Leading ANTARSYA member’s views on the Greek elections
Posted by John, June 18th, 2012 - under ANTARSYA, Greece, SYRIZA.
ANTARSYA is a ”Front of the anticapitalist, revolutionary, communist left and radical ecology”. It was set up in 2009 by 10 organisations and independent militants. These organisations include radical ecologists, ex-Communist Party (KKE) and KKE Interior members, Maoists and Trotskyists and members of the Greek Socialist Workers’ Party (SEK). The SEK’s socialism from below politics stands in the same International Socialist tradition as mine. As, I should point out, do those of the Internationalist Workers’ Left or DEA which is a member of SYRIZA.
These are some personal notes by Panagiotis Sotiris. He is a member of the coordinating committee of ANTARSYA and they reflect aspects of the discussion within ANTARSYA, but it is not a statement from ANTARSYA. ANTARSYA is a front and there are different tendencies and they will issue their statement soon.
Greek elections reflect a polarized society. The Left takes more votes from youths, people in productive ages (18-44), employees, people living in poorer neighborhoods, people living in cities. The Right gets votes from older ages, more rural areas, affluent strata. On the one hand, this means that there is a dimension of civil war in current social contestation. On the other hand, it is evident that that the bases of a new ‘historical block’ are evident in the electoral result.
New democracy being the first party means that it is possible to have a pro-austerity government along the New Democracy – PASOK axis. However, it will not be a legitimized government. Even though it will start with the attempt to “renegotiate” the Memoranda , in the end it will be strong-armed into imposing austerity. This will lead to new social explosion. It is the responsibility of the movement to make sure that this government will face popular anger.
SYRIZA did not manage to take the first position. However, we still have an impressive result for the Left, the biggest total electoral presence in post-war elections. The reason SYRIZA lost is not because its political proposal was not realist enough. On the contrary the problem with SYRIZA was exactly that it ‘glided’ towards the ‘realism’ of renegotiating austerity. This meant that the tone and the stakes of the electoral debate was becoming more favorable to pro-austerity forces. SYRIZA did not manage to answer the ideological terrorism regarding a potential exit from the euro, exactly because it did not have a clear position against the euro.
The fact that the fascists maintain their electoral result is a reason for concern, especially if we take into consideration that people who voted for them now knew what they were voting for… Now it is the time to start fighting fascism: street by street, neighborhood by neighborhood.
The Communist Party, KKE, is facing the destructive results of its tactics and especially the undermining of popular unity. Let’s hope that we shall hear some form of self-criticism from the leadership of KKE.
ANTARSYA waged a difficult electoral battle. We knew from the beginning that many ANTARSYA voters would vote for SYRIZA. However, we chose, during the whole campaign, to avoid useless polemics and instead to focus on the question of the necessary left-wing program, beginning with the need to stop paying the debt and exit the euro and on to the need to form a United Front of struggle and solidarity. Now, we are facing the task of helping the movement and social mobilization that will eventually overthrow this government and open up new paths of hope.
The future lasts a long time and surely more than singular events. The protracted people’s war continues. With determination, unity in struggle and a radical program we can still win.
Advertisement
Comments
Comment from John
Time June 18, 2012 at 11:34 am
Well, I do think there are a lot of ‘interesting’ formulations in this document, including Maoist people’s war stuff. And I do think that ANTARSYA were wrong to continue to stand, rather than offer critical support. And I do think the comment may be an oversimplification and incorrect reading. But there was and is an ambiguity at the heart of SYRIZA about the Euro and the strategy at best of Grexit. It is one that SYRIZA sympathiser Richard Seymour for example recognises. And it seems to me your comment misses the important point from the article that the class struggle, the struggle on the ground, becomes the way to fight austerity for those workers wanting to resist. Voting SYRIZA now, or in the future, won’t stave off the immediate attacks. It is the role of revolutionaries to make that point and organise on the ground where they can around it.
Comment from Dr_Tad
Time June 18, 2012 at 2:20 pm
Corey, at no point has SYRIZA ever promised to *not* renegotiate austerity. They had a narrow position around the Memoranda, but have always maintained the need for “realistic” restructuring of the debt and of sharing the burden of this more fairly.
Anyone following the media coverage of the election campaign could notice that SYRIZA spokespeople became ever more intent on portraying the party as economically realistic the closer we got to polling day.
I don’t see why the second bit is controversial, either. SYRIZA accepted the idea that the outcome had to be inside the Euro, which — as John points out — creates an irresolvable tension in what they were arguing for. Their response to the quite reasonable claim that a rejection of austerity would lead in the direction of exit was merely to say, essentially, “no it won’t because nobody would really take it that far”. Read any Tsipras interview in the last few weeks and that’s what is said.
These are the facts. One can have an argument over what impact they had electorally or on the struggle more generally, but we need to acknowledge them honestly.
Comment from prianikoff
Time June 18, 2012 at 5:16 pm
But KKE and Antarsya were clearly against the Euro.
Yet KKE’s vote fell to 4.5% and Antarsya’s to only 0.33%.
This just shows their “Socialist Drachma” postion is completely bonkers.
Particularly as 80% of Greeks want to stay in the Eurozone, but to tear up the Memorandum.
If KKE and Antarsysa had treated Syriza as a Coalition, like the FdG in France, they might have actually won.
Comment from John
Time June 18, 2012 at 5:51 pm
It doesn’t show their position on the Euro was bonkers. it shows that the society polarised around two positions represented by ND and SYRIZA and they should have in my view thrown their support behind SYRIZA. The KKE was never going to do that given its history. I think ANTARSYA was wrong to stand.
Pingback from En Passant » Greece and Egypt: a tale of two elections
Time June 18, 2012 at 6:30 pm
[...] Government’s expansionary austerity may well provoke even further class struggle. As ANTARSYA has said (and ignoring if you can the Maoist [...]
Comment from ross
Time June 19, 2012 at 8:44 pm
Everyone side steps the core issue.It is the Central Bankers who have created this whole GFC on purpose to bring in their New World Order.
They own everyone of us who works for a living by virtue of creating from nothing the money to equal our toil.The game was always rigged.
Comment from Corey
Time June 18, 2012 at 10:08 am
“the problem with SYRIZA was exactly that it ‘glided’ towards the ‘realism’ of renegotiating austerity…SYRIZA did not manage to answer the ideological terrorism regarding a potential exit from the euro, exactly because it did not have a clear position against the euro.”
What rubbish.