Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis

[willowtooth]

What do you think of Yanis Varoufakis did he do a good job? Is he really a marxist? Do you support his decisions and his rhetoric? why did he quit?


In five months of being Greek Finance Minister, Yanis Varoufakis proved himself to be a tough negotiator who was not going to concede even a bit to Greece’s creditors, as well as a political ‘rock star’ who wins hearts and minds from atop his motorcycle.

Varoufakis never showed that he was ready to accept all the demands Greece creditors put towards the debt-stricken nation. He repeatedly refused bailout plan offered by the troika of international creditors, calling it “a committee built on rotten foundations.”

The self-declared "erratic Marxist" was apparently ready to mutilate himself rather than agree to current terms of bailout presented to Athens by its international creditors.

“I’d prefer to cut my arm off” than agree to current deal, he said in an interview to Bloomberg, adding that people of Greece are tired of “losing their dignity by signing agreements and making pledges that simply cannot be met. Because the financing is wrong.”http://rt.com/news/272008-varoufakis-coolest-finance-minister/

[Tim Cornelis]

He is a Marxist, but his reasons for joining the government are flawed. I don't know if he did a good job really.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

What do you think of Yanis Varoufakis did he do a good job?

His job was to manage one aspect the Greek bourgeois state. He seems to have done an adequate job, if nothing else, in that the Greek bourgeois state is still standing and sucking the life out of the workers of Greece in cooperation with the Greek and EU bourgeoisie.


Is he really a marxist?

No. He calls himself a Marxist, but basic Marxist analysis is entirely absent from his work. I can call myself the queen of Norway, that doesn't mean Norway will start paying my life expenses and give me a metal hat.


Do you support his decisions and his rhetoric?

I don't support anyone working together with a bourgeois government or rhetoric that supports working with a bourgeois government.


why did he quit?

To show the EU Tsipras doesn't really mean it when he rants and blusters about opposing austerity.

[PhoenixAsh]

Varoufakis represents the left of the moderate wing of SYRIZA. IMO he was placed there to placate the more radical wing in the party as well as antagonise negotiations with the EU because of his Marxist affiliations. In other words he served a specific strategic purpose.

As does his exit.

His continued presence would endanger a possible future deal on an alternative austerity package as the EU will need a concession to continue negotiations without losing too much face and have a means to say that the landscape has changed to justify their abandonment of the previous non compromising position.

And a deal is necessary if Greece wants to stay in the EU and maintain the Euro. And they do. And the EU does too.

A deal will benefit the bourgeoisie in Greece and will possibly and incidentally have some less negative side effects for the working class compared to the previous package. But it is aimed at the continuation of the current structure.

A Greek exit would spell disaster for some of the individual economies in the EU as well as for the EU politically. It would also be disastrous for the Greek bourgeois elite and could spark a revolutionary situation (either left or right wing) among the working class whose situation would be severely negatively impacted within the current economic situation.

[Tim Cornelis]

No. He calls himself a Marxist, but basic Marxist analysis is entirely absent from his work. I can call myself the queen of Norway, that doesn't mean Norway will start paying my life expenses and give me a metal hat.

If it's absent from his work isn't that because he uses neoclassical economics to disprove neoclassical economics? Also, what works are you talking about?

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

If it's absent from his work isn't that because he uses neoclassical economics to disprove neoclassical economics? Also, what works are you talking about?

I am directly familiar with his work around 2012, when he worked for Valve. But according to every overview I have read, he remained within the bounds of what might be called "bourgeois economics" by way of lazy shorthand. E.g. you're never going to see Varoufakis referring to the law of value etc.

[Tim Cornelis]

He himself says because he applies Marx's imminent criticism, so, he's pushing neoclassical (or bourgeois?) economics to its logical (and wrong) conclusions. So based on this it's possible, I think, that he's a Marxist, but describing him as a Marxist economist would be inaccurate because there's no Marxism (directly) in his economic works. His Marxism only exists in the background then.

Of course, I don't know the details of his Marxism.

[Islam Muslim Muhammad]

Varoufakis failed spectacularly. And then he got ignominiously sacked by Tsirpas to appease the troika. The end.

Tsirpas and Varoufakis campaigned on an anti-austerity, anti-EC/ECB/IMF memorandum platform. "We will tear up the memorandum", they said. Then they capitulated to the Troika almost immediately. The last half year the only thing they've been doing is negotiating the terms of their humiliating capitulation.

Varoufakis's long list of accomplishments as Minister of Finance:

- renaming the memorandum, now known as "the agreement"

- renaming the troika, now known as "the institutions"

- renaming the lenders, now known as "our partners"

..and that's it. He's clearly a genuine Marxist. Playing with words instead of doing something productive is the Western Marxist's forte.

I'd call him a traitor to the proletariat but how could he betray it when it's always been clear that he's a bourgeois parasite and that he doesn't have a single proletarian bone in his body? He's the son of Giorgos Varoufakis, a steel oligarch and PASOK aristocrat(no doubt nepotism is how Varoufakis secured his old job of advisor to George Papandreou). Spent half his life in prestigious private schools and universities(paid for by all the money his father looted from the Greek people), and the other half floating between academic positions and corporate contracts. The man lives in a lavish mansion with a view of the Parthenon from his balcony while bitterly complaining about the rapidly declining living standards in Greece for God's sake.

[Islam Muslim Muhammad]

He is a Marxist, but his reasons for joining the government are flawed. I don't know if he did a good job really.


He himself says because he applies Marx's imminent criticism, so, he's pushing neoclassical (or bourgeois?) economics to its logical (and wrong) conclusions. So based on this it's possible, I think, that he's a Marxist, but describing him as a Marxist economist would be inaccurate because there's no Marxism (directly) in his economic works. His Marxism only exists in the background then.

Of course, I don't know the details of his Marxism.

Ah, Varoufakis is a taqīyah-practicing Marxist. Thank you for that explanation Tim Cornelis, everything is clear now.

Do you know if Varoufakis the Keynesian has any other alter-egos besides Varoufakis the Marxist? Is he also Batman, "in the background"?

[khad]

He himself says because he applies Marx's imminent criticism, so, he's pushing neoclassical (or bourgeois?) economics to its logical (and wrong) conclusions. So based on this it's possible, I think, that he's a Marxist, but describing him as a Marxist economist would be inaccurate because there's no Marxism (directly) in his economic works. His Marxism only exists in the background then.

Of course, I don't know the details of his Marxism.
I don't believe he ever characterized himself as a Marxist. He treats Marx as one of a number of tools in his theoretical box. He draws as much from the keynesian school as the marxist:

http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2012/04/04/on-keynes-marx-and-the-value-of-models-at-a-time-of-crisis-a-reply-to-david-laibman/


The main point here is that Keynes rejects a standard assumption all his predecessors made, including Marx: that all profits are automatically re-invested. Keynes’ argument is that whether they are or not depends on average optimism; recall the little game that I used in the original post as an illustration of the importance of optimism. Marx left no room for optimism in his analysis. This is why crises, in his theory (e.g. Vol. 1 of Das Kapital), are redemptive: they generate misery but, also, they immediately start the process for the next recovery.

Why did Marx not consider the possibility that a recession, a crisis, can lead to a depression, a capital ‘c’ Crisis? Because, the answer is, he was in the business of, what David and I refer to, immanent criticism (see below for more). And what is immanent criticism? In brief, it is the following: You take the establishment theory, the dominant paradigm, and you refrain from criticising its basic presumptions. What you do is to show that, by its own criteria, on the basis of its own assumptions, the model (or theory) which the Establishment accepts as valid, produces ‘subversive’ results. Nothing upsets the Establishment more than to have something like this demonstrated; that its ‘favourite’ theory recommends views and policies which are detrimental to the Establishment’s own ideology.

In practical terms, what Marx did was to take the model of capitalism that had the most kudos in his time (i.e. the theories of Adam Smith ad David Ricardo) and show that, by their own criteria, and under the force of their own assumptions, even the most efficient, most competitive, corruption-free capitalism would, unavoidably generate crises. To show this, Marx strove to demonstrate that, even if all profits were automatically saved, capitalism would periodically fall in deep holes of its own making. This was quite an achievement; one with lasting value. For it alerts us to reasons why crises occur in capitalism; reasons that go well beyond the creation of (Austrian, Hayek-like) bubbles, of a depletion in optimism (negative animal spirits, as Keynesians might have called it), of over-indebtedness by governments, corporations etc.

And Keynes? Without ever having acknowledged Marx’s contribution, he instinctively understood something important about capitalism that Marx did not allow himself to dwell upon: that when capitalism digs a hole and then falls into it, it is perfectly capable of failing to climb out again. You see, the difference between Keynes and Marx was that Keynes believed in capitalism; he thought of it a little like Churchill thought of democracy (a terrible form of government but the best of all available alternatives). In fact, Keynes was eager to save capitalism from itself; to identify faults in its functioning and fix them so as to prevent crises from turning into implosions with the capacity to undermine its long term future.

Marx, on the other hand, had an agenda for transcending capitalism (socialism, he called the ‘next’, more developed, phase). For this reason, his analytical endeavours were all about concentrating on a utopian capitalism (one in which, for example, all profits are automatically invested) in order to show that, even in its utopian guise, capitalism is irrational, inefficient, unnatural, wasteful.

[Tim Cornelis]

A religious Marxist lamenting someone for not being a Marxist proper, that's rich (you're a "takfiri-Marxist" if you will). When Marx applied imminent critique to classical economics was he a practising "taqiyah"? No, because it served his critique of classical political economy. Varoufakis says that he showed, mathematically, that the models used in bourgeois economics do not show what bourgeois economists say they do. In other words, he refuted modern bourgeois economics, according to him that is. Although, perhaps to his fortune, the bourgeois economists didn't understand it and wrongly believed he was on their side, so he was hired as an academic at some institute, which they then regretted because they found out he wasn't. So he was open about his opposition, so no "taqiyah".

As for your attack of his family background, his career, and lifestyle, you do realise that the same basically applies to the co-founder of Marxism, Friedrich Engels? Sure, when the revolution comes we'll take his stuff, but that doesn't mean he isn't a Marxist.

Also, your throwing around of Islamic terms in secular discourse doesn't feel authentic.

@Khad

He does self-identify as Marxist. Here he explains why he advocates populat frontism, basically:


Europe is experiencing a slump that differs substantially from a ‘normal’ capitalist recession, of the type that is overcome through a wage squeeze which helps restore profitability. This secular, long-term slide toward asymmetrical depression and monetary disintegration puts radicals in a terrible dilemma: Should we use this once-in-a-century capitalist crisis as an opportunity to campaign for the dismantling of the European Union, given the latter’s enthusiastic acquiescence to the neoliberal policies and creed? Or should we accept that the Left is not ready for radical change and campaign instead for stabilising European capitalism? This paper argues that, however unappetising the latter proposition may sound in the ears of the radical thinker, it is the Left’s historical duty, at this particular juncture, to stabilise capitalism; to save European capitalism from itself and from the inane handlers of the Eurozone’s inevitable crisis. Drawing on personal experiences and his own intellectual journey, the author explains why Marx must remain central to our analysis of capitalism but also why we should remain ‘erratic’ in our Marxism. Furthermore, the paper explains why a Marxist analysis of both European capitalism and of the Left’s current condition compels us to work towards a broad coalition, even with right-wingers, the purpose of which ought to be the resolution of the Eurozone crisis and the stabilisation of the European Union. In short, the paper suggests that radicals should, in the context of Europe’s unfolding calamity, work toward minimising the human toil, reinforcing Europe’s public institutions and, therefore, buying time and space in which to develop a genuinely humanist alternative.

He also explains different stuff in the article, he mentions that there was no Marxism in his academic work, but that there's still a need for it, and whatnot.

http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2013/12/10/confessions-of-an-erratic-marxist-in-the-midst-of-a-repugnant-european-crisis/

[Comrade Jacob]

I for one am sad he has gone.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

He does self-identify as Marxist.

But that doesn't mean anything. Any number of people have self-identified as Marxists that no one else would consider Marxists.


He also explains different stuff in the article, he mentions that there was no Marxism in his academic work, but that there's still a need for it, and whatnot.

Does that sound coherent to you? Honestly? To me it's the same as a biologist saying there is no Darwinism in his academic work, but that he is a Darwinist. What does that mean? That he goes to bed thinking himself a Darwinist (or Marxist)?

[Tim Cornelis]

I'm not saying it means anything, it was in response to Khad's claim that he doesn't self-identify. I hope you're not going to start categorically misinterpreting things again. I started to like you, well, almost.

If I become a trade union bureaucrat I'd probably not be able to take my Marxism to work, or if I become a high school civics teacher, ditto. That doesn't mean I wouldn't be a Marxist. I wouldn't be a Marxist trade union bureaucrat, or a Marxist teacher, but I would be a Marxist -- and a teacher who is also a Marxist, or a trade union bureaucrat who is also a Marxist.

We'd have to begin with, what is a Marxist? Someone who upholds Marxism, who agrees with the Marxist method, historical materialism, Marxist analysis of the economy, blah, blah, blah etc. etc. Well then he probably is a Marxist isn't he? Because he upholds and agrees with Marxism.

What is a Marxist academic? An academic that applies Marxism to one or multiple academic fields. Then he isn't a Marxist academic.

Marxist, yes, Marxist academic or economist, no. Is it coherent? I dunno.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I was making a general comment about self-identification. I don't think you would deny that a lot of people on RL do put a lot of stock in how politicians self-identify. I didn't say you did, though. I quoted your post because it mentioned self-identification.

And again, it's not coherent. For someone to believe something, they have to act as if it were true, right? Someone who says they're not superstitious but avoids black cats is, in fact, superstitious. So the only way in which Varoufakis could be a Marxist is if he is a complete hypocrite and actually analyses the world in one way, but pretends to analyse it in another in order to get more money. I don't think there is any evidence for that, though.

[Alet]

I've read a speech by him, he considers himself as an 'erratic Marxist'. To be honest, his statements were really not Marxist. He said things like we had to develop a new economic system which definitely works before we try to realize socialism. Plus, I think he is a reformist / social democrat.

[Luís Henrique]

that doesn't mean Norway will start paying my life expenses and give me a metal hat.

Well, shame on Norway.

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

What do you think of Yanis Varoufakis did he do a good job? Is he really a marxist? Do you support his decisions and his rhetoric? why did he quit?

http://rt.com/news/272008-varoufakis-coolest-finance-minister/

Well, he is of course a Marxist. What "being a Marxist" means - including whether it is a good thing -, that's another discussion.

Did he do a good job? Well, it depends on what we think his job was. If it was to reach a deal with the EU, then he obviously failed. If it was to expose how the EU initiatives in the negotiation did not point toward a deal (or at least, not to a deal acceptable by the Greek population), then he seems to have achieved some degree of success.

I am not sure that he knew what his job was, either.

It seems that he didn't quit, but rather "was quitted". If so, it must have to do with different understandings of what his job was, or should be, between him and his boss.

Luís Henrique

[cyu]

Any revolutionary who believes in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man_theory is doomed to failure.

[Luís Henrique]

Does that sound coherent to you? Honestly? To me it's the same as a biologist saying there is no Darwinism in his academic work, but that he is a Darwinist. What does that mean? That he goes to bed thinking himself a Darwinist (or Marxist)?

It could mean that the specific area of research of our biologist isn't evolutionary biology; Darwinism is in the background, ie, he knows it is true, but his area of interest is, say, the physiology of celenterates as it is, not as it has evolved.

True, that is not a good analogy for the relations between Marxism and "economics" as a "science" (which look more like the relations between, uhhh, "Keplerianism" and astrology). But as I have said elsewhere, a Marxist striving to make money at the Forex market would have to rely on the "law" of supply and demand. (And leave Marxism "in the background", perhaps?)

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

Plus, I think he is a reformist / social democrat.

Isn't social democracy a form of degeneration peculiar to Marxism, though? Anarchists don't seem to degenerate into social democrats unless they go over to Marxism first (that isn't to say that anarchists do not degenerate, just that the forms of their degeneration are different).

Luís Henique

[Alet]

Isn't social democracy a form of degeneration peculiar to Marxism, though? Anarchists don't seem to degenerate into social democrats unless they go over to Marxism first (that isn't to say that anarchists do not degenerate, just that the forms of their degeneration are different).

Luís Henique

Maybe, I don't know. I just don't think that Varoufakis can be considered a Marxist.

[The Lizard]

He appears to be a very good man with honest intentions for the people from what I can tell.

[cyu]

Everyone is a good and honest man until intelligence agencies want to intentionally compromise your political reputation.

[hexaune]

Looks like they might be coming after him for setting up contingency plans in case they had to crash out of the euro:


With Greek banks operating under capital controls and the international standing of Athens damaged after months of acrimonious talks with creditors, largely overseen by Varoufakis, calls are also growing for the academic-turned-politician to be tried for high treason.

On Tuesday night, supreme court prosecutor Efterpi Koutzamani forwarded two suits filed against Varoufakis by private individuals to parliament – a move that could see the 300-seat House lifting his political immunity, the first step towards him standing trial.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jul/28/greek-crisis-brussels-rejects-yanis-varoufakist-claims-troika

[cyu]

High treason to the capitalist class ...which is the only class that matters, judging by the thought patterns of those pushing austerity :lol:

http://www.thequotepedia.com/images/02/the-medias-the-most-powerful-entity-on-earth-they-have-the-power-to-make-the-innocent-guilty-and-to-make-the-guilty-innocent-and-thats-power-malcolm-x.jpg

[Sibotic]

What do you think of Yanis Varoufakis did he do a good job? Is he really a marxist? Do you support his decisions and his rhetoric? why did he quit?

http://rt.com/news/272008-varoufakis-coolest-finance-minister/
Yanis Varoufakis' current form seems to be an alright person, and that was a clever Christ-figure reference. Referring to themselves, Yanis Varoufakis, as 'erratic' might be recognising certain issues with some of the economic work which they had previously associated themselves with, nonetheless his condemnation of certain 'financial' organisations as rotten in its foundations was both appropriate and accurate, and their evaluation of the deals offered to the people of Greece are also accurate of course. Overall, you'd say that that was alright on a certain level, they have issues of some magnitude but I suppose that their name is quite cool, hopefully things go onwards and upwards for Greece from now on.


Spent half his life in prestigious private schools and universities(paid for by all the money his father looted from the Greek people), and the other half floating between academic positions and corporate contracts. The man lives in a lavish mansion with a view of the _Parthenon_ from his balcony while bitterly complaining about the rapidly declining living standards in Greece for God's sake.
So why would that prevent them from complaining about the rapidly declining living standards of Greece or w/e, if they had an issue with this. Surely if such money had to be used or etc. that's as fair a use as any to compensate for having to live with awful people since they were fairly young, which is seemingly their situation.

[Faust Arp]

Der Spiegel: Yanis Varoufakis plans establishment of European Alliance

Former Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis plans the establishment of a European Alliance that will be comprised of representatives of various political currents, including Christian democrats from Berlin, German Der Spiegel writes.
The European Alliance will not be a party structure but a movement of all those with a European manner of thinking that wish to “revive” democracy in Europe.
The motives of the former finance minister in Athens are connected to the danger of power being assumed by “anti-Europeans”, such as French politician Marine Le Pen, for instance.

:rolleyes:

[Luís Henrique]

With Greek banks operating under capital controls and the international standing of Athens damaged after months of acrimonious talks with creditors, largely overseen by Varoufakis, calls are also growing for the academic-turned-politician to be tried for high treason.

Regardless of what we think of Varoufakis, I suppose it is obvious that such a move does not signal any good, and that it should be opposed by anyone interested in fostering the working class interests.

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

Former Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis plans the establishment of a European Alliance that will be comprised of representatives of various political currents, including Christian democrats from Berlin, German Der Spiegel writes.

Unless he is far more "erratic" than promised... it doesn't sound plausible. (And if he is, I don't see why the CDU would be interested, either.)

Luís Henrique

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Obviously we demand an end to political repression by the bourgeois state as a matter of fact, whether we're talking about Sendero Luminoso members imprisoned by Peru or anarchists imprisoned by Greece.

But to take up the cause of a bourgeois minister in isolation would be completely suicidal.

[Faust Arp]

Unless he is far more "erratic" than promised... it doesn't sound plausible. (And if he is, I don't see why the CDU would be interested, either.)

Luís Henrique

I do see it as plausible (and the CDU would definitely be interested), but also extremely reactionary. He's basically implicitely taking the Troika's side by creating this aberration, they're going to turn against the Greek working class in the same way as against the National Front and other right-wing eurosceptics, all in the name of preserving "European unity".