By John Pilger
An historic betrayal has consumed Greece. Having set aside the
mandate of the Greek electorate, the Syriza government has willfully
ignored last week’s landslide “No” vote and secretly agreed a raft of
repressive, impoverishing measures in return for a “bailout” that means
sinister foreign control and a warning to the world.
Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras has pushed through parliament a
proposal to cut at least 13 billion euros from the public purse – 4
billion euros more than the “austerity” figure rejected overwhelmingly
by the majority of the Greek population in a referendum on 5 July.
These reportedly include a 50 per cent increase in the cost of
healthcare for pensioners, almost 40 per cent of whom live in poverty;
deep cuts in public sector wages; the complete privatization of public
facilities such as airports and ports; a rise in value added tax to 23
per cent, now applied to the Greek islands where people struggle to eke
out a living. There is more to come.
“Anti-austerity party sweeps to stunning victory”, declared a Guardian
on January 25. “Radical leftists” the paper called Tsipras and his
impressively-educated comrades. They wore open neck shirts, and the
finance minister rode a motorbike and was described as a “rock star of
economics”. It was a façade. They were not radical in any sense of that
cliched label, neither were they “anti austerity”.
For six months Tsipras and the recently discarded finance minister,
Yanis Varoufakis, shuttled between Athens and Brussels, Berlin and the
other centres of European money power. Instead of social justice for
Greece, they achieved a new indebtedness, a deeper impoverishment that
would merely replace a systemic rottenness based on the theft of tax
revenue by the Greek super-wealthy – in accordance with European
“neo-liberal” values — and cheap, highly profitable loans from those now
seeking Greece’s scalp.
Greece’s debt, reports an audit by the Greek parliament, “is illegal,
illegitimate and odious”. Proportionally, it is less than 30 per cent
that of the debit of Germany, its major creditor. It is less than the
debt of European banks whose “bailout” in 2007-8 was barely
controversial and unpunished.
For a small country such as Greece, the euro is a colonial currency: a
tether to a capitalist ideology so extreme that even the Pope
pronounces it “intolerable” and “the dung of the devil”. The euro is to
Greece what the US dollar is to remote territories in the Pacific, whose
poverty and servility is guaranteed by their dependency.
In their travels to the court of the mighty in Brussels and Berlin,
Tsipras and Varoufakis presented themselves neither as radicals nor
“leftists” nor even honest social democrats, but as two slightly upstart
supplicants in their pleas and demands. Without underestimating the
hostility they faced, it is fair to say they displayed no political
courage. More than once, the Greek people found out about their “secret
austerity plans” in leaks to the media: such as a 30 June letter
published in the Financial Times
, in which Tsipras promised the
heads of the EU, the European Central Bank and the IMF to accept their
basic, most vicious demands – which he has now accepted.
When the Greek electorate voted “no” on 5 July to this very kind of
rotten deal, Tsipras said, “Come Monday and the Greek government will be
at the negotiating table after the referendum with better terms for the
Greek people”. Greeks had not voted for “better terms”. They had voted
for justice and for sovereignty, as they had done on January 25.
The day after the January election a truly democratic and, yes,
radical government would have stopped every euro leaving the country,
repudiated the “illegal and odious” debt – as Argentina did successfully
— and expedited a plan to leave the crippling Eurozone. But there was
no plan. There was only a willingness to be “at the table” seeking
The true nature of Syriza has been seldom examined and explained. To
the foreign media it is no more than “leftist” or “far left” or
“hardline” – the usual misleading spray. Some of Syriza’s international
supporters have reached, at times, levels of cheer leading reminiscent
of the rise of Barack Obama. Few have asked: Who are these “radicals”?
What do they believe in?
In 2013, Yanis Varoufakis wrote: “Should we welcome this crisis of
European capitalism as an opportunity to replace it with a better
system? Or should we be so worried about it as to embark upon a campaign
for stabilising capitalism? To me, the answer is clear. Europe’s crisis
is far less likely to give birth to a better alternative to capitalism …
“I bow to the criticism that I have campaigned on an agenda founded
on the assumption that the left was, and remains, squarely defeated ….
Yes, I would love to put forward [a] radical agenda. But, no, I am not
prepared to commit the [error of the British Labour Party following
“What good did we achieve in Britain in the early 1980s by promoting
an agenda of socialist change that British society scorned while falling
headlong into Thatcher’s neoliberal trip? Precisely none.
will it do today to call for a dismantling of the Eurozone, of the
European Union itself …?”
Varoufakis omits all mention of the Social Democratic Party that
split the Labour vote and led to Blairism. In suggesting people in
Britain “scorned socialist change” – when they were given no real
opportunity to bring about that change – he echoes Blair.
The leaders of Syriza are revolutionaries of a kind – but their
revolution is the perverse, familiar appropriation of social democratic
and parliamentary movements by liberals groomed to comply with
neo-liberal drivel and a social engineering whose authentic face is that
of Wolfgang Schauble, Germany’s finance minister, an imperial thug.
Like the Labour Party in Britain and its equivalents among former social
democratic parties such as the Labor Party in Australia, still
describing themselves as “liberal” or even “left”, Syriza is the
product of an affluent, highly privileged, educated middle class,
“schooled in postmodernism”, as Alex Lantier wrote.
For them, class is the unmentionable, let alone an enduring struggle,
regardless of the reality of the lives of most human beings. Syriza’s
luminaries are well-groomed; they lead not the resistance that ordinary
people crave, as the Greek electorate has so bravely demonstrated, but
“better terms” of a venal status quo that corrals and punishes the poor.
When merged with “identity politics” and its insidious distractions,
the consequence is not resistance, but subservience. “Mainstream”
political life in Britain exemplifies this.
This is not inevitable, a done deal, if we wake up from the long,
postmodern coma and reject the myths and deceptions of those who claim
to represent us, and fight.