Click on the headline to link to the Boston Occupier Archives.
Markin comment:
Defend the Occupy movement! Hands Off All Occupy Protestors! Victory To The Greek Workers!
Showing posts with label victory to the greek workers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label victory to the greek workers. Show all posts
Saturday, June 23, 2012
Monday, June 18, 2012
Victory To The Greek Workers! Down With The EU!-For A Workers And Peasant Government In Greece!
Markin quick comment:
In light of the June 17th Greek elections the battlelines between revolution and counter-revolution are sharply posed:
Victory To The Greek Workers!-Build Workers Councils –Arm The Workers-Take The Power Now And Build Socialism! Later May Be Too Late- And Start Reading Lenin And Trotsky Like Crazy! They Knew How To Make A Revolution.For A Workers and Peasant Government!
In light of the June 17th Greek elections the battlelines between revolution and counter-revolution are sharply posed:
Victory To The Greek Workers!-Build Workers Councils –Arm The Workers-Take The Power Now And Build Socialism! Later May Be Too Late- And Start Reading Lenin And Trotsky Like Crazy! They Knew How To Make A Revolution.For A Workers and Peasant Government!
Trotskyist Group of Greece Says:Vote KKE! No Vote to Syriza!
5 June 2012
Trotskyist Group of Greece Says:Vote KKE! No Vote to Syriza!
The following is a translation of a leaflet being distributed by our comrades in Greece.
The Greek section of the International Communist League (Fourth Internationalist) calls on workers, minorities and all opponents of capitalist austerity to vote for the candidates of the Greek Communist Party (KKE) on June 17. The central issue for the working class in Greece today is rejection of the devastating attacks dictated by the troika [the European Union (EU), the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund] and imposed by the Greek bourgeoisie. A massive vote to the KKE—which opposes the EU—would deliver a slap in the face to the imperialists and their Greek lackeys and could give a boost to the defensive battles of workers across Europe.
The KKE rightly stands against Syriza’s perspective of keeping “Greece in the EU and NATO and the capitalist relations of production untouched” (KKE Web site, “Between Two Tough Battles,” 23 May). Despite intense pressure for unity, the KKE has rejected Syriza’s appeal to form a “left” (bourgeois) government. Syriza stands in favor of the imperialist EU and the euro, while claiming it can “renegotiate” the austerity package. As proletarian internationalists, we oppose the imperialist EU on principle (as well as the single currency) as part of our perspective for the Socialist United States of Europe. A socialist society cannot be achieved within the borders of Greece alone.
The KKE correctly notes that the central force within Syriza, the “Coalition of the Left” (SYN), voted for the Maastricht Treaty of 1992, is a supporter of the EU and “joined the anti-communist campaign against the USSR” (“Between Two Tough Battles,” 23 May). Today, the pseudo-Trotskyist groups who also hailed counterrevolution in the Soviet Union—including the Socialist Workers Party (SEK) and Xekinima—place themselves to the right of the KKE, whom they denounce for rejecting Syriza’s call to join them in government. We say: Down with the EU! No vote to Syriza!
Our call for a vote to the KKE in this election is an application of the tactic of critical support outlined by Lenin in “Left-Wing” Communism—An Infantile Disorder in 1920. While supporting KKE candidates, we have fundamental differences of program. Our program is proletarian, revolutionary and internationalist. In contrast, the KKE panders to Greek nationalism, the chief obstacle to building a revolutionary party in Greece. Their perspective of “people power” liquidates the proletariat—the only class with the power to overthrow capitalism—into “the people” and obscures the class line, the central division in capitalist society. The KKE’s populism—expressed as “the people” against “the monopolies”—is counterposed to the class independence of the proletariat from the bourgeoisie.
The violent racist attacks on immigrants by rampaging mobs of Chrysi Avgi (Golden Dawn) fascists pose the urgent need to mobilize contingents of workers to defend immigrants and to sweep the fascist vermin off the streets. The KKE has the social weight in the trade unions to do this, but its nationalist populism is a barrier to it. Rather than mobilizing workers and immigrants against Golden Dawn, which represents a threat to the whole of the organized working class, the KKE appeals for votes from among the same backward layers of the population who voted for the fascist scum, demanding: “The working people who voted for Golden Dawn must correct their vote” (KKE Press Office statement, 2 June).
The KKE admits that: “During the 1950’s and 1980’s, the KKE formed ‘left’ alliances” and claims that it “has drawn valuable conclusions from its experience regarding the policy of alliances and it does not intend to repeat similar mistakes” (“Between Two Tough Battles,” 23 May). These were not mistakes but betrayals that flow from their Stalinist program. Despite the KKE’s refusal to participate in a coalition government at the present time, they have not broken politically with the program that led them to join bourgeois governments in the past.
Our international tendency actively fought, to the limit of our resources, for defense of the Soviet Union against counterrevolution. We also stood for a proletarian political revolution against the Stalinist bureaucracy, whose politics of “socialism in one country” and of “peaceful coexistence” with imperialism undermined the defense of the USSR and ultimately led to the triumph of counterrevolution in 1991-92, a defeat for the world’s working masses.
With this call to vote for the KKE we are mass-distributing the article, “Banks Starve Greek Working People” [Workers Vanguard No. 1002, 11 May], to introduce to a wider audience our broader political views. We seek to coalesce into a political formation those forces who agree with the politics expressed there.
—5 June 2012
Trotskyist Group of Greece Says:Vote KKE! No Vote to Syriza!
The following is a translation of a leaflet being distributed by our comrades in Greece.
The Greek section of the International Communist League (Fourth Internationalist) calls on workers, minorities and all opponents of capitalist austerity to vote for the candidates of the Greek Communist Party (KKE) on June 17. The central issue for the working class in Greece today is rejection of the devastating attacks dictated by the troika [the European Union (EU), the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund] and imposed by the Greek bourgeoisie. A massive vote to the KKE—which opposes the EU—would deliver a slap in the face to the imperialists and their Greek lackeys and could give a boost to the defensive battles of workers across Europe.
The KKE rightly stands against Syriza’s perspective of keeping “Greece in the EU and NATO and the capitalist relations of production untouched” (KKE Web site, “Between Two Tough Battles,” 23 May). Despite intense pressure for unity, the KKE has rejected Syriza’s appeal to form a “left” (bourgeois) government. Syriza stands in favor of the imperialist EU and the euro, while claiming it can “renegotiate” the austerity package. As proletarian internationalists, we oppose the imperialist EU on principle (as well as the single currency) as part of our perspective for the Socialist United States of Europe. A socialist society cannot be achieved within the borders of Greece alone.
The KKE correctly notes that the central force within Syriza, the “Coalition of the Left” (SYN), voted for the Maastricht Treaty of 1992, is a supporter of the EU and “joined the anti-communist campaign against the USSR” (“Between Two Tough Battles,” 23 May). Today, the pseudo-Trotskyist groups who also hailed counterrevolution in the Soviet Union—including the Socialist Workers Party (SEK) and Xekinima—place themselves to the right of the KKE, whom they denounce for rejecting Syriza’s call to join them in government. We say: Down with the EU! No vote to Syriza!
Our call for a vote to the KKE in this election is an application of the tactic of critical support outlined by Lenin in “Left-Wing” Communism—An Infantile Disorder in 1920. While supporting KKE candidates, we have fundamental differences of program. Our program is proletarian, revolutionary and internationalist. In contrast, the KKE panders to Greek nationalism, the chief obstacle to building a revolutionary party in Greece. Their perspective of “people power” liquidates the proletariat—the only class with the power to overthrow capitalism—into “the people” and obscures the class line, the central division in capitalist society. The KKE’s populism—expressed as “the people” against “the monopolies”—is counterposed to the class independence of the proletariat from the bourgeoisie.
The violent racist attacks on immigrants by rampaging mobs of Chrysi Avgi (Golden Dawn) fascists pose the urgent need to mobilize contingents of workers to defend immigrants and to sweep the fascist vermin off the streets. The KKE has the social weight in the trade unions to do this, but its nationalist populism is a barrier to it. Rather than mobilizing workers and immigrants against Golden Dawn, which represents a threat to the whole of the organized working class, the KKE appeals for votes from among the same backward layers of the population who voted for the fascist scum, demanding: “The working people who voted for Golden Dawn must correct their vote” (KKE Press Office statement, 2 June).
The KKE admits that: “During the 1950’s and 1980’s, the KKE formed ‘left’ alliances” and claims that it “has drawn valuable conclusions from its experience regarding the policy of alliances and it does not intend to repeat similar mistakes” (“Between Two Tough Battles,” 23 May). These were not mistakes but betrayals that flow from their Stalinist program. Despite the KKE’s refusal to participate in a coalition government at the present time, they have not broken politically with the program that led them to join bourgeois governments in the past.
Our international tendency actively fought, to the limit of our resources, for defense of the Soviet Union against counterrevolution. We also stood for a proletarian political revolution against the Stalinist bureaucracy, whose politics of “socialism in one country” and of “peaceful coexistence” with imperialism undermined the defense of the USSR and ultimately led to the triumph of counterrevolution in 1991-92, a defeat for the world’s working masses.
With this call to vote for the KKE we are mass-distributing the article, “Banks Starve Greek Working People” [Workers Vanguard No. 1002, 11 May], to introduce to a wider audience our broader political views. We seek to coalesce into a political formation those forces who agree with the politics expressed there.
—5 June 2012
Η Τροτσκιστική Ομάδα Ελλάδας δηλώνει:Η Τροτσκιστική Ομάδα Ελλάδας δηλώνει:ΨΗΦΟ ΣΤΟ ΚΚΕ!ΚΑΜΙΑ ΨΗΦΟ ΣΤΟ ΣΥΡΙΖΑ!
Η Τροτσκιστική Ομάδα Ελλάδας δηλώνει:ΨΗΦΟ ΣΤΟ ΚΚΕ!ΚΑΜΙΑ ΨΗΦΟ ΣΤΟ ΣΥΡΙΖΑ!
5 Ιουνίου - Το ελληνικό τμήμα της Διεθνούς Κομμουνιστικής Ένωσης (4ο διεθνιστικής) καλεί τους
εργάτες, τις μειονότητες και όλους τους αντιπάλους της καπιταλιστικής λιτότητας να ψηφίσουν τους
υποψήφιους του ΚΚΕ στις 17 Ιουνίου. Το κύριο θέμα για την εργατική τάξη στην Ελλάδα σήμερα
είναι η απόρριψη των καταστροφικών επιθέσεων που προστάζει η τρόικα και επιβάλλονται από την
ελληνική αστική τάξη. Μία μαζική ψήφος στο ΚΚΕ – το οποίο εναντιώνεται στην ΕΕ – θα έδινε μια
γροθιά στο πρόσωπο των ιμπεριαλιστών και των Ελλήνων λακέδων τους και θα μπορούσε να δώσει
ώθηση στους αμυντικούς αγώνες των εργατών σε όλη την Ευρώπη.
Το ΚΚΕ ορθά στέκεται ενάντια στην προοπτική του ΣΥΡΙΖΑ να κρατήσει την «Ελλάδα στην
ΕΕ και στο ΝΑΤΟ και τις καπιταλιστικές σχέσεις παραγωγής άθικτες» (στην αγγλική διαδυκτιακή
σελίδα του ΚΚΕ, “Between two tough battles”, 23 Μαΐου). Παρά τις έντονες πιέσεις για ενότητα, το
ΚΚΕ έχει απορρίψει την έκκληση του ΣΥΡΙΖΑ για σχηματισμό μιας «αριστερής» (αστικής)
κυβέρνησης. Ο ΣΥΡΙΖΑ στέκεται υπέρ της ιμπεριαλιστικής ΕΕ και του ευρώ ενώ υποστηρίζει ότι
μπορεί να «επαναδιαπραγματευτεί» το πακέτο λιτότητας. Ως προλεταριακοί διεθνιστές,
εναντιωνόμαστε στην ιμπεριαλιστική ΕΕ από θέση αρχής (καθώς και στο κοινό νόμισμα) ως μέρος
της προοπτικής μας για τις Σοσιαλιστικές Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες της Ευρώπης. Μια σοσιαλιστική
κοινωνία δεν μπορεί να επιτευχθεί μόνο μέσα στα σύνορα της Ελλάδας.
Το ΚΚΕ σωστά τονίζει ότι η κεντρική δύναμη μέσα στον ΣΥΡΙΖΑ, ο «Συνασπισμός της
Αριστεράς» (ΣΥΝ), ψήφισε την συνθήκη του Μάαστριχτ το 1992, είναι υποστηριχτής της ΕΕ και
«συμμετείχε στην αντικομμουνιστική καμπάνια ενάντια στην ΕΣΣΔ» (“Between two tough battles”,
23 Μαΐου). Σήμερα, οι ψευδοτροτσκιστικές ομάδες οι οποίες επίσης χαιρέτησαν την αντεπανάσταση
στην Σοβιετική Ένωση – συμπεριλαμβανομένου του Σοσιαλιστικού Εργατικού Κόμματος (ΣΕΚ) και
του ΞΕΚΙΝΗΜΑΤΟΣ – τοποθετούν τον εαυτό τους στα δεξιά του ΚΚΕ, το οποίο καταγγέλουν για
την απόρριψη προς το κάλεσμα του ΣΥΡΙΖΑ να σχηματίσουν μαζί κυβέρνηση. Λέμε: Κάτω η ΕΕ! Όχι
ψήφο στο ΣΥΡΙΖΑ!
Το κάλεσμά μας για ψήφο στο ΚΚΕ σε αυτές τις εκλογές είναι μία εφαρμογή της τακτικής της
κριτικής υποστήριξης που περιέγραψε ο Λένιν στο Ο “Αριστερισμός”, Παιδική Αρρώστια του
Κομμουνισμού το 1920. Ενώ υποστηρίζουμε τους υποψήφιους του ΚΚΕ έχουμε θεμελιακές
προγραμματικές διαφορές. Το πρόγραμμά μας είναι προλεταριακό, επαναστατικό και διεθνιστικό. Σε
αντίθεση, το ΚΚΕ συνθηκολογεί με τον ελληνικό εθνικισμό, που είναι το κύριο εμπόδιο για το
χτίσιμο ενός επαναστατικού κόμματος στην Ελλάδα. Η προοπτική της «λαϊκής εξουσίας» διαλύει το
προλεταριάτο – την μόνη τάξη με τη δύναμη να ανατρέψει τον καπιταλισμό – σε «λαό» και θολώνει
την ταξική γραμμή, τη βασική διαίρεση στην καπιταλιστική κοινωνία. Ο λαϊκισμός του ΚΚΕ – που
εκφράζεται ως «ο λαός» ενάντια «στα μονοπώλια» - αντιτίθεται στην ταξική ανεξαρτησία του
προλεταριάτου από την αστική τάξη.
Οι βίαιες ρατσιστικές επιθέσεις σε μετανάστες από τις αφηνιασμένες φασιστικές συμμορίες της Χρυσής Αυγής θέτουν την άμεση ανάγκη για την κινητοποίηση εργατικών τμημάτων για να υπερασπιστούν τους μετανάστες και για να καθαρίσουν το φασιστικό δηλητήριο από τους δρόμους. Το ΚΚΕ έχει το κοινωνικό βάρος στα εργατικά σωματεία για να το κάνει, αλλά ο εθνικιστικός λαϊκισμός αποτελεί εμπόδιο σε αυτό. Αντί να κινητοποιήσει τους εργάτες και τους μετανάστες εναντίον της Χρυσής Αυγής, η οποία αντιπροσωπεύει μία απειλή σε ολόκληρη την οργανωμένη εργατική τάξη, το ΚΚΕ κάνει έκκληση για ψήφο στα ίδια καθυστερημένα στρώματα του πληθυσμού που ψήφισαν τα φασιστικά αποβράσματα, απαιτώντας: «Οι εργαζόμενοι που ψήφισαν την Χρυσή Αυγή πρέπει να διορθώσουν την ψήφο τους» (Σχόλιο του Γραφείου Τύπου για την επίθεση μελών της Χρυσής Αυγής εναντίον μεταναστών, 2 Ιουνίου).
Το ΚΚΕ παραδέχεται ότι: «Κατά την διάρκεια της δεκαετίας του 1950 και του 1980, το ΚΚΕ σχημάτισε “αριστερές συμμαχίες”» και υποστηρίζει ότι «έχει αντλήσει πολύτιμα συμπεράσματα από τις εμπειρίες του αναφορικά με την πολιτική των συμμαχιών και δεν προτίθεται να επαναλάβει παρόμοια λάθη» (“Between two tough battles”, 23 Μαΐου). Αυτά δεν ήταν λάθη αλλά προδοσίες που προέρχονται από το Σταλινικό τους πρόγραμμα. Παρά την άρνηση του ΚΚΕ να συμμετέχει σε μία κυβέρνηση συνασπισμού τώρα, δεν έχει σπάσει πολιτικά με το πρόγραμμα που το οδήγησε να συμμετέχει σε αστικές κυβερνήσεις στο παρελθόν.
Η διεθνής μας τάση πάλεψε ενεργά, στο όριο των δυνάμεών μας, για την υπεράσπιση της Σοβιετικής Ένωσης ενάντια στην αντεπανάσταση. Επίσης σταθήκαμε για μία προλεταριακή πολιτική επανάσταση ενάντια στην Σταλινική γραφειοκρατία, της οποίας οι πολιτικές του «σοσιαλισμού σε μία μόνη χώρα» και της «ειρηνικής συνύπαρξης» με τον ιμπεριαλισμό υπονόμευσαν την υπεράσπιση της ΕΣΣΔ και τελικά οδήγησαν στον θρίαμβο της αντεπανάστασης το 1991-92, μία ήττα για τις παγκόσμιες εργατικές μάζες.
Μαζί με αυτό το κάλεσμα για ψήφο στο ΚΚΕ διανέμουμε μαζικά το άρθρο «Οι Τράπεζες Ματώνουν τους Έλληνες Εργαζόμενους» για να εισάγουμε σε ένα μεγαλύτερο ακροατήριο τις ευρύτερες πολιτικές μας απόψεις. Αναζητούμε να ενώσουμε σε ένα πολιτικό σχηματισμό αυτές τις δυνάμεις που συμφωνούν με τις πολιτικές που εκφράζονται σε αυτό το άρθρο.
ΤΟΕ
5 Ιουνίου - Το ελληνικό τμήμα της Διεθνούς Κομμουνιστικής Ένωσης (4ο διεθνιστικής) καλεί τους
εργάτες, τις μειονότητες και όλους τους αντιπάλους της καπιταλιστικής λιτότητας να ψηφίσουν τους
υποψήφιους του ΚΚΕ στις 17 Ιουνίου. Το κύριο θέμα για την εργατική τάξη στην Ελλάδα σήμερα
είναι η απόρριψη των καταστροφικών επιθέσεων που προστάζει η τρόικα και επιβάλλονται από την
ελληνική αστική τάξη. Μία μαζική ψήφος στο ΚΚΕ – το οποίο εναντιώνεται στην ΕΕ – θα έδινε μια
γροθιά στο πρόσωπο των ιμπεριαλιστών και των Ελλήνων λακέδων τους και θα μπορούσε να δώσει
ώθηση στους αμυντικούς αγώνες των εργατών σε όλη την Ευρώπη.
Το ΚΚΕ ορθά στέκεται ενάντια στην προοπτική του ΣΥΡΙΖΑ να κρατήσει την «Ελλάδα στην
ΕΕ και στο ΝΑΤΟ και τις καπιταλιστικές σχέσεις παραγωγής άθικτες» (στην αγγλική διαδυκτιακή
σελίδα του ΚΚΕ, “Between two tough battles”, 23 Μαΐου). Παρά τις έντονες πιέσεις για ενότητα, το
ΚΚΕ έχει απορρίψει την έκκληση του ΣΥΡΙΖΑ για σχηματισμό μιας «αριστερής» (αστικής)
κυβέρνησης. Ο ΣΥΡΙΖΑ στέκεται υπέρ της ιμπεριαλιστικής ΕΕ και του ευρώ ενώ υποστηρίζει ότι
μπορεί να «επαναδιαπραγματευτεί» το πακέτο λιτότητας. Ως προλεταριακοί διεθνιστές,
εναντιωνόμαστε στην ιμπεριαλιστική ΕΕ από θέση αρχής (καθώς και στο κοινό νόμισμα) ως μέρος
της προοπτικής μας για τις Σοσιαλιστικές Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες της Ευρώπης. Μια σοσιαλιστική
κοινωνία δεν μπορεί να επιτευχθεί μόνο μέσα στα σύνορα της Ελλάδας.
Το ΚΚΕ σωστά τονίζει ότι η κεντρική δύναμη μέσα στον ΣΥΡΙΖΑ, ο «Συνασπισμός της
Αριστεράς» (ΣΥΝ), ψήφισε την συνθήκη του Μάαστριχτ το 1992, είναι υποστηριχτής της ΕΕ και
«συμμετείχε στην αντικομμουνιστική καμπάνια ενάντια στην ΕΣΣΔ» (“Between two tough battles”,
23 Μαΐου). Σήμερα, οι ψευδοτροτσκιστικές ομάδες οι οποίες επίσης χαιρέτησαν την αντεπανάσταση
στην Σοβιετική Ένωση – συμπεριλαμβανομένου του Σοσιαλιστικού Εργατικού Κόμματος (ΣΕΚ) και
του ΞΕΚΙΝΗΜΑΤΟΣ – τοποθετούν τον εαυτό τους στα δεξιά του ΚΚΕ, το οποίο καταγγέλουν για
την απόρριψη προς το κάλεσμα του ΣΥΡΙΖΑ να σχηματίσουν μαζί κυβέρνηση. Λέμε: Κάτω η ΕΕ! Όχι
ψήφο στο ΣΥΡΙΖΑ!
Το κάλεσμά μας για ψήφο στο ΚΚΕ σε αυτές τις εκλογές είναι μία εφαρμογή της τακτικής της
κριτικής υποστήριξης που περιέγραψε ο Λένιν στο Ο “Αριστερισμός”, Παιδική Αρρώστια του
Κομμουνισμού το 1920. Ενώ υποστηρίζουμε τους υποψήφιους του ΚΚΕ έχουμε θεμελιακές
προγραμματικές διαφορές. Το πρόγραμμά μας είναι προλεταριακό, επαναστατικό και διεθνιστικό. Σε
αντίθεση, το ΚΚΕ συνθηκολογεί με τον ελληνικό εθνικισμό, που είναι το κύριο εμπόδιο για το
χτίσιμο ενός επαναστατικού κόμματος στην Ελλάδα. Η προοπτική της «λαϊκής εξουσίας» διαλύει το
προλεταριάτο – την μόνη τάξη με τη δύναμη να ανατρέψει τον καπιταλισμό – σε «λαό» και θολώνει
την ταξική γραμμή, τη βασική διαίρεση στην καπιταλιστική κοινωνία. Ο λαϊκισμός του ΚΚΕ – που
εκφράζεται ως «ο λαός» ενάντια «στα μονοπώλια» - αντιτίθεται στην ταξική ανεξαρτησία του
προλεταριάτου από την αστική τάξη.
Οι βίαιες ρατσιστικές επιθέσεις σε μετανάστες από τις αφηνιασμένες φασιστικές συμμορίες της Χρυσής Αυγής θέτουν την άμεση ανάγκη για την κινητοποίηση εργατικών τμημάτων για να υπερασπιστούν τους μετανάστες και για να καθαρίσουν το φασιστικό δηλητήριο από τους δρόμους. Το ΚΚΕ έχει το κοινωνικό βάρος στα εργατικά σωματεία για να το κάνει, αλλά ο εθνικιστικός λαϊκισμός αποτελεί εμπόδιο σε αυτό. Αντί να κινητοποιήσει τους εργάτες και τους μετανάστες εναντίον της Χρυσής Αυγής, η οποία αντιπροσωπεύει μία απειλή σε ολόκληρη την οργανωμένη εργατική τάξη, το ΚΚΕ κάνει έκκληση για ψήφο στα ίδια καθυστερημένα στρώματα του πληθυσμού που ψήφισαν τα φασιστικά αποβράσματα, απαιτώντας: «Οι εργαζόμενοι που ψήφισαν την Χρυσή Αυγή πρέπει να διορθώσουν την ψήφο τους» (Σχόλιο του Γραφείου Τύπου για την επίθεση μελών της Χρυσής Αυγής εναντίον μεταναστών, 2 Ιουνίου).
Το ΚΚΕ παραδέχεται ότι: «Κατά την διάρκεια της δεκαετίας του 1950 και του 1980, το ΚΚΕ σχημάτισε “αριστερές συμμαχίες”» και υποστηρίζει ότι «έχει αντλήσει πολύτιμα συμπεράσματα από τις εμπειρίες του αναφορικά με την πολιτική των συμμαχιών και δεν προτίθεται να επαναλάβει παρόμοια λάθη» (“Between two tough battles”, 23 Μαΐου). Αυτά δεν ήταν λάθη αλλά προδοσίες που προέρχονται από το Σταλινικό τους πρόγραμμα. Παρά την άρνηση του ΚΚΕ να συμμετέχει σε μία κυβέρνηση συνασπισμού τώρα, δεν έχει σπάσει πολιτικά με το πρόγραμμα που το οδήγησε να συμμετέχει σε αστικές κυβερνήσεις στο παρελθόν.
Η διεθνής μας τάση πάλεψε ενεργά, στο όριο των δυνάμεών μας, για την υπεράσπιση της Σοβιετικής Ένωσης ενάντια στην αντεπανάσταση. Επίσης σταθήκαμε για μία προλεταριακή πολιτική επανάσταση ενάντια στην Σταλινική γραφειοκρατία, της οποίας οι πολιτικές του «σοσιαλισμού σε μία μόνη χώρα» και της «ειρηνικής συνύπαρξης» με τον ιμπεριαλισμό υπονόμευσαν την υπεράσπιση της ΕΣΣΔ και τελικά οδήγησαν στον θρίαμβο της αντεπανάστασης το 1991-92, μία ήττα για τις παγκόσμιες εργατικές μάζες.
Μαζί με αυτό το κάλεσμα για ψήφο στο ΚΚΕ διανέμουμε μαζικά το άρθρο «Οι Τράπεζες Ματώνουν τους Έλληνες Εργαζόμενους» για να εισάγουμε σε ένα μεγαλύτερο ακροατήριο τις ευρύτερες πολιτικές μας απόψεις. Αναζητούμε να ενώσουμε σε ένα πολιτικό σχηματισμό αυτές τις δυνάμεις που συμφωνούν με τις πολιτικές που εκφράζονται σε αυτό το άρθρο.
ΤΟΕ
Saturday, June 16, 2012
SYRIZA'S SPECTRE:THEIR STRUGGLE IS OUR STRUGGLE-VICTORY TO SYRIZA! NO TO AUSTERITY! MAKE THE 1% PAY!
SYRIZA'S SPECTRE:THEIR STRUGGLE IS OUR STRUGGLE
"Today, I want to hear a new song all around Europe, "all we are saying is give Greece a chance. " -Slavoj Zizek
The Nightmare that Capitalism has Wrought
For a generation, we have been told that history had ended. Capitalism and liberal democracy were proclaimed to be the only horizon for humanity. Our rulers told us that all dreams of a better world were just Utopian fancies. Capitalism, the system of supposed 'enlightened self-interest' was promised as able to provide for the benefit of all.
Then came the crash of 2008. Workers and poor people suffered the most. Millions in the United States, Europe and around the world have lost their jobs, facing abject misery as a result. Homes have been foreclosed while the homeless sleep in the streets. There is seemingly no future in an old world that was dying. The only solution is to 'give the market time' to figure it out.
One of the countries hardest hit by capitalism's crisis is Greece. The ruling class and its government has decided to turn Greece into a laboratory for austerity. For the past decade, the Greece wracked up debt from the banks and found itself unable to pay when the financial crash came. The resulting debt crisis has decimated the country's economy, shattered legitimacy in the government, and unleashed fierce struggles from the working class.
Greek and European banks were bailed out to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. In turn, the Greek government has slashed government spending, gutted wages and benefits to workers and imposed major tax increases on those least able to
The state and its representatives are fast losing legitimacy in Greece. The ruling parties, whether the conservative New Democracy or the "Socialist" Party have proven themselves to be able custodians of the ruling class while assaulting any who dare to resist.
The Greek people have valiantly fought back. They have staged general strike upon general strike. They have occupied spaces and raised the spectre of a new world from a dying nightmare. They imagine a world where there are no hungry people and the right to life is not subject to the whim of bankers. No bank bailouts. No exploitation. They demand a world where the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all. All of this is something the current system can not and will not grant.
The ruling class can no longer rule in the old way. Their parties have lost legitimacy and confidence among workers and the poor. On the elections of May 6, it was clear that a new force had emerged among the working class by name of SYRIZA. SYRIZA or the Coalition of the Radical Left (composed of socialists and revolutionary communists) came in second in the elections with more than 18% of the vote.
The elections of May 6 were supposed to form a government that would carry out more draconian austerity measures. Instead, the elections revealed the fracturing of.the rulers. New elections are scheduled for June 17 and SYRIZA is posed to win more than 30% of the vote. The potential exists for SYRIZAto take power.
The ruling classes of Greece, Europe and the United States urge the Greeks to reject SYRIZA. They cast SYRIZA as the harbinger of financial collapse which will plunge Greece into misery. Yet it is the ruling classes of the world and the system they protect which has bankrupted Greece and the world.
What does SYRIZA propose that is considered so extreme?
^ Raise income tax to 75% for all incomes over 500,000 euros.
^ Cut drastically military expenditures.
^ Use buildings of the government, banks and the Church for the homeless.
^ Nationalization of banks.
These are the planks of a program that will benefit the working class of Greece, not their rulers. Some in SYRIZA no doubt want to use this program to stabilize the system and restore rights taken away by austerity.
Yet it is becoming increasingly clear that capitalism cannot be reformed. Not only is the ruling class unable to govern in the old way, the people don't want to live in a world of bailouts and austerity. They have shed the illusions that history is over and are ready to blaze the way to a socialists future.
Even if SYRIZA wins in the elections, it is only the beginning. The ruling class may be bloodied , but it is far from beaten. SYRIZA in government would find itself confronting institutions like parliament, the army and police that have historically been used against the people.
From Wisconsin to Washington DC, the hard won benefits of workers on the chopping block while Wall Street grows richer. It is time to make our stand alongside the Greeks in their struggle because it is our struggle too. Their victories are the victories of workers everywhere.
VICTORY TO SYRIZA! NO TO AUSTERITY! MAKE THE 1% PAY!
"Today, I want to hear a new song all around Europe, "all we are saying is give Greece a chance. " -Slavoj Zizek
The Nightmare that Capitalism has Wrought
For a generation, we have been told that history had ended. Capitalism and liberal democracy were proclaimed to be the only horizon for humanity. Our rulers told us that all dreams of a better world were just Utopian fancies. Capitalism, the system of supposed 'enlightened self-interest' was promised as able to provide for the benefit of all.
Then came the crash of 2008. Workers and poor people suffered the most. Millions in the United States, Europe and around the world have lost their jobs, facing abject misery as a result. Homes have been foreclosed while the homeless sleep in the streets. There is seemingly no future in an old world that was dying. The only solution is to 'give the market time' to figure it out.
One of the countries hardest hit by capitalism's crisis is Greece. The ruling class and its government has decided to turn Greece into a laboratory for austerity. For the past decade, the Greece wracked up debt from the banks and found itself unable to pay when the financial crash came. The resulting debt crisis has decimated the country's economy, shattered legitimacy in the government, and unleashed fierce struggles from the working class.
Greek and European banks were bailed out to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. In turn, the Greek government has slashed government spending, gutted wages and benefits to workers and imposed major tax increases on those least able to
The state and its representatives are fast losing legitimacy in Greece. The ruling parties, whether the conservative New Democracy or the "Socialist" Party have proven themselves to be able custodians of the ruling class while assaulting any who dare to resist.
The Greek people have valiantly fought back. They have staged general strike upon general strike. They have occupied spaces and raised the spectre of a new world from a dying nightmare. They imagine a world where there are no hungry people and the right to life is not subject to the whim of bankers. No bank bailouts. No exploitation. They demand a world where the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all. All of this is something the current system can not and will not grant.
The ruling class can no longer rule in the old way. Their parties have lost legitimacy and confidence among workers and the poor. On the elections of May 6, it was clear that a new force had emerged among the working class by name of SYRIZA. SYRIZA or the Coalition of the Radical Left (composed of socialists and revolutionary communists) came in second in the elections with more than 18% of the vote.
The elections of May 6 were supposed to form a government that would carry out more draconian austerity measures. Instead, the elections revealed the fracturing of.the rulers. New elections are scheduled for June 17 and SYRIZA is posed to win more than 30% of the vote. The potential exists for SYRIZAto take power.
The ruling classes of Greece, Europe and the United States urge the Greeks to reject SYRIZA. They cast SYRIZA as the harbinger of financial collapse which will plunge Greece into misery. Yet it is the ruling classes of the world and the system they protect which has bankrupted Greece and the world.
What does SYRIZA propose that is considered so extreme?
^ Raise income tax to 75% for all incomes over 500,000 euros.
^ Cut drastically military expenditures.
^ Use buildings of the government, banks and the Church for the homeless.
^ Nationalization of banks.
These are the planks of a program that will benefit the working class of Greece, not their rulers. Some in SYRIZA no doubt want to use this program to stabilize the system and restore rights taken away by austerity.
Yet it is becoming increasingly clear that capitalism cannot be reformed. Not only is the ruling class unable to govern in the old way, the people don't want to live in a world of bailouts and austerity. They have shed the illusions that history is over and are ready to blaze the way to a socialists future.
Even if SYRIZA wins in the elections, it is only the beginning. The ruling class may be bloodied , but it is far from beaten. SYRIZA in government would find itself confronting institutions like parliament, the army and police that have historically been used against the people.
From Wisconsin to Washington DC, the hard won benefits of workers on the chopping block while Wall Street grows richer. It is time to make our stand alongside the Greeks in their struggle because it is our struggle too. Their victories are the victories of workers everywhere.
VICTORY TO SYRIZA! NO TO AUSTERITY! MAKE THE 1% PAY!
Monday, June 11, 2012
From The Lenin's Tomb Blog Via "The Boston Occupier"- The Upcoming Greek Elections And Syriza ( Union Of the Radical Left)
Greece: The Challenge of Syriza and the Radical Left
Richard SeymourJune 8, 20120
This post originally appeared on the author’s blog, Lenin’s Tomb.
The question of a workers’ government arises in Greece only because it has been raised in a certain form by Syriza, and only because they have come to hegemonise the left workers’ vote. Current (unofficial) polling seems to indicate they have up to 35% of the vote, though there is still a great deal of volatility, and some recent polls have even given New Democracy a very narrow lead. Nonetheless, with anything close 35% of the vote, they would be in a position to lead a government of the left. So, a great deal rests on why Syriza are in the position they’re in.
Explanations for Syriza’s success built on the insight that reformism is a first port of call for workers in struggle aren’t wrong, but they are rather complacent and general. Apart from anything else, Syriza aren’t classical reformists. Syriza comprises a coalition between a Eurocommunist bloc, Synaspismos, which has roots in a breakaway from the Communist Party (KKE) in 1968, and various Maoist and Trotskyist groups.The Eurocommunists are by far the dominant force, having comprised about 85% of the members before a rightist split in 2010, which I’ll come back to. But of course, they have their own internal differentiations, as Eurocommunism has always had its left and right currents, historically oscillating between centrism and reformism. The Maoist group, the Communist Organization of Greece (KOE), is the second largest organisation in the coalition. Alongside them are the Trotskyist group, the International Workers Left, and the Communist Left for Ecology and Renewal.
The trajectory and composition of these hetroclite elements are discussed by Stathis Kouvelakis here (original here). Essentially, we are talking about divisions, redivisions, and realignments within the communist and non-communist left, with the leading role taken by a Eurocommunist organisation with an orientation toward what used to be called the ‘new social movements’. Not a typical reformism, then, and certainly more akin at an ideological level to Die Linke than to traditional social democracy. Moreover, they’re far from the only reformist option for workers, a point we will return to.
A refinement of the same argument is that since Greeks are overwhelmingly opposed to the Memorandum, yet simultaneously opposed to withdrawal from the euro, it is logical that Syriza, which favours continued membership of the Eurozone on a reformed basis, should have benefited from PASOK’s collapse. Hence, workers are gravitating to a reformist solution that matches their ‘level of consciousness’.
Again, though more specific, this explanation is inadequate to the complexity of reality. Polls show that about half of Greeks oppose remaining in the euro if it means sticking with the measures contained in the Memorandum, and these voters are overwhelmingly concentrated in the base of the left parties, including more than two thirds of Syriza voters. In other words, their attitude to the EU is context-driven.
Syriza itself is not that simple either. As Kouvelakis has pointed out: 1) its position is that the EU can be internally reformed “but on the basis of denouncing all the existing European Treaties (Maastricht, Lisbon etc)”; 2) it contains other currents hostile to the EU, including significant Trotskyist and Maoist groups who comprise about 15% of the membership; 3) most importantly, its position on austerity is inconsistent with its pro-European stance, an ambiguity whose resolution will depend significantly on the continuation and outcome of struggles in which Syriza is partially embedded.
Recall, moreover, that it looked for a while as if a right-wing breakaway from Syriza, the Democratic Left (DIMAR) would be the main beneficiary. DIMAR represented the ‘Europeanist’ Ananeotiki wing of Synaspismos, the dominant Eurocommunist component of Syriza. It departed amid some grievance over the leftist direction in which the leadership of Alexis Tsipras was taking the coalition, and took with it the former leader of Syriza, four sitting MPs, and hundreds of members. It selected Fotis Kouvelis as its leader, and lauded its attitude of “responsibility and accountability” before the press.
Strictly in terms of its programme and its attitude to austerity, it was somewhere between Syriza and PASOK, and slightly to the right of the Greens with whom it shared enough to cooperate in the 2010 regional elections. After the May elections, Kouvelis even indicated that he would be willing to join a coalition government with some of the austerity parties if Syriza could be persuaded to join.
So, having thus launched itself as both a critic of austerity and a ‘responsible party of government’, at one stage it had 15% in the polls. That is not far short of what Syriza actually received in the recent parliamentary elections. There was no necessary reason, if what mattered was a pro-European anti-austerity stance, why Syriza should have overtaken them. Syriza haven’t just won people on their main programmatic points; they’ve won the trust of millions of workers and, at that, the most radicalised workers.
It is also true, but inadequate, to say that Syriza is the beneficiary of militant struggles including 17 general strikes, several mass demonstrations, workplace occupations, and the spread of rank and file organisation. Syriza has benefited from this, but it has not been as important to these struggles as the KKE, so it was not inevitable that it should do so. Likewise, that Syriza’s claim on the majority of the left workers’ vote is only a recent development, following from the formation of a PASOK-led coalition government, is true, but doesn’t itself explain why Syriza should have benefited.
There are, of course, many determining factors, but I would suggest that a key determination was Syriza raising the slogan of a left government to stop austerity. This immediately distinguished it from its two main left electoral rivals – the respectability-hugging DIMAR, and the sectier-than-thou KKE. This is why Syriza could win the election with about a third of the vote, much of which it coming at the expense of other left parties. The Communists (KKE) have lost the most, with their vote pushed down to about 5%. The anticapitalist left coalition ANTARSYA have also been squeezed, from 1.2% to about 0.5%. DIMAR appears to be relatively steady on 7.5%.
Of course, the KKE remains a powerful force in the workers’ movement, but it is suffering from its appallingly sectarian position. Not only does it refuse to work with Syriza, but in true Third Period fashion it actually denounces them far more than it does the Nazis or the parties of the Memorandum. Its combination of militancy and sectarianism is partially rooted in the antiquated and mortified analysis of ‘monopoly capitalism’, and partially in its view of its role as the vanguard party uniquely tasked with taking on the EU and the ‘monopolists’. At any rate, the KKE have decided to make the EU the main point of division when it is clear that for most left-wing Greek workers, that is not the main antagonism.
Possibly, the KKE will comfort themselves with the idea that their electoral perdition is temporary, that soon the ideological and political vapours giving rise to Syrizismo will dispel as the KKE edge out their left rivals and take the leadership of the workers’ movement. But their strong industrial position is not written in stone, and this isn’t just another election. The choice is between a New Democracy-led austerity government, which would be immensely demoralising, and a Syriza-led anti-austerity government, which would give the whole continental left a massive shot in the arm and open up a host of new possibilities. This is a key moment in which a great deal is condensed, which will be formative of a great deal of the political and ideological terrain for some time, and any formation that appears to bring the latter possibility closer isn’t helping the industrial struggle.
The best hope is that the KKE’s delegates will be persuaded to give a vote of confidence in a Syriza-led minority government, and support its measures from the opposition benches, even if they refuse to join it. But one still can’t be sure that they aren’t waiting for the chance to say, “first the Golden Dawn, then us”.
As for ANTARSYA, they are standing without illusions, expecting to incur a humiliatingly low vote. They intend to use the electoral platform to organise around and push for a programme of anticapitalist transition. You may say that it is unlikely that this programme will benefit from an electoral drubbing. You may add that since the main locus of their leadership is in the industrial and social struggles, since that is where they are a most serious force, this is probably where such a programme could be raised most effectively. And, going further, you might assert that in this election, with the stakes this high, the presence of ANTARSYA candidates is unlikely to add any new dynamic to the electoral contest, thus actually increasing the turnout among left voters. You may say that say none of the usual reasons for the far left running no-hope election campaigns apply, while unusual ones why they shouldn’t, do.
You may say all that. I couldn’t possibly comment, except to nod vigorously and say ‘well, yes, of course’.
Nonetheless, the majority of Greece’s left-wing workers will support Syriza in their attempt to form a left government. And that may be enough to give them a parliamentary majority, or at least a working minority government, which can then revoke the laws implementing the Memorandum. No small thing, this, if it happens.
Now, judging from online conversations and opinion pieces, a large section of the far left is waiting for the other shoe to drop. The narratives of betrayal are already being readied, the old verities being ‘proved’ repeatedly. There are many variations, but the core of it is that: 1) Syriza are straightforwardly reformists, notwithstanding the substantial revolutionary fringe – the tail does not wag the dog; 2) reformists are apt to compromise with the forces of capitalism, and as such a sell-out of the working class cannot be long following Syriza’s election. In its latest instantiation, this is expressed in the tutting, sighing, and fanning of armpits over Tsipras chatting up the G20. There it is: the betrayal is already afoot, the reformists already making deals with the bosses. Perhaps so, but thus far Syriza have not withdrawn from their fundamental commitments, which are: abrogate the Memorandum, and stop austerity measures. They did not do so when there was pressure to do so after the last election, and are not doing so now.
I would advise caution on this line of critique, therefore: it is very well to criticise what Syriza has actually said and done, but it isn’t necessary to second guess what Syriza will do. The point will be to support the mass movements capable of pressuring a Syriza-led government from the left. No, they are not a revolutionary formation; no, they won’t overthrow capitalism; no, their manifesto is not a communist manifesto. Yet it is just possible that Syriza won’t betray workers in the interests of European capital, and that all the stern augury will have been displacement activity.
Of course there is an unresolved tension at the heart of Syriza’s agenda. Of course they can’t break the austerity deadlock within the EU. But it is not inevitable that they will resolve it by capitulation. For what it’s worth, I think they know very well that the their policy will not be tolerable to the EU’s masters. I think the talk of Europe’s leaders not being willing to see Greece exit is a knowing bluff. Of course, the Merkozy consensus is weaker than before, and may well be weakened still by Spain’s ongoing crisis, or by another plunge in Italy. But one can’t envision at any stage the EU’s leadership allowing themselves to give in to a junior, peripheral EU state. Tsipras talks about Greece joining Europe as an equal and a partner – that is exactly what the EU’s leadership will never allow.
So, I think the Syriza strategy is simply to avoid being blamed for Greece being forced out, in view of the potentially apocalyptic consequences of doing so. This is perfectly understandable, even if it is a position that one could not admit from a marxist perspective, since it means basically fudging the problem that the quasi-colonial, class-structured hierarchies of the EU can possibly be reformed, but they cannot be reformed away. The latter is a problem that will return, even if a Syriza success is followed by a graceful default, and a ‘Grexit’ under the most benign circumstances, and it has to be faced.
Moreover, the strongest likelihood for a Syriza-led government is that it will be in perpetual crisis. It would be a spot-lit enclave, under constant assault from capital and the media. One could well imagine that the severity of the social crisis, and the pressure from European capital, would force splits in such a government and bring about its early downfall. On the other hand, there would also be a pressure, which should be resisted, on the rank and file to temper its criticisms, and curtail its actions, in order to help ‘our’ government as it came under capitalist attack. The best way to ‘save’ such a government from capital would be to keep up the pressure and organisation, but not everyone would see it this way. And even if Syriza would lack a sufficient basis in the leadership of the workers’ movement to effect a quietening of class struggle, it would have undoubted authority within the movement.
So, these divisions would not merely be in the party of government, but would exert effects throughout the resistance. The election of a Syriza-led government will be a nodal point, not the end point, in the process of workers finding a solution to the problem.
However, I suggest you should compare those antagonisms to the sorts of demoralising splits and recriminations that would likely follow from a New Democracy victory and the prolonged imposition of austerity. Relatively speaking, the crisis of a Syriza government would be a benevolent crisis. This is Syriza’s challenge: the good crisis, or the bad crisis? The first radical left government in Europe for a generation, in a situation more serious than any radical movement has faced since the Carnation Revolution, the further exacerbation of divisions in the European bourgeoisie, a step forward for the Greek and all European workers’ movements, and possibly a new and uncertain terrain? Or, terra firma, in permanent opposition and division, with our weaknesses and hesitancy constantly making up for those of the bourgeoisie?
************
Richard SeymourJune 8, 20120
This post originally appeared on the author’s blog, Lenin’s Tomb.
The question of a workers’ government arises in Greece only because it has been raised in a certain form by Syriza, and only because they have come to hegemonise the left workers’ vote. Current (unofficial) polling seems to indicate they have up to 35% of the vote, though there is still a great deal of volatility, and some recent polls have even given New Democracy a very narrow lead. Nonetheless, with anything close 35% of the vote, they would be in a position to lead a government of the left. So, a great deal rests on why Syriza are in the position they’re in.
Explanations for Syriza’s success built on the insight that reformism is a first port of call for workers in struggle aren’t wrong, but they are rather complacent and general. Apart from anything else, Syriza aren’t classical reformists. Syriza comprises a coalition between a Eurocommunist bloc, Synaspismos, which has roots in a breakaway from the Communist Party (KKE) in 1968, and various Maoist and Trotskyist groups.The Eurocommunists are by far the dominant force, having comprised about 85% of the members before a rightist split in 2010, which I’ll come back to. But of course, they have their own internal differentiations, as Eurocommunism has always had its left and right currents, historically oscillating between centrism and reformism. The Maoist group, the Communist Organization of Greece (KOE), is the second largest organisation in the coalition. Alongside them are the Trotskyist group, the International Workers Left, and the Communist Left for Ecology and Renewal.
The trajectory and composition of these hetroclite elements are discussed by Stathis Kouvelakis here (original here). Essentially, we are talking about divisions, redivisions, and realignments within the communist and non-communist left, with the leading role taken by a Eurocommunist organisation with an orientation toward what used to be called the ‘new social movements’. Not a typical reformism, then, and certainly more akin at an ideological level to Die Linke than to traditional social democracy. Moreover, they’re far from the only reformist option for workers, a point we will return to.
A refinement of the same argument is that since Greeks are overwhelmingly opposed to the Memorandum, yet simultaneously opposed to withdrawal from the euro, it is logical that Syriza, which favours continued membership of the Eurozone on a reformed basis, should have benefited from PASOK’s collapse. Hence, workers are gravitating to a reformist solution that matches their ‘level of consciousness’.
Again, though more specific, this explanation is inadequate to the complexity of reality. Polls show that about half of Greeks oppose remaining in the euro if it means sticking with the measures contained in the Memorandum, and these voters are overwhelmingly concentrated in the base of the left parties, including more than two thirds of Syriza voters. In other words, their attitude to the EU is context-driven.
Syriza itself is not that simple either. As Kouvelakis has pointed out: 1) its position is that the EU can be internally reformed “but on the basis of denouncing all the existing European Treaties (Maastricht, Lisbon etc)”; 2) it contains other currents hostile to the EU, including significant Trotskyist and Maoist groups who comprise about 15% of the membership; 3) most importantly, its position on austerity is inconsistent with its pro-European stance, an ambiguity whose resolution will depend significantly on the continuation and outcome of struggles in which Syriza is partially embedded.
Recall, moreover, that it looked for a while as if a right-wing breakaway from Syriza, the Democratic Left (DIMAR) would be the main beneficiary. DIMAR represented the ‘Europeanist’ Ananeotiki wing of Synaspismos, the dominant Eurocommunist component of Syriza. It departed amid some grievance over the leftist direction in which the leadership of Alexis Tsipras was taking the coalition, and took with it the former leader of Syriza, four sitting MPs, and hundreds of members. It selected Fotis Kouvelis as its leader, and lauded its attitude of “responsibility and accountability” before the press.
Strictly in terms of its programme and its attitude to austerity, it was somewhere between Syriza and PASOK, and slightly to the right of the Greens with whom it shared enough to cooperate in the 2010 regional elections. After the May elections, Kouvelis even indicated that he would be willing to join a coalition government with some of the austerity parties if Syriza could be persuaded to join.
So, having thus launched itself as both a critic of austerity and a ‘responsible party of government’, at one stage it had 15% in the polls. That is not far short of what Syriza actually received in the recent parliamentary elections. There was no necessary reason, if what mattered was a pro-European anti-austerity stance, why Syriza should have overtaken them. Syriza haven’t just won people on their main programmatic points; they’ve won the trust of millions of workers and, at that, the most radicalised workers.
It is also true, but inadequate, to say that Syriza is the beneficiary of militant struggles including 17 general strikes, several mass demonstrations, workplace occupations, and the spread of rank and file organisation. Syriza has benefited from this, but it has not been as important to these struggles as the KKE, so it was not inevitable that it should do so. Likewise, that Syriza’s claim on the majority of the left workers’ vote is only a recent development, following from the formation of a PASOK-led coalition government, is true, but doesn’t itself explain why Syriza should have benefited.
There are, of course, many determining factors, but I would suggest that a key determination was Syriza raising the slogan of a left government to stop austerity. This immediately distinguished it from its two main left electoral rivals – the respectability-hugging DIMAR, and the sectier-than-thou KKE. This is why Syriza could win the election with about a third of the vote, much of which it coming at the expense of other left parties. The Communists (KKE) have lost the most, with their vote pushed down to about 5%. The anticapitalist left coalition ANTARSYA have also been squeezed, from 1.2% to about 0.5%. DIMAR appears to be relatively steady on 7.5%.
Of course, the KKE remains a powerful force in the workers’ movement, but it is suffering from its appallingly sectarian position. Not only does it refuse to work with Syriza, but in true Third Period fashion it actually denounces them far more than it does the Nazis or the parties of the Memorandum. Its combination of militancy and sectarianism is partially rooted in the antiquated and mortified analysis of ‘monopoly capitalism’, and partially in its view of its role as the vanguard party uniquely tasked with taking on the EU and the ‘monopolists’. At any rate, the KKE have decided to make the EU the main point of division when it is clear that for most left-wing Greek workers, that is not the main antagonism.
Possibly, the KKE will comfort themselves with the idea that their electoral perdition is temporary, that soon the ideological and political vapours giving rise to Syrizismo will dispel as the KKE edge out their left rivals and take the leadership of the workers’ movement. But their strong industrial position is not written in stone, and this isn’t just another election. The choice is between a New Democracy-led austerity government, which would be immensely demoralising, and a Syriza-led anti-austerity government, which would give the whole continental left a massive shot in the arm and open up a host of new possibilities. This is a key moment in which a great deal is condensed, which will be formative of a great deal of the political and ideological terrain for some time, and any formation that appears to bring the latter possibility closer isn’t helping the industrial struggle.
The best hope is that the KKE’s delegates will be persuaded to give a vote of confidence in a Syriza-led minority government, and support its measures from the opposition benches, even if they refuse to join it. But one still can’t be sure that they aren’t waiting for the chance to say, “first the Golden Dawn, then us”.
As for ANTARSYA, they are standing without illusions, expecting to incur a humiliatingly low vote. They intend to use the electoral platform to organise around and push for a programme of anticapitalist transition. You may say that it is unlikely that this programme will benefit from an electoral drubbing. You may add that since the main locus of their leadership is in the industrial and social struggles, since that is where they are a most serious force, this is probably where such a programme could be raised most effectively. And, going further, you might assert that in this election, with the stakes this high, the presence of ANTARSYA candidates is unlikely to add any new dynamic to the electoral contest, thus actually increasing the turnout among left voters. You may say that say none of the usual reasons for the far left running no-hope election campaigns apply, while unusual ones why they shouldn’t, do.
You may say all that. I couldn’t possibly comment, except to nod vigorously and say ‘well, yes, of course’.
Nonetheless, the majority of Greece’s left-wing workers will support Syriza in their attempt to form a left government. And that may be enough to give them a parliamentary majority, or at least a working minority government, which can then revoke the laws implementing the Memorandum. No small thing, this, if it happens.
Now, judging from online conversations and opinion pieces, a large section of the far left is waiting for the other shoe to drop. The narratives of betrayal are already being readied, the old verities being ‘proved’ repeatedly. There are many variations, but the core of it is that: 1) Syriza are straightforwardly reformists, notwithstanding the substantial revolutionary fringe – the tail does not wag the dog; 2) reformists are apt to compromise with the forces of capitalism, and as such a sell-out of the working class cannot be long following Syriza’s election. In its latest instantiation, this is expressed in the tutting, sighing, and fanning of armpits over Tsipras chatting up the G20. There it is: the betrayal is already afoot, the reformists already making deals with the bosses. Perhaps so, but thus far Syriza have not withdrawn from their fundamental commitments, which are: abrogate the Memorandum, and stop austerity measures. They did not do so when there was pressure to do so after the last election, and are not doing so now.
I would advise caution on this line of critique, therefore: it is very well to criticise what Syriza has actually said and done, but it isn’t necessary to second guess what Syriza will do. The point will be to support the mass movements capable of pressuring a Syriza-led government from the left. No, they are not a revolutionary formation; no, they won’t overthrow capitalism; no, their manifesto is not a communist manifesto. Yet it is just possible that Syriza won’t betray workers in the interests of European capital, and that all the stern augury will have been displacement activity.
Of course there is an unresolved tension at the heart of Syriza’s agenda. Of course they can’t break the austerity deadlock within the EU. But it is not inevitable that they will resolve it by capitulation. For what it’s worth, I think they know very well that the their policy will not be tolerable to the EU’s masters. I think the talk of Europe’s leaders not being willing to see Greece exit is a knowing bluff. Of course, the Merkozy consensus is weaker than before, and may well be weakened still by Spain’s ongoing crisis, or by another plunge in Italy. But one can’t envision at any stage the EU’s leadership allowing themselves to give in to a junior, peripheral EU state. Tsipras talks about Greece joining Europe as an equal and a partner – that is exactly what the EU’s leadership will never allow.
So, I think the Syriza strategy is simply to avoid being blamed for Greece being forced out, in view of the potentially apocalyptic consequences of doing so. This is perfectly understandable, even if it is a position that one could not admit from a marxist perspective, since it means basically fudging the problem that the quasi-colonial, class-structured hierarchies of the EU can possibly be reformed, but they cannot be reformed away. The latter is a problem that will return, even if a Syriza success is followed by a graceful default, and a ‘Grexit’ under the most benign circumstances, and it has to be faced.
Moreover, the strongest likelihood for a Syriza-led government is that it will be in perpetual crisis. It would be a spot-lit enclave, under constant assault from capital and the media. One could well imagine that the severity of the social crisis, and the pressure from European capital, would force splits in such a government and bring about its early downfall. On the other hand, there would also be a pressure, which should be resisted, on the rank and file to temper its criticisms, and curtail its actions, in order to help ‘our’ government as it came under capitalist attack. The best way to ‘save’ such a government from capital would be to keep up the pressure and organisation, but not everyone would see it this way. And even if Syriza would lack a sufficient basis in the leadership of the workers’ movement to effect a quietening of class struggle, it would have undoubted authority within the movement.
So, these divisions would not merely be in the party of government, but would exert effects throughout the resistance. The election of a Syriza-led government will be a nodal point, not the end point, in the process of workers finding a solution to the problem.
However, I suggest you should compare those antagonisms to the sorts of demoralising splits and recriminations that would likely follow from a New Democracy victory and the prolonged imposition of austerity. Relatively speaking, the crisis of a Syriza government would be a benevolent crisis. This is Syriza’s challenge: the good crisis, or the bad crisis? The first radical left government in Europe for a generation, in a situation more serious than any radical movement has faced since the Carnation Revolution, the further exacerbation of divisions in the European bourgeoisie, a step forward for the Greek and all European workers’ movements, and possibly a new and uncertain terrain? Or, terra firma, in permanent opposition and division, with our weaknesses and hesitancy constantly making up for those of the bourgeoisie?
************
Sunday, June 10, 2012
From The International Marxist Tendency- Latest Polls Before Elections In Greece- The Pre-Revolutionary Upheaval Continues
As the June 16 elections in Greece are getting closer, the last opinion polls are being published. They reveal a number of interesting things.
First of all, the number of people who would vote for SYRIZA have increased massively in relation to the votes it received in the May 6 election, when it got 16.7% of the votes. Now all opinion polls consistently show the party getting between 25 and 31.5% of the votes (the highest figure being that of the last Public Issue poll for Kathimerini). This is despite the fact that there has been a massive campaign of intimidation, threats, blackmail and fear against the party by all representatives of the Greek and international bourgeoisie. The European Union, the European Central Bank, the IMF and prime ministers and finance ministers from many European countries, all have threatened that a victory for SYRIZA would mean the end of EU funding (which in any case goes to pay German and French banks), Greek exit from the euro-zone, economic chaos, etc.
Just to give you a taste of the tone of this campaign, here's a quote from the outgoing PASOK Minister of the Interior Michalis Chrysohoidis: "If Greece cannot meet its obligations and serve its debt the pain will be great. What will prevail are armed gangs with Kalashnikovs and which one has the greatest number of Kalashnikovs will count. We will end up in civil war." Despite all this SYRIZA's votes according to the opinion polls would still increase by between 60-100%, showing on the one hand the depth of opposition against the austerity policies imposed and on the other, the fact that now SYRIZA looks like a serious proposition with a chance of coming to power.
At the same time, the very parties who signed and voted for the terms of the Memorandum, including ND and PASOK, are now campaigning on the basis of ... their opposition to those austerity measures!
There is a parallel process of concentration of the right wing vote around New Democracy. The Democratic Alliance party which was formed a year ago as split off from ND and which received 2.5% of the votes in May, has now gone back into the fold of New Democracy. The Independent Greeks, a right wing, anti-Memorandum split off from New Democracy, has also lost votes (from 10% in May to 5-7% now) as a result of the fact that its leader was seen to betray the cause of opposition to the Memorandum. Extreme right wing LAOS, which only received 2.8% at the elections (crushed because of its support for the Papademos government) has further collapsed in the polls, down to between 0.4 to 1.7%). Opinion polls, conducted since the June elections were called, give ND between 25 and 29.4% of the votes.
Interestingly the openly neo-Nazi Golden Dawn has also seen half of its votes disappear, from 6.97% in the May elections to 4.4 - 5.4% now. This confirms what the Marxists said at the time that this was mainly a protest vote, which was occupying the ground LAOS had lost. An interesting GPO poll found that of the nearly 7 percent of Greeks who voted for Chrysi Avgi (Golden Dawn) in the May 6 polls, 60 percent did it as a protest vote, 29.3 percent did it "to get rid of illegal immigrants" while only 4.8 percent described themselves as far-right. We should not underestimate the threat which GD represents, as its core is composed of fascist gangs who have not hesitated in using violence against immigrants and left wing organisations. However, the vote it got in May does not represent its real base of support. The 4.8% of its voters which describe themselves as "far-right" would represent about 0.3% of the electorate.
In the camp of the left, the most significant thing is the collapse of the Communist Party (KKE), which is paying for the extremely sectarian policy of its leadership in rejecting the appeal from Syriza to form a government of the Left (graphically shown by Papariga's refusal to even meet Tsipras for discussions). While the KKE received 8.48% of the votes in the May elections, it is currently polling only between 5 and 5.7%. This would mean losing about 200,000 of the 536,000 votes it got in May.
So far, this has only had the effect of increasing the hysterical and sectarian attacks of the KKE leadership against Syriza, precisely the opposite of the tactic of United Front which Lenin advocated towards other workers' parties. In a speech yesterday, KKE general secretary Aleka Papariga concentrated in denouncing SYRIZA as a "new social democratic party" like PASOK, part of a general plot of the ruling class against the KKE. She event went as far as saying that while she did not subscribe to "conspiracy theories" and was not saying that there were any direct "links", she drew attention to the fact that "US media was giving wide coverage to SYRIZA" because it was in the interest of the US to break up the European Union (which is dominated by Germany) thus clearing the way for the US to move against Russia (!!).
As a side note, one of the opinion polls traced changes in voting and produced a very interesting diagram showing what percentage of other party's votes would be going to Syriza:
The graph shows how 24% of those who voted for the KKE in May would now vote for SYRIZA, which would also win votes from a few other parties. As a side note, despite the sectarian policy of ANTARSYA (a coalition of extreme-left sectarian groups) leadership of rejecting an appeal for unity from SYRIZA, 40% of its voters, with a healthy instinct, would vote SYRIZA.
It is still two weeks from the elections and many things can happen. In this situation, violent shifts in public opinion are intrinsic in the situation. The general trends however, are clear.
First of all, the number of people who would vote for SYRIZA have increased massively in relation to the votes it received in the May 6 election, when it got 16.7% of the votes. Now all opinion polls consistently show the party getting between 25 and 31.5% of the votes (the highest figure being that of the last Public Issue poll for Kathimerini). This is despite the fact that there has been a massive campaign of intimidation, threats, blackmail and fear against the party by all representatives of the Greek and international bourgeoisie. The European Union, the European Central Bank, the IMF and prime ministers and finance ministers from many European countries, all have threatened that a victory for SYRIZA would mean the end of EU funding (which in any case goes to pay German and French banks), Greek exit from the euro-zone, economic chaos, etc.
Just to give you a taste of the tone of this campaign, here's a quote from the outgoing PASOK Minister of the Interior Michalis Chrysohoidis: "If Greece cannot meet its obligations and serve its debt the pain will be great. What will prevail are armed gangs with Kalashnikovs and which one has the greatest number of Kalashnikovs will count. We will end up in civil war." Despite all this SYRIZA's votes according to the opinion polls would still increase by between 60-100%, showing on the one hand the depth of opposition against the austerity policies imposed and on the other, the fact that now SYRIZA looks like a serious proposition with a chance of coming to power.
At the same time, the very parties who signed and voted for the terms of the Memorandum, including ND and PASOK, are now campaigning on the basis of ... their opposition to those austerity measures!
There is a parallel process of concentration of the right wing vote around New Democracy. The Democratic Alliance party which was formed a year ago as split off from ND and which received 2.5% of the votes in May, has now gone back into the fold of New Democracy. The Independent Greeks, a right wing, anti-Memorandum split off from New Democracy, has also lost votes (from 10% in May to 5-7% now) as a result of the fact that its leader was seen to betray the cause of opposition to the Memorandum. Extreme right wing LAOS, which only received 2.8% at the elections (crushed because of its support for the Papademos government) has further collapsed in the polls, down to between 0.4 to 1.7%). Opinion polls, conducted since the June elections were called, give ND between 25 and 29.4% of the votes.
Interestingly the openly neo-Nazi Golden Dawn has also seen half of its votes disappear, from 6.97% in the May elections to 4.4 - 5.4% now. This confirms what the Marxists said at the time that this was mainly a protest vote, which was occupying the ground LAOS had lost. An interesting GPO poll found that of the nearly 7 percent of Greeks who voted for Chrysi Avgi (Golden Dawn) in the May 6 polls, 60 percent did it as a protest vote, 29.3 percent did it "to get rid of illegal immigrants" while only 4.8 percent described themselves as far-right. We should not underestimate the threat which GD represents, as its core is composed of fascist gangs who have not hesitated in using violence against immigrants and left wing organisations. However, the vote it got in May does not represent its real base of support. The 4.8% of its voters which describe themselves as "far-right" would represent about 0.3% of the electorate.
In the camp of the left, the most significant thing is the collapse of the Communist Party (KKE), which is paying for the extremely sectarian policy of its leadership in rejecting the appeal from Syriza to form a government of the Left (graphically shown by Papariga's refusal to even meet Tsipras for discussions). While the KKE received 8.48% of the votes in the May elections, it is currently polling only between 5 and 5.7%. This would mean losing about 200,000 of the 536,000 votes it got in May.
So far, this has only had the effect of increasing the hysterical and sectarian attacks of the KKE leadership against Syriza, precisely the opposite of the tactic of United Front which Lenin advocated towards other workers' parties. In a speech yesterday, KKE general secretary Aleka Papariga concentrated in denouncing SYRIZA as a "new social democratic party" like PASOK, part of a general plot of the ruling class against the KKE. She event went as far as saying that while she did not subscribe to "conspiracy theories" and was not saying that there were any direct "links", she drew attention to the fact that "US media was giving wide coverage to SYRIZA" because it was in the interest of the US to break up the European Union (which is dominated by Germany) thus clearing the way for the US to move against Russia (!!).
As a side note, one of the opinion polls traced changes in voting and produced a very interesting diagram showing what percentage of other party's votes would be going to Syriza:
The graph shows how 24% of those who voted for the KKE in May would now vote for SYRIZA, which would also win votes from a few other parties. As a side note, despite the sectarian policy of ANTARSYA (a coalition of extreme-left sectarian groups) leadership of rejecting an appeal for unity from SYRIZA, 40% of its voters, with a healthy instinct, would vote SYRIZA.
It is still two weeks from the elections and many things can happen. In this situation, violent shifts in public opinion are intrinsic in the situation. The general trends however, are clear.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
We Are All Greeks - Commentary via "Boston IndyMedia"
Click on the headline to link to a commentary via Boston IndyMedia on the recent events in Greece and the struggle ahead.
Markin commentary:
The Greek workers have shown incredible militancy. What they need is a party that is ready and willing to lead them to form workers councils and a struggle for state power. And quickly. Victory to the Greek workers!
Markin commentary:
The Greek workers have shown incredible militancy. What they need is a party that is ready and willing to lead them to form workers councils and a struggle for state power. And quickly. Victory to the Greek workers!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)