A - I n f o s
a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists
News in all languages
Last 40 posts (Homepage)
archives of old posts
The last 100 posts, according
The First Few Lines of The Last 10 posts in:
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours |
of past 30 days |
of 2002 |
of 2003 |
of 2004 |
of 2005 |
of 2006 |
of 2007 |
of 2008 |
of 2009 |
of 2010 |
of 2011 |
of 2012 |
of 2013 |
of 2014 |
of 2015 |
of 2016 |
Syndication Of A-Infos - including
RDF - How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups
(en) Greece, anarkismo.net: The strategy of flattery by Antonis Drakonakis (gr) [machine translation]
Mon, 28 Aug 2017 11:27:00 +0300
SYRIZA: The strategy of flattery and the end of the movements ---- Article by Antonis
Drakonakis, as can be read in the Political Review "Social Anarchism" of the Koursal
Publishing Houses. ---- SYRIZA: the strategy of flattery and the end of the movements ----
Party and electoral base ---- We are not social democrats[...]. Social democracy is
capitalism with a polite faculty. It is based on the same production relationships, in the
same system of values. The goal is not to abolish human exploitation by man, but to ease
class divisions to preserve the system, to consolidate monopoly and imperialist
capitalism. That is why the marginal changes promoted by social democracy, changes aimed
at concealing the contradictions and weaknesses of the system, are not steps towards
socialism, but rather measures to derail[...]. And something that should not be forgotten:
social-democratic experiments are feasible in the metropolitan centers of capitalism where
there are possibilities for 'kindly masks'. In dependent peripheral countries such as
Greece, Such margins do not exist. - Andreas Papandreou, 1975
At the same wavelength of the views that want SYRIZA to be the new PASOK, it would not be
absurd to wait for statements like that of Papandreou by Mr Tsipras' lips, nevertheless
that never happened. As much as a (tangled) minority of SYRIZA tries to spurn the word
"capitalism" (and therefore the anti-capitalist word) into the modern terminology of the
party, SYRIZA is trembling; instead, he prefers to talk about "neoliberalism" At the same
time that it officially deals with capital on the corridors of the Greek Industrialists
Association (BSE) corridors. Thus, SYRIZA's inability to articulate, albeit elementarily,
a serious anti-capitalist reason, proves that he fears to reach even the levels of
Papandreou's "revolutionary" rhetoric,
SYRIZA can not become the new PASOK, at least not at all levels, and not only because its
leader is scared to ideologically exaggerate his speech, as Mr. Papandreou did, but
because the former does not have the purse Of the second. Papandreou's social democracy, a
revolutionary and demagogic nature, was based on a state-run treasury to redeem the social
consciousness; it inspired the "hungry" crowds, replacing the books and social struggles.
Based on state money "gifts", generalized flattery, cheap patriotism, and falsified
radical speech, PASOK of '81 has been able to secure social consensus and, by extension,
the country's governance for a long time.
Correspondingly, with exactly the same recipe but without a drachma in the fund, SYRIZA
seeks to occupy the state apparatus. But even if he can inspire pre-election, he does not
have the "than" to hold his voters afterwards.
What SYRIZA does not understand or does not understand is that the gap between party and
voter, which characterizes each separate political structure such as a party - the lack of
an organic relationship between the body and society - is restored either by revolutionary
change or by money . In the case of an aspiring social democracy (PASOK '81, SYRIZA now),
the second one is supposed. As much as SYRIZA calls on its voters to actively support and
support the struggle for the rebirth of the country, this audience is still largely
electoral, so far away from the social struggles, separated from the Life and work and
alienated from the heteronomy of social reality. It can not, therefore, be transformed
from one day into another, into an active crowd, Inspired by the "radical" proposals of a
new sic political force, at a time when this power does not even have truly radical ideas
that could possibly have given rise to a movement but appeals for painless bites in the
body of a rising capitalism. The SYRIZE of 1,655,086 votes is neither a mind-boggling
movement; on the contrary, it could be described as an electoral "anti-movement".
If out of the 26% (June 2012) of SYRIZA, we deduct 4.5% of the period before 2012, there
is a 21.5% left, which is only a fairly acquired electoral commodity bought with flattery
and "stigmatizing". But on what basis do we unite? SYRIZA answers: a) national unity; b)
unity of the progressive forces of the place. The second may not be a matter of particular
concern, but as far as the first is concerned, it is interesting to stand for a moment and
consider the universality of the patriotic rhetoric in politics in Greece:
There were, of course, and (left) minorities[in Greece], who supported their own claims of
dominance in internationalist ideologies, but for that reason they could never have wider
influence - and whenever they exercised it was because Have adopted patriotic or national
Talking with members who have been in the party since the Coalition, we will hear that
Tsipras and the party executives obviously are not naive; they do not ideologically
support any national unity at the expense of a progressive-left social rally; but how else
can you get a government If you do not acquire an elementary, patriotic rhetoric? From
this, the central strategic pillar, on which the new SYRIZA was structured in all the
thematic fields: "all in the midst" and we see clearly, is clear.
After 26% time was pressing and the party found itself in front of two choices; or it
would maintain an autonomous left-wing profile, keeping distances from the center-left
dynasty or becoming the most "unruly" part of it, and thus a party of power . Of course,
he chose the second: the diminishing of political conflicts (ideology), the ideological
truce under the weight of the anti-monk slave (see flirting with Independent Greeks), the
formation of a government image (absorption of PASOK's "pure" , Statements of legality in
the EU and cheap patriotism with a young profile.
With these terpitias, a party that, until recently, expressed - indeed, a truly
progressive (and to that extent) part of Greek society (though with no internal rallying),
decided to express them all. It took the risk of building a political structure with
atrophic trunk and big head; a political struggle that attempts to engage in the same
body, governmental and kinematic profile; but we are not in Nicaragua of the Sandinista.
In short, what we want to demonstrate is that SYRIZA is based on a lean electoral base -
and rather there will remain - that will betray it at the first opportunity. This is
because, on the one hand, it does not come from any massive kinematic force (movement)
experienced on the road and social struggles, and because it does not have the possibility
to buy its electorate body (distribution of state money), by building a clientele A
mechanism - but PASOK - that can rally the base in the name of the "tampaker".
SYRIZA voters are a population of creditors who, as soon as they see their claims
collapse, will withdraw credit. The petty bourgeois impatience for change, based on denial
of personal involvement in the social struggle, is blind and witty; not interested in the
color of the Messiah, as long as it appears as a messiah and does not understand his
requests for patience; he wishes prosperity here and now, otherwise Changes ballot paper.
Electoral populations like these can not rally around a political body on the basis of
social solidarity and common ideals; initially, because they do not have, at least in
their revolutionary version, either of the two. Solidarity and the ideal, it does not have
either a class sign or a holistic, value-based question. The overwhelming majority of
parliamentary parties' voters perceive solidarity as charity and ideals as relativistic
This, of course, does not mean that the Greek people are not characterized by the element
of solidarity; it is simply that solidarity in the present form can not be ideologicalised
in the liberation direction. For all of this, we are of course not blaming the
responsibility solely on the voters themselves; on the contrary, we perceive the
alienating dynamics of the division of labor and the hegemonic mechanisms (Gramsci) with
which the capitalist state is mashing up the average human mind.
The snapping of a political force like SYRIZA with purely electoral terms strengthens the
dimension of party and voter; it makes it even more evident, the lack of an organic
relationship between SYRIZA and its electoral base. It is enough to look at Dawn's sales,
the number of his youth, the size of his blocks on the road, or, better yet, how easily he
mobilizes his world; and we recall that we are talking about a party of 1.5 million votes.
SYRIZA has little to do with the real dimension of social struggles (as in their
exaltation) and that is the dry truth. Apart from some active citizens participating in
the neighborhood assemblies of their neighborhood and some doctors, lawyers working in
social clinics and legal support groups (without of course underestimating the two),
SYRIZA does not have any remarkable experience or know-how , In the bottom-up construction
of social struggles; it is no coincidence that it has unlearned any idea and practice that
has developed within the anti-authoritarian space in recent years.
However, self-organization is not found in any internal process or party practice, at the
same time that the concept of social self-organization has become its flag, while the
violent and confrontational repertoires of Kerateas and Skouries are accepted in SYRIZA's
rhetoric When his press office condemns violence and claims to undermine social struggles.
Whoever has the slightest sense, understands that without the social antiquity and the
extreme forms of resistance of the inhabitants of Lavreotikos and Halkidiki, which drove
the struggle and made it known throughout Greece, these movements would have been
diminished. "The stones, the molotovs and the arson have no place in the popular
mobilizations, they have no effect and they stop the struggle" - yes,
In spite of the theoretical harassment and despite repeated attempts by SYRIZA to
ideologically control the newly emerging social movements, every effort fails miserably;
on the contrary, it proves to be able to draw spectacularly the political surplus of
cinematic action in general, of course in the context of the electoral , Perceptual
capacity of the average viewer.
The end of the movements
There were forces - mainly of the anarchist - within the movements, which in their effort
to impose their own perceptions and practices in the movements, ultra-ideologize and
over-politicize local struggles, creating the conditions for their de-isolation and
thereby undermining the successful outcome of these struggles. The political confrontation
with these perceptions and practices, which consider any association of structures of
direct and indirect democracy and any request addressed to the competent (governmental)
institutions, in the first place against the struggles, is decisive for the local
movements to continue to have a broad social dimension and To shape victory conditions.
When a left party, which has been nurtured for years in the opposition, is suddenly housed
in government seats, it faces a series of contradictions; one of them is its relation to
This contradiction arises from the very nature of the movements that, for the most part,
are directed at the authorities. In this regard, we are considering the case of radical
movements, with demands that are in line with the struggle of a left-wing political force
(eg, Squires, Keratea) and not, for example, a movement against the erection of mosques in
Being in the position of the government, SYRIZA is automatically transformed into a
receiver of the protest and the demands of a movement. Thus, by the propelling power of
kinematic action, it appears as a passive decision maker. It is, therefore, potentially in
the face of a remarkable existential issue: if it sparks or backs a movement that turns to
the government is like complaining to itself. If, again, it immediately meets the demands
of a movement, then it means that the movement stops automatically; it stops the kinematic
So is the question: how can a kinematic force, supposedly SYRIZA, be a detonator of
popular claims and movements when it takes over the reins of the state? How can a force
that stands solidly in the local movements be supported by the government? It would be at
least funny to see a SYRIZA government sending its executives next to the struggling
residents of a region to support their struggle as a means of pressure to the government.
So we answer quickly and clearly:
The government is in structural conflict with a movement regardless of whether it agrees
or disagrees with the content of his claims, because it already threatens to ontological
level; standing, ie, competitive in the very essence of the social movement that is
extra-institutional character. A government can only support a movement, except to unload
it - albeit through negotiation - and turn it into a non-kinematic pressure group.
There are no institutional "movements", ie cells of collective action and mobilization
within the institutional (government, state, administrative, etc.) field. The only
relationship of a movement with the institutions is either either a possible support of
its extra-institutional action by institutional actors (eg the mayor) or the
auxiliary-instrumental use of the institutional path (eg appeals to the Council of State).
The "movement," then, is and will remain an extra-institutional collective form of
struggle for the oppressed.
A government has two choices to a newly emerging movement; or to meet its demands or to
collide with it. There is no middle-class solution; either it collides with it, opens
another front, meets all or part of its demands, stops it altogether, or temporarily
Let's take a look at these options, against the backdrop of the mobilizations against the
Scourge mines. A possible SYRIZA government could not, of course, (if it wants to become a
surgeon) rather than turn against the claims of "El dorado gold" and block its work from
above, satisfying the demands of the mines movement. Obviously, this would automatically
mean the end of the struggle of the inhabitants of Halkidiki; the state (SYRIZA) would
receive the credit from the once-fought local society and everything would be solved
through the institutional path. Let us assume, now, that this tactic is continuing for
some time; let us suppose, for example, that SYRIZA manages to construct a government that
is corrupt and trustworthy in its "radical" profile, at least for the first time.
We would have the complete depreciation of kinematic action as a repertoire of action and,
at the same time, the establishment of a tactical, direct appeal to the government's
negotiating bodies on the part of the citizens. And now you will ask: but why should there
be movements if the government is condescending? Is kinematic action an end in itself?
Certainly, to the extent that it radicalizes and educates society in a culture of
resistance, militancy and self-organization; to the extent that the instinct of the
rebellion (Bakunin) keeps alive and impregnates a people with political
consciousness(the necessary other half of class consciousness Which, in their union,
give us revolutionary consciousness); to the extent, finally, that a people through the
kinematic action are accustomed to resisting, creating a tradition-this time-kinematic, a
"custom" of resistance.
Kinematic action and the instinct of the rebellion should not be treated as an occasion
but as proof of the vitality of a society; collective action and rebellion, that is,
demonstrate that a society is alive.Still, they keep the flame of the insurgency
outlook on the international level; they therefore maintain the internationalist dimension
of the social struggle and the project of social liberation. In contrast, for example, in
the struggling Scandinavian countries, collective action is moving at zero levels; the
social lull of the north can by no means say that it contributes in particular to the
prospect of creating a European or more international, Subversive movement. What can the
Netherlands or Denmark add to the struggle of rebels around the world?
Continuing our response, we would like to note that a period may be characterized by
government conscientiousness (eg probably the first SYRIZA governance period), but years
pass and one period succeeds the other. PASOK's early years of government were
characterized by a deep consensus on popular claims, but a few years later, the state
again showed its true form. Those who are willing to invest once more in his polite mask
will do so; the anarchists will continue to stare at the story and the truth.
In governing the left, movements will be promoted by the state as potential means of
struggle against the next government or, even worse, perhaps undermined by conservative
and ultra-right-opposing forces. Self-organized popular assemblies will be set up with the
blessing of the state, they will organize "public dialogues" and not mobilizations, and
they will not create any "Forbidden castle"; instead, they will meet in the councils'
halls and act as collective bodies Self-education on state propaganda.
What to do;
In the case that a left-wing government like SYRIZA follows a consensus-oriented strategy
(at least in the beginning), it means that radical kinematic action in Greece
automatically becomes a recession or even a permanent inhibition. A governmental strategy
of satisfaction and co-operation with the movements will automatically mean the
elimination of the movements in their generation or, even worse, their preventive
extinction before they even break out.
Self-organization, self-management and direct democracy will be linked to popular
consciousness with the state, and even in their most unpolluted, counter-revolutionary
form; the social revolutionary struggle will once again take a few steps backwards. The
state's conscious state of dynamism will be surrounded by a left-progressive-kimono cloak,
and any movement of state arbitrariness will be "charged" to the broader radical forces.
For all this and for thousands of other reasons, the position of the anarchists in a
possible SYRIZA government must be stable and immovable. No retreat, no consensus and no
tolerance to the state and its prospective managers. Self-organization, labor
self-management, social solidarity, and the class struggle against capital and its army
are not made with state funding and smiles in every direction but through struggles,
conflicts and deprivations; not within an eternal expectation of global Revolution, but
not the retreat of petty bourgeois impatience for a certain change.
Interview in the newspaper The News, 3.11.75 by Papandreou A., For a Socialist Society,
Athens, Ed. Ed., 1977, pp. 45-46.
Kondylis P., The Decline of Urban Culture, Athens, Themes, 2007, p. 31.
Looking at the SYRIZA model as a whole, we will find that it is quite different from
the well-known European left-wing forces of our day. It has little influence on the trade
union and its forces on the road do not exceed the dynamics of ANTARSYA. It is well off,
for example, from both the Spanish Left Coalition (IU) and the French Communist Party
(PCF), both of which have a strong presence in the trade union field. See, Izquierd Unida
(the largest power of the coalition is known since the time of the civilian Spanish
Communist Party - PCE) and Parti Communiste Francais. The trade unions close to the two
parties are CCOO (Comisiones Obreras) in Spain and CGT (Confederation Generale Du Travail)
in France, respectively.
Typically, before the arson on February 15, 2013, the issue was buried by the media,
while the solidarity marches in Athens and Thessaloniki (June 2012) numbered a few
hundred. Following the arson and dimensions of the issue, two massive solidarity trades
with thousands of people took place in Athens (12 March 2013) and Thessaloniki (9 March
2013). More than 10,000 people participated in the course of Thessaloniki.
Position papers of the 6th SYN Youth Congress, Chapter 2 - "City Movements and
Ecological Structures", http://archive-gr.com/page/1903877/2013-04-22/http://ww. .d = 714.
In this paragraph, SYN youth obviously confuses the anarchist space with the KKE (at least
as far as the first part is concerned). So if the abovementioned writing is not a product
of fallacy, we would please the youth to give us the example of a local struggle that was
alienated by the undermining dynamics of the anarchist space.
There are also social movements that do not necessarily address the authorities. In the
non-text, however, we refer to social movements with a political dimension, to what they
are turning to the authorities to meet their demands. See, Neveu E., The Sociology of
Social Movements, Athens, Savvas, 2010.
Bakunin M., Marxism, Freedom and State, at anthostoukakou.blogspot.gr/2012/07/1.html.
"[...]a people who, under any pretext, may suffer tyranny, necessarily lose finally the
savior's habit of rebellion, even the very instinct of the insurrection," Bakunin, to himself.
The competing political hangout "Inferno Castro" was an improvised site that served as
a center of struggle for the inhabitants of Keratea during the mobilizations against the
Related Link: http://koursal.wordpress.com
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-Infos Information Center