THE GOVERNMENT OF THE OPPRESSED IN GREECE
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
 
Other articles
 

01 March 2015 / International Bulletin / No. 149


With its statements and demands Syriza that formed the government after early elections in Greece (on 25th January 2015) had been the centre of hope and courage of the Greek people, the working class and the labourer masses before the elections. The success of this party made progressive, revolutionary and communist forces all over the world happy. The electoral success of Syriza had been a strong fist against the Troika dictate consisting of IMF, EU and European Central Bank that turned Greece into an EU protectorate and against the compulsion for the interests of monopoly capital. The Troika that took the Greek people captive with its dictate and compulsions shows that it could do everything for the capital’s profit. Syriza’s electoral success shows that it could struggle against this and achieve some things although within the system.

 

This electoral success of the working class, labourers, in general of the oppressed in Greece is also the victory of all of us, the exploited, the oppressed and those fighting against hunger and poverty.

 

When looking at its members, the statements before the elections and its program, we can see that Syriza isn’t any bourgeois party, doesn’t have its origin in any social class and doesn’t act in line with the ideology  of this or that social class but consists of political structures and social classes of different ideologies. Syriza represents such a “new“ formation. Syriza represents the radical democracy or “left-wing” radicalism. In this sense it is a “post Marxist” party. We can see that when we look at the programme of Syriza. It’s a programme that doesn’t aim at going beyond the system and rejects to target the system. It aims at renewing the bourgeois system and in this sense it aims at finding a middle way in terms of profit between the masses and international monopoly capital. The social and economic rights in this programme, the abolition of privatisation and other points made the masses hope.

 

Syriza is the product of EU politics. It is the EU that turned Greece into a protectorate, plundered the country, abased the people and made them face hunger and poverty; Syriza is a direct result of the protest against this.

With the experience of Greece the EU wanted to create the model how to make the working class and labourers pay for the crisis. The experience of Greece was planned to be applied in countries such as Spain, Portugal and Italy. However, it didn’t work, the Greek people, the working class and broad labourer masses resisted, they fought on the streets.

 

Is Syriza the solution? Undoubtedly no. When negotiating with the Troika and EU, the Syriza government remained below its demands it had before the elections; none of its basic demands was accepted; the “credit help”  was extended for four more months, apart from agreeing on demands such as in the struggle against black money, corruption and tax dodging; the decrease of the number of ministers from 16 to 10, free medical treatment for 300 thousand poor families, cheaper fuel, free electricity and food, Syriza couldn’t resist the EU. Syriza moved away from its basic demands it had before the elections. Its aim before the elections was to free Greece from the current economic and social destruction. Now Syriza tries to reach this aim through collaborating with the EU, but is undoubtedly that this will be anything but not the liberation for Greece.

 

The electoral success of Syriza will help “social Europe” to speed up. This will be a struggle against the enforcements of the EU although not aiming at the EU directly. Now, it’s Spain’s turn. Although being founded only 10 months ago, Podemos (tn: “We can”) has become the first party in the polls and has the power to form the government. Podemos is a “post-marxist” party representing radical democracy or “left-wing” radicalism regarding its class formation and demands. It is the party of the oppressed.

 

The main characteristic for distinguishing between post-marxist movements and parties from bourgeois parties that totally adapted to the system is staying within the current system and demanding a radical change and radical democracy. They demand to share “socially” and “fair”; they want to guide the economic crisis through the state. They represent social democracy and the ideas of Keynes in a “radical” format. The main difference from classic democratic parties is that they had been developed from Street movements and outside parliament. Broad masses went on the streets to fight outside parliament, and there is the struggle that corresponds to the radical statements: without there would be no Green Party in Germany neither Syriza in Greece or Podemos in Spain. In the next part of developments – when they become the government or part of the government- these parties will face the fact that broad masses are organised outside parliament and that they will have to carry their struggle within parliament. They have no other chance than defending the system. The Green Party in Germany is one example for this. And we can see that looking at Syriza who has been the government for only a month. And Podemos won’t be different when becoming the government. These formations are progressive but not revolutionary.  Apart from being revolutionary in its structure, there’s none of them being revolutionary in its demands. Their main understanding is not to affect the class structure of the system. Independently from their intentions and based on the pressure of the masses on the streets have made these parties become representatives of radical democracy until they become the government. However, once they are the government the way is open for integration into the system and openly defend it.

 
 

 

Archive

 

2020
January
2019
December November
October September
August July
June May
April March
February

 

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE OPPRESSED IN GREECE
fc Share on Twitter
 

01 March 2015 / International Bulletin / No. 149


With its statements and demands Syriza that formed the government after early elections in Greece (on 25th January 2015) had been the centre of hope and courage of the Greek people, the working class and the labourer masses before the elections. The success of this party made progressive, revolutionary and communist forces all over the world happy. The electoral success of Syriza had been a strong fist against the Troika dictate consisting of IMF, EU and European Central Bank that turned Greece into an EU protectorate and against the compulsion for the interests of monopoly capital. The Troika that took the Greek people captive with its dictate and compulsions shows that it could do everything for the capital’s profit. Syriza’s electoral success shows that it could struggle against this and achieve some things although within the system.

 

This electoral success of the working class, labourers, in general of the oppressed in Greece is also the victory of all of us, the exploited, the oppressed and those fighting against hunger and poverty.

 

When looking at its members, the statements before the elections and its program, we can see that Syriza isn’t any bourgeois party, doesn’t have its origin in any social class and doesn’t act in line with the ideology  of this or that social class but consists of political structures and social classes of different ideologies. Syriza represents such a “new“ formation. Syriza represents the radical democracy or “left-wing” radicalism. In this sense it is a “post Marxist” party. We can see that when we look at the programme of Syriza. It’s a programme that doesn’t aim at going beyond the system and rejects to target the system. It aims at renewing the bourgeois system and in this sense it aims at finding a middle way in terms of profit between the masses and international monopoly capital. The social and economic rights in this programme, the abolition of privatisation and other points made the masses hope.

 

Syriza is the product of EU politics. It is the EU that turned Greece into a protectorate, plundered the country, abased the people and made them face hunger and poverty; Syriza is a direct result of the protest against this.

With the experience of Greece the EU wanted to create the model how to make the working class and labourers pay for the crisis. The experience of Greece was planned to be applied in countries such as Spain, Portugal and Italy. However, it didn’t work, the Greek people, the working class and broad labourer masses resisted, they fought on the streets.

 

Is Syriza the solution? Undoubtedly no. When negotiating with the Troika and EU, the Syriza government remained below its demands it had before the elections; none of its basic demands was accepted; the “credit help”  was extended for four more months, apart from agreeing on demands such as in the struggle against black money, corruption and tax dodging; the decrease of the number of ministers from 16 to 10, free medical treatment for 300 thousand poor families, cheaper fuel, free electricity and food, Syriza couldn’t resist the EU. Syriza moved away from its basic demands it had before the elections. Its aim before the elections was to free Greece from the current economic and social destruction. Now Syriza tries to reach this aim through collaborating with the EU, but is undoubtedly that this will be anything but not the liberation for Greece.

 

The electoral success of Syriza will help “social Europe” to speed up. This will be a struggle against the enforcements of the EU although not aiming at the EU directly. Now, it’s Spain’s turn. Although being founded only 10 months ago, Podemos (tn: “We can”) has become the first party in the polls and has the power to form the government. Podemos is a “post-marxist” party representing radical democracy or “left-wing” radicalism regarding its class formation and demands. It is the party of the oppressed.

 

The main characteristic for distinguishing between post-marxist movements and parties from bourgeois parties that totally adapted to the system is staying within the current system and demanding a radical change and radical democracy. They demand to share “socially” and “fair”; they want to guide the economic crisis through the state. They represent social democracy and the ideas of Keynes in a “radical” format. The main difference from classic democratic parties is that they had been developed from Street movements and outside parliament. Broad masses went on the streets to fight outside parliament, and there is the struggle that corresponds to the radical statements: without there would be no Green Party in Germany neither Syriza in Greece or Podemos in Spain. In the next part of developments – when they become the government or part of the government- these parties will face the fact that broad masses are organised outside parliament and that they will have to carry their struggle within parliament. They have no other chance than defending the system. The Green Party in Germany is one example for this. And we can see that looking at Syriza who has been the government for only a month. And Podemos won’t be different when becoming the government. These formations are progressive but not revolutionary.  Apart from being revolutionary in its structure, there’s none of them being revolutionary in its demands. Their main understanding is not to affect the class structure of the system. Independently from their intentions and based on the pressure of the masses on the streets have made these parties become representatives of radical democracy until they become the government. However, once they are the government the way is open for integration into the system and openly defend it.