spoilage, which I provide a defense of), while in Greece it can shift the balance of power that has implications for a whole pan-European working class, because the fundamental political basis of power in European capital is not in Greece. I conceived this in terms of degrees of concentration of finance capital.

Ultimately, Syriza will fail if it is not supplemented by a more radical working class movement, in the long term. If the bourgeois factions within these broad populist movements suppress any potential independent class based politics, this constitutes a failure among the leaders of the working class organizations.

[PhoenixAsh]

and here it starts: http://theantimedia.org/uk-public-wants-its-own-austerity-referendum/

[Baseballuser]

Can someone give me some insight into what the political climate in Greece is right now? Is there still of a lot of support for Syzria? I know there is a communist party and a fascist party that each hold a few seats. Are these parties growing in the face of recent events?

[BIXX]

and here it starts: http://theantimedia.org/uk-public-wants-its-own-austerity-referendum/

What is actually starting though? Sure, an anti-austerity movement, but realistically for an anti-capitalist what is that? It's a reformation of capital, and whatever gains made will be ultimately hollow as there is an infinity of ways for capital to fight it. Furthermore I'd be willing to bet that the small "crisis" we are in now has more to due with the reformations of capital that got us here and were systematically manufactured by capital, which in turn creates no actual crisis for capital.

[PhoenixAsh]

It is not about gains.

It is about a disruption of capital and it is about growing re-sentiment. Every revolutionary movement starts with demands for reform and from reformism. From the French to the Russian not one single revolution started out from a revolutionary consciousness. It started with reform movements.

And that small crisis we are in has lasted for 7 years now.

[Sewer Socialist]

What is actually starting though? Sure, an anti-austerity movement, but realistically for an anti-capitalist what is that? It's a reformation of capital, and whatever gains made will be ultimately hollow as there is an infinity of ways for capital to fight it. Furthermore I'd be willing to bet that the small "crisis" we are in now has more to due with the reformations of capital that got us here and were systematically manufactured by capital, which in turn creates no actual crisis for capital.

You think the capitalists want a recession?

I think most here would say the restructuring is only happening as necessary for capitalism to continue despite crisis; the crisis being the result of the inability to overcome the debts required to buy off the creditors' debts of the last recession and the overproduction required by manufacturing to pay off their debts to the creditors. I would agree with that assessment.

You see this "crisis" as manufactured as in planned by capitalists? To what end? Why wouldn't the capitalists be happy to watch profits soar amidst relatively happy workers? What opportunity does recession provide capitalists they could not otherwise achieve? You say restructuring, but if restructuring is not necessary to avoid recession, what purpose might it serve?

[cyu]

It occurs to me that questions like whether to stay or leave the EU, is rather like questions about whether to stay or leave the UK or Spain. Sure it can result in political change, but the issues are mostly orthogonal to the concerns of the working class. The question of capitalism itself is danced around and avoided, and it merely becomes a question of replacing local capitalists with remote capitalists, or vice versa.

[Thirsty Crow]

A couple of rather quick points:

1) You seem to be of the opinion that SYRIZA either represents a platform for radical working class action ("not even have a platform for existing") or that it participates in some kind of a constitution of such a platform. Another interpretation is that SYRIZA represents a platform for the "Left" to exist.

Both counts are incorrect. In Greece, and let's put aside what we think of KKE, there is a long history of such a platform (and also put aside the effectiveness of this) in precisely this party, and also other organizations. The former point is also incorrect in that I don't even think SYRIZA ever acted as any such platform; in my view, it's more accurate to view the party as rising due to the demise of both mass social movements and massive working class action. In that I agree with TPTG (will link relevant articles later).

2) I also think that it is either a clear tendency for SYRIZA to constitute a particular capitalist management party; not only that - they're doing it. As we speak. I'll clarify why I think this is relevant in another point. And this is so irrespective of the European South and marginal EU states being caught in this momentum of a "new social democracy". But in any case, if this "New New Deal" in Europe is to have even a thin veener of viability, international outspread, and especially that centered on European institutions, is necessary (not desirable, not potentially good - it's vital).

3) About marginal and central European states - while I'm inclined to agree that any such political party might be very hard to spring up in Germany, I'm not sure if this has to be declared impossible. I don't think the US needs to be discussed within this thread to be honest, but yeah I'm inclined to agree on that as well.

4) I don't know what you mean by conceptualizing this in terms of the degree of financial capital concentration so maybe you could expand on that.

5) In relation to point 1 and 2 - and this is crucial - I'm not convinced for a minute that any such political formation such as SYRIZA can in the long term act as a force to facilitate radical working class action and massive organizing along class lines. SYRIZA probably can't be supplemented by such action - but it would need to be demolished, nothing more and nothing less. The reason for this claim is the clear fact that the party as a party of government will simply need to balance between keeping voter confidence (also a class basis) and international state and capitalists confidence. Connected to this, if and when a workers' party poses the question of forming government*, the political formation will tend to channel any class action into the electoral sphere. This is not a matter of bad politics or bad intentions - it's simply what they have to do in order to remain in control of things. And this negotiations' move was bold and it seems that it will pay off, but it is worth remembering that SYRIZA's goal is a compromise, on equal terms. In other words, they want the creditors to see the light. Which is only logical for a party in their position.

* and 6) This is no fear of "power", no "ideological purity". It might be considered such if tailing populists and social democrats is - ideological purity. But then again, I'd say it's a matter of a firm class line. Not to make it too personal - I know where I stand (not implying you don't). This is the first thing; the second is implications for communists' activity flowing from this. In this our case of Europe, there can be no question of temporary alliances which would force communists to silence both our criticism and our proposal for massive, revolutionary action. This is the ultimate horizon ("maximum program") which needs to be operative in the here-and-now. And if anything, a party like SYRIZA ought to be related to on a hostile basis of doing what Marx considered to be political action - widespread pressure through militant struggle so that SYRIZA is forced to do every goddamned thing the overall social-economic situation now allows for. But not as comrades - but as hostile class forces which are better suited to bow down to this pressure. But when push comes to shove - they'll in all probability need to be smashed as an organized political formation.

This last point is crucial. We can now see the results of SYRIZA's poltics in other countries; in Croatia, there's a tentative workers' party formation which has a strict electoral win-power platform. It can't do and won't do what some radicals within it thinks it can. And here it seems I'm in fundamental disagreement with you.


Better the possibility of being defeated in the first place, then to not even have a platform for existing at all. It is entirely possible that if Syriza succeeds in spreading a wave of a "new social democracy" across Europe, they will become another institutional part of capital. But it is easy to see that in the long term, any such victory is contingent upon a more radical pan-European working class movement to fail in the first place in securing power, for a "moderate" Syriza across Europe is simply not possible. In another thread, I pointed out how a Syriza in the United States or Germany is impossible precisely for this reason, and that electoral politics for executive power in both countries is futile (i.e. unless we're talking about DNZ's "crazy" ideas of spoilage, which I provide a defense of), while in Greece it can shift the balance of power that has implications for a whole pan-European working class, because the fundamental political basis of power in European capital is not in Greece. I conceived this in terms of degrees of concentration of finance capital.

Ultimately, Syriza will fail if it is not supplemented by a more radical working class movement, in the long term. If the bourgeois factions within these broad populist movements suppress any potential independent class based politics, this constitutes a failure among the leaders of the working class organizations.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Each recession so far has only strengthened the entrenched capitalists. Sure some get eaten up in the process but its not like solidarity is a trait capitalists are known for. Theres no reason to think that capitalists can somehow be bought off with a situation that keeps their profits intact while fulfilling the needs of workers, why should they care about workers? We've been flattened by our defeats, we don't represent a meaningful hurdle to growth at the moment.

I don't think individual capitalists are manufacturing recessions per se, only that as a class they have no unified opposition to them. What spells doom for some represents grand opportunity for others.

[The Intransigent Faction]

Can someone give me some insight into what the political climate in Greece is right now? Is there still of a lot of support for Syzria? I know there is a communist party and a fascist party that each hold a few seats. Are these parties growing in the face of recent events?

I have similar questions. What, exactly, do the referendum results reflect in terms of class consciousness? I've seen some sources suggesting that much of the opposition to the EU and its policies is rooted in an anti-Semitic, fascist view of "who controls the financial system". Using that as a reason to view all opponents of austerity with preemptive suspicion is obviously ridiculous, but the implications would be less optimistic than opposition to neoliberal politics as such based on a rising skepticism directed at capital.

[BIXX]

I have similar questions. What, exactly, do the referendum results reflect in terms of class consciousness? I've seen some sources suggesting that much of the opposition to the EU and its policies is rooted in an anti-Semitic, fascist view of "who controls the financial system". Using that as a reason to view all opponents of austerity with preemptive suspicion is obviously ridiculous, but the implications would be less optimistic than opposition to neoliberal politics as such based on a rising skepticism directed at capital.

I fail to see why we should be optimistic about either option tbh

[PhoenixAsh]

The last opinion polls I have seen date half June at which point SYRIZA had won about 27 seats more than the result of the January elections mostly at the expense of ND (-24), ANEL (-2) and PASOK (-1).

KKE was back at 15 after a short dip towards 13. Golden Dawn remained relatively stable at 17 after an initial dip in march back to 12 seats.

This is of course before the referendum so I have no idea how the political field is now...and I haven't found any polling for July yet.

[BIXX]

I have similar questions. What, exactly, do the referendum results reflect in terms of class consciousness? I've seen some sources suggesting that much of the opposition to the EU and its policies is rooted in an anti-Semitic, fascist view of "who controls the financial system". Using that as a reason to view all opponents of austerity with preemptive suspicion is obviously ridiculous, but the implications would be less optimistic than opposition to neoliberal politics as such based on a rising skepticism directed at capital.

I fail to see why we should be optimistic about either option tbh given what we know about capital it doesn't seem like we should be optimistic about anything within capitalism

[The Intransigent Faction]

I fail to see why we should be optimistic about either option tbh given what we know about capital it doesn't seem like we should be optimistic about anything within capitalism

No, but there's still less reason to be optimistic if the working class has and openly expresses fascist sympathies than if it doesn't. The point was that the fact of Greek workers opposing austerity measures is not enough information to judge the implications.

[BIXX]

No, but there's still less reason to be optimistic if the working class has and openly expresses fascist sympathies than if it doesn't. The point was that the fact of Greek workers opposing austerity measures is not enough information to judge the implications.

But I'm saying there is no reason to be optimistic ever.

This is why I think class unity (or any kind of unity, really) is bullshit. It is 100% of the time an attempt to homogenize people, creating a false narrative of struggle. On what basis, for example, am I to ally with the working class if 99.99999% hold stupid fucked up views, like fascism? Or even if not fascism, support capitalism? Why would any of that lead to ANY optimism?

there can be no realistic, unified class strugle, unless you want to remove any hope for autonomy, in the name of leftist communism (which, tbh, doesn't offers anything that seems particularly different than capitalism).

[The Intransigent Faction]

But I'm saying there is no reason to be optimistic ever.

Okay, so it doesn't make any difference to anything whether workers hold outright fascist views or not? You don't think more widespread support for, say, Golden Dawn, would be reason to be more pessimistic than if workers were increasingly openly critical of capitalism?


This is why I think class unity (or any kind of unity, really) is bullshit. It is 100% of the time an attempt to homogenize people, creating a false narrative of struggle. On what basis, for example, am I to ally with the working class if 99.99999% hold stupid fucked up views, like fascism? Or even if not fascism, support capitalism? Why would any of that lead to ANY optimism?

there can be no realistic, unified class strugle, unless you want to remove any hope for autonomy, in the name of leftist communism (which, tbh, doesn't offers anything that seems particularly different than capitalism).

Er, well, yeah, there is no basis for 'allying' with fascists or workers who support capitalism, which is why it's better if workers oppose fascism or capitalism as opposed to supporting it. As for class unity, good luck carrying out a revolution by yourself. Class struggle is not about "homogenizing" people. Each worker doesn't have to be the same in all respects for them to have common ground in opposing capitalism and even supporting a socialist alternative. In fact, if anything treats workers as some dehumanized homogenous mass, it's capitalism.

I'd say we should at least inform ourselves when possible of the degree of fascist sympathies among the working class. If you're telling me that you oppose class unity because workers are not homogenous, and because many workers hold reactionary views: Okay, what specifically do you know about Greek workers' rationale for opposition to austerity that might support this? That's the sort of information that I was originally asking about here, so if you have some insight then I'd appreciate it.

[Rafiq]

Both counts are incorrect. In Greece, and let's put aside what we think of KKE, there is a long history of such a platform (and also put aside the effectiveness of this) in precisely this party, and also other organizations. The former point is also incorrect in that I don't even think SYRIZA ever acted as any such platform; in my view, it's more accurate to view the party as rising due to the demise of both mass social movements and massive working class action. In that I agree with TPTG (will link relevant articles later).

My point is not so much that Syriza is a platform for independent working class action, but that the political possibility of it can be wrought out from the "populist" phenomnea that is Syriza. Interestingly, were class politics not largely forged from the onset of populist politics in the 19th century, as a break from them? Aside from this, while the KKE might have a large working-class base, that hardly constitutes it as a basis for independent working class action, and not to saw they're the same - but parties like the BNP are also composed of a large working class base, too. That does not change its class character. Likewise, the KKE knows exactly what it's doing, it is pursuing a Grexit and thereby divorcing the Greek working class from the possibility of aligning themselves with a pan-European movement, making them subservient to a Russian "anti-imperialist" coalition. This would, if anything, completely decimate the possibility of independent class based politics in Greece far more than the compromising nature of Syriza.

It is true that Syriza represents the demise of mas working class action, but when is the last time we've seen mass working class action? Largely in a previous capitalist epoch, one that proceeded present conditions. If we go on from here, we can easily see that this demise also represents the possibility of a rebirth, a necessary one too - it is for this reason that the KKE is a reactionary party, for to emulate rhetoric of a previous capitalist epoch is to fundamentally change its essential implications.


But in any case, if this "New New Deal" in Europe is to have even a thin veener of viability, international outspread, and especially that centered on European institutions, is necessary (not desirable, not potentially good - it's vital).


Well, yes - Syriza's victory hinges upon pan-European action, but this isn't possible with a Grexit, the inevitable alternatives to Syriza being the demand for one.


I don't know what you mean by conceptualizing this in terms of the degree of financial capital concentration so maybe you could expand on that.


Essentially, in states like Germany and the US, you can't simply have capital flight, because of the major concentrations of capital that are essential for their movement elsewhere. People in Europe can pull out their investments and so on from Greece, and their banks, but where would they go if this followed in, say, Germany?


But not as comrades - but as hostile class forces which are better suited to bow down to this pressure. But when push comes to shove - they'll in all probability need to be smashed as an organized political formation.


Very well, but you speak as though this militant, independent working class actually even exists. It doesn't, yet. Meaningful steps toward building it have not been taken for the past few decades. One cannot speak of an invisible working class movement - my point is largely that the political language, the political standards are in favor of the formation of such a movement with the rise of left-populist parties as Syriza. This is the way politics works - Syriza will and can never have a monopoly on what constitutes as "left alternative" because they're setting standards in place which are beyond them.


This last point is crucial. We can now see the results of SYRIZA's poltics in other countries; in Croatia, there's a tentative workers' party formation which has a strict electoral win-power platform. It can't do and won't do what some radicals within it thinks it can. And here it seems I'm in fundamental disagreement with you.


That is because the prerogatives of "some radicals" has blunderously failed in the past few decades, on a strategic level.

[Rafiq]

Basically, my point is very simple: any independent working class movement in Greece or elsewhere must pre-suppose the achievements of Syriza, "break off" from it, just as the Zimmerwald left wouldn't have been possible had it not been a part of, and therefore capable of breaking from - the second international.

[cyu]

you speak as though this militant, independent working class actually even exists.

There are two ways to build a movement. One method is structured like a pyramid, hierarchical, like traditional governments, corporations, and other organizations. Another is like a network or web - where there is no final authority. The pyramid structure is good for providing unity of action, uniformity of thought, and speed in delivering orders from those in charge. Disadvantage is that it stifles creativity, has less filters against bad ideas, and replaces parallel processing with single points of failure.