Greece: debt, creditors, austerity measures, Syriza, Varoufakis, Troika

[luc]

Spyraal, all that is interesting, no doubt - and I thank you for compiling this and providing us with new angles of the story.

The problem that I have with such connections is that it makes us think purely in terms of "pattern recognition", which seems to be an ability we have based on evolution. But it can go wrong quickly and make us blind to the colorful, multi-facetted reality of human relations. It's just not that black and white!

Just as an example: you could build a similar case against Putin - he was "selected" by Yeltsin, he worked with him and many other powerful figures at the time, ergo: he must be a "trojan horse". It just doesn't work that way IMO.

You wrote:

So I ask, how could ever Varoufakis have had a true "gun on table" during the negotiations last year, when a potential Grexit would actually undo the signature of his own mentor to enter the EU, his benefactor for entering university?

Well, maybe he just needed a letter of recommendation and asked someone he had access to who had the best credentials? Happens all the time. Maybe they were close, but he always disagreed with his "mentor" regarding the EU? Maybe he agreed with him, but eventually changed his mind because he learned more about all that later? Maybe they enjoyed talking about all kinds of things, but strongly disagreed about politics? In fact, given my experience with people in real life, àll that is far more likely than a conspiracy where some shady, powerful people decided to "send Yanis as a Trojan horse", who then went on to play a role his whole life, only to infiltrate the leftist movement...

When a Grexit would seriously hurt the Greek oligarchs like the Aggelopoulou family who have been employing his father for decades as their trustee and personal secretary?

Why should Yanis agree with his father? Sons and fathers often disagree... And why would his father agree with everything the Aggelopoulou family says and does? Just because he worked for them? And what about the different members, factions, views, interests and personal relations within this family? All in all, the fact that Yanis' father worked for an important business family - even if at a high position - says nothing about Yanis.

What would Varoufakis' father tell to the Angelopoulou family if his son Yanis have helped to change the status quo of Greece being an EU member they so much depend upon?

There are many possibilities - from nothing at all to "my son has different views than I". We can't answer that question because we don't know about the personal relations of these people.


What I like about Varoufakis and his thinking is that he considers things from many different angles and was exposed to many different mindsets in his life. I consider this a strength! For example, he knows his Marx, but he knows his Hayek as well. He sympathizes with the leftists and considers himself as such, but he knows too much about how the economy works to accept simple solutions and rhetoric. And so on. Fascinating!

In other words: why do we need to determine if Varoufakis or another politician is "100% the real thing" or "a Trojan horse planted by a conspiracy"? What's the point - that we can dismiss everything he says out of hand or believe everything he says without questioning him? I think both options are very limiting and miss the point. How about reading his books, listening to what he has to say, and really think about it from many different angles? So that we can come to some conclusions by using our mind and our experience - that maybe he got this or that wrong, this or that is very interesting, here he's spot-on etc.? That would be more fruitful I think than to construct all kinds of connections that only lead to black-and-white thinking.

 

[Mr.Cyan]

In other words: why do we need to determine if Varoufakis or another politician is "100% the real thing" or "a Trojan horse planted by a conspiracy"? What's the point - that we can dismiss everything he says out of hand or believe everything he says without questioning him? I think both options are very limiting and miss the point. How about reading his books, listening to what he has to say, and really think about it from many different angles? So that we can come to some conclusions by using our mind and our experience - that maybe he got this or that wrong, this or that is very interesting, here he's spot-on etc.? That would be more fruitful I think than to construct all kinds of connections that only lead to black-and-white thinking.

Well summarized luc, I have similar views. Nothing in history or politics is really black and white - and there are lots of grey areas, shifting alliances, difference of thought; and even consorting with the pathologicals in order to achieve certain outcomes. I think its the Empire that wants us to think black and white - that wants us to think everything is a conspiracy, and they are in full control with their Trojan horse minions all around the world. It definitely may be that they have Trojan horses in many places (eg. Some EU leaders) - but then again, in any country, there are many leaders who are not "in the bag" yet, and this makes for a fluid situation concerning any outcome and the Empire is the one working hard behind the scenes to ensure a desired outcome. Hence the reality is that its really not that simple, just because a leader has known connections to the "blue bloods" of a particular nation - he is not "definitely" a Trojan horse.

Your mention of Putin is a good example of how a leader has to work with all characters of the Empire (or not) to reach the top to serve humanity.

 

[Tristan]

Here you have a DiEM25 Talk discussing on democracy in the EU among Luciana Castellina (Italian leftist parliamentary), Jorge Moruno ( representing Spanish political party PODEMOS) and Varoufakis himself. Perhaps this might be of interest to some of you:

http://<iframe width="560" height="...0M" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Niall]

[quote author= Pashalis]Unfortunately he seems to believe the propaganda about Putin and russia:

http://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/05/06/exp-gps-varoufakis-eu-putin.cnn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQHLtbN6DxE

After all he understand about the system, he is actually buying the Anti-Russian propaganda. Just how is that even possible ?!

Russia is the only true ally they can ever get in a world ruled by wolves. Maybe he should look at how the Eurasian Union operates in contrast of the EU. It's completely the opposite.

No, he isn't. He explains his position in the interview with the Russian TV channel. He says that the western anti-Russian propaganda is "pathetically wrong".

He's leftist. He says he doesn't believe in strong leaders. He believes in strong democracies where each citizen has exactly the same say. Fair enough. He says Putin is a totalitarian leader. Well, in a sense he is. But there is a good reason for that. Yanis also explains why Greece "didn't want" help from Russia. I think he's being diplomatic.[/quote]

After hearing more of Varoufakis' criticism of Putin, I'm afraid it's more than him being diplomatic.

I don't think he's dissing Putin because he's "buying the anti-Russian propaganda" per se; I think he's dissing Putin on principle because he believes that having strong leadership impedes the development of 'pure grassroots democracy'. In other words, Putin clashes with Varoufakis' idea of how the world ought to work.

Varoufakis' ideology blinds him from the plain facts of life on Earth at this time: democracy can't grow anywhere unless its seed is protected by protecting your territory's sovereignty from the marauding beast that would otherwise devour everyone and everything in it.

I think the value of Varoufakis' work, and his public showdown with the Eurocrats, to anyone seeking truth was his pursuit of knowledge about how the world actually works. Having achieved some success on that front, his subsequent views on how the world *should* instead function are - like his hero, Karl Marx - deluded.

 

[angelburst29]

Yanis Varoufakis and the Soro's connection.

Varoufakis: The Anti-Russian Trojan Horse Exposed
http://katehon.com/article/varoufakis-anti-russian-trojan-horse-exposed

Yanis Varoufakis became something of an alternative media "rock star" when he ditched Syriza after the bailout referendum and let Tsipras take the full blame for betraying the people's will. Prior to this, the force of his personality and his earlier work in exposing the US' international financial games as the "Global Minotaur" earned him much respect in many activist circles, yet suspicion still lingered around the man who some wisely thought was "too good to be true".

One of those few voices of reason was F. William Engdahl, who raised serious questions about this politician's personal background and shady associations in a July 2015 article for Journal NEO. "What Stinks about Varoufakis and the Whole Greek Mess?" boldly challenged the prevailing narrative in the alternative media, causing some to ponder whether Varoufakis was truly some sort of a "hero" or just a Trojan Horse in waiting.

It took a year to find out whether he was ultimately right or not, but Engdahl's position was vindicated when Varoufakis went on Soros' "Project Syndicate" webpage to advocate for the creation of a "Progressive International" in order to defeat the likes of Hillary Clinton...and President Putin. In a proto-manifesto startlingly similar to the author's own earlier warnings about the rise of Secular Wahhabis, the Greek (anti-)"hero" came out sharply against the Russian leader and his alleged "Trump, Le Pen, (and) Britain’s right-wing Brexiteers" allies for being part of "a nationalist international – a classic creature of a deflationary period – united by contempt for liberal democracy and the ability to mobilize those who would crush."

It's worthwhile to call attention to the fact that Varoufakis had previously appeared on the most prominent publicly funded media platform of this supposed "nationalist international", RT, though he apparently didn't have a big enough problem with Moscow back then to refrain from doing so. With hindsight being 20/20, there's now a very strong probability that he was actually a "sleeper agent" all along and was choreographing his rise to power in such a way as to masterfully appeal to multipolar supporters in preparation for sabotaging the emergent system from within.

When the Greek people soundly rejected the bailout measures, Varoufakis didn't want to have his reputation smeared by remaining in the same Greek administration that he already knew in advance would accept Germany's demands anyway, so he ditched the party and let his former political "partner in crime" - Tsipras - become the much-hated patsy instead.

With his reputation preserved and even somewhat mythologized in the minds of many as a "man of morals", Varoufakis and his backers were now free to plan for his inevitable comeback. This agent was originally intended to operate from within the system and take it down the path of ruin due to his internal sabotage, but after the referendum, a fallback plan was improvised into making him the leader of a "grassroots resistance movement" against the EuroCautionaries (the author's more neutral coinage of what the media slams as "Euroskeptics"). In other words, Varoufakis was tasked with leading a 21st-century COINTELPRO operation.

None of this is mere conjecture either, since the "Greek Judas'" choice of publishing his declaration on the "Project Syndicate" site was a damning confirmation of his very close ties to George Soros. Not only does the billionaire Color Revolution financier directly fund this said portal (The Open Society Foundation gave it a $350,000 grant in 2014), but he even regularly uses it as his preferred platform for publishing his articles. Proverbially speaking, this is the closest that anyone can come to the "belly of the beast" in cyberspace, yet Varoufakis has no shame at all in publicly advertising his elite connections to the notoriously Russophobic regime change mastermind.

It can reasonably be inferred that Soros is backing Varoufakis' Trojan Horse scheme of developing a "Progressive International" of Secular Wahhabis, and might even have been behind the "Minotaur slayer" this whole time. At this moment, it's clear that Varoufakis is one of Soros' many "political bastards" entrusted with creating unipolar-controlled "protest" fronts for orchestrating Color Revolutions.

None of this is mere conjecture either, since the "Greek Judas'" choice of publishing his declaration on the "Project Syndicate" site was a damning confirmation of his very close ties to George Soros. Not only does the billionaire Color Revolution financier directly fund this said portal (The Open Society Foundation gave it a $350,000 grant in 2014), but he even regularly uses it as his preferred platform for publishing his articles. Proverbially speaking, this is the closest that anyone can come to the "belly of the beast" in cyberspace, yet Varoufakis has no shame at all in publicly advertising his elite connections to the notoriously Russophobic regime change mastermind.

It can reasonably be inferred that Soros is backing Varoufakis' Trojan Horse scheme of developing a "Progressive International" of Secular Wahhabis, and might even have been behind the "Minotaur slayer" this whole time. At this moment, it's clear that Varoufakis is one of Soros' many "political bastards" entrusted with creating unipolar-controlled "protest" fronts for orchestrating Color Revolutions.

In this particular context, it is one which will likely clothe itself in the trendy and "self-righteous" regalia of fighting "Russian-led" "fascism" in Europe, thus capitalizing off of the Secular Wahhabi movement to the fullest and organizing a publicly presentable and "legitimate" front for their militancy. Varoufakis' famed "cult of personality" will kick into overdrive with favorable media coverage in faux-multipolar left-wing media outlets, which will seek to capitalize off of the zombie-like "ideological consistency" of their readership in reprogramming genuinely anti-systemic individuals into misguided anti-Russian provocateurs.

It's expected that the Secular Wahhabis that Soros and Varoufakis organize under the "Progressive International" banner will then be deployed against Trump, the EuroCautionary governments of Poland and Hungary, and supporters of the Brexit and LePen movements -- all of which were mentioned alongside President Putin as part of the "nationalist international" - in order to provoke violent conflict and destabilize the most pragmatic Western forces towards Russia. There is no other way to describe this process other than it being yet another phase of the ever-expanding Hybrid War against multipolarity.

The Trojan Horse is now poised to take this geopolitical drama in the direction of a Greek tragedy, with the "Minotaur slayer" transforming into the same mythical beast that made him famous, though with the ultimately irony being that this monster is now consuming misguided left-wing activists instead of surplus capital and belching out a stream of Russophobic vomit afterwards.

Mod note: Article text block-quoted (it's not hard to do!)

 

[Niall]

That's not really much evidence of a 'Soros connection'. Korybko tends to paint things too black-and-white... "Varoufakis is criticizing Putin now, therefore everything Varoufakis ever said or did is suspect - worse, it's all lies!"

The most we can say is that Varoufakis is corrupted by ideology, not money and power.

There's a disinformation program literally for everyone...

 

[Anthony]

There's a podcast with Varoufakis and Eric Draitser on CounterPunch, he sure doesn't come off as a 'Trojan horse'.

http://store.counterpunch.org/yanis-varoufakis-episode-51/

This week Eric sits down with economist, and former Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis to discuss the shifts in the political landscape of both Europe and the US, and what they mean for political activism and progressive politics. Eric and Yanis discuss the nature of the EU and whether it can be reformed or democratized, as well as the forces at play within it. The conversation also touches on the US election as Yanis and Eric debate the utility of "lesser evil" politics, while also examining the ascendance of the fascist right in Europe and the US, with particular attention to the Brexit vote and its implications. The bond bubble and potential economic collapse, the long view of the 2008 crisis, the importance of addressing climate change, the necessity of internationalism, and many other topics are discussed in this wide-ranging interview with one of the best economic minds in the world today.

 

[Possibility of Being]

The most we can say is that Varoufakis is corrupted by ideology, not money and power.

And, perhaps, that he's diverting (consciously and deliberately or not) the anti-EU movement by gathering around himself some good brains and other eurosceptics and pushing toward his (utopian) "democratic EU" idea. Probably it would be better for the world to let the EU just collapse and fall apart.

 

[spyraal]

This article from the World Socialist network is one of the best articles I have found so far about Varoufakis. IMO, it exposes using his own words how irrelevant and harmless he is for any meaningful fight against the establishment. Be it by folly or conscious intent. I should mention that bellow I post some selected bits, and not the complete article which can be found on the following link.

_https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/21/varo-f21.html

Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis’ mission to save capitalism

Varoufakis has been portrayed as leading the fight, along with Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras, against the austerity programme imposed on Greece by the European Union. This, in turn, is said to be proof that Syriza constitutes a model “left” party to be emulated throughout Europe and internationally.

The frank account given by Varoufakis of his political beliefs, motives and history belies such claims.

His is a highly revealing statement, one that is very rare in that he clearly feels the need to explain himself and attempts to do so with a degree of honesty. In doing so, he lays bare not only his own political outlook, but that of an entire social layer.

In his essay (_https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/feb/18/yanis-varoufakis-how-i-became-an-erratic-marxist), adapted from a lecture delivered in 2013, Varoufakis makes clear that he is neither a Marxist nor a revolutionary, but at best someone whose politics can be described as vaguely reformist. He is not a member of Syriza, but was chosen to represent the government precisely because of these views. He wants nothing more than to convince the ruling elite that they risk plunging the continent into an economic and political catastrophe and to advise them to take an alternative path.

Varoufakis begins by stating that the crisis of 2008 was not merely a “cyclical slump,” but one that “poses a threat to civilisation as we know it.”

“[T]he question that arises for radicals is this: 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 European capitalism?”

“To me, the answer is clear,” he replies. “Europe’s crisis is far less likely to give birth to a better alternative to capitalism than it is to unleash dangerously regressive forces that have the capacity to cause a humanitarian bloodbath, while extinguishing the hope for any progressive moves for generations to come.”

“For this view,” he adds, “I have been accused, by well-meaning radical voices, of being ‘defeatist’ and of trying to save an indefensible European socioeconomic system. This criticism, I confess, hurts. And it hurts because it contains more than a kernel of truth.”

Varoufakis says that he has “campaigned on an agenda founded on the assumption that the left was, and remains, squarely defeated.” He now wishes to “convince radicals” that they too must work to defend “a repugnant European capitalism whose implosion, despite its many ills, should be avoided at all costs.”

Varoufakis studied at Essex University from 1978, and then began his academic career in the UK. Under the heading, “Thatcher’s lessons,” he describes his experiences in the 1980s as seminal:

"The lesson Thatcher taught me about the capacity of a long-lasting recession to undermine progressive politics,
is one that I carry with me into today’s European crisis. It is, indeed, the most important determinant of my stance
in relation to the crisis. It is the reason I am happy to confess to the sin I am accused of by some of my critics on the left:
the sin of choosing not to propose radical political programs that seek to exploit the crisis as an opportunity to overthrow
European capitalism, to dismantle the awful eurozone, and to undermine the European Union of the cartels and the bankrupt bankers."

The “left”, he adds, “became more introverted, less capable of producing a convincing progressive agenda and, meanwhile, the working class was being divided between those who dropped out of society and those co-opted into the neoliberal mindset.”

As a result, Thatcherism, he asserts, “permanently destroyed the very possibility of radical, progressive politics—and not just in Britain".

He asks, “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 trap? Precisely none. What good will it do today to call for a dismantling of the eurozone, of the European Union itself, when European capitalism is doing its utmost to undermine the eurozone, the European Union, indeed itself?”

Varoufakis concludes from these experiences that, given the failure of the “left”, the only possible outcome of the present crisis of European and world capitalism is fascist reaction. If preventing this “means that it is we, the suitably erratic Marxists, who must try to save European capitalism from itself, so be it.”

With Europe’s elites “behaving today as if they understand neither the nature of the crisis that they are presiding over, nor its implications for the future of European civilisation … the left must admit that we are just not ready to plug the chasm that a collapse of European capitalism would open up with a functioning socialist system.”

Varoufakis’ extremely demoralised outlook assigns to a grocer’s daughter from Grantham the world-historic role as the gravedigger of the entire socialist project. It is a position that is both ahistorical and which turns political reality on its head.

He leaves out entirely the period of intense and potentially revolutionary struggles that unfolded on a global scale in the period between 1968 and 1975. This began with the May-June 1968 General Strike in France and included the 1973 military coup in Chile, the fall of the fascist dictatorship in Portugal in April 1974, followed in July by the fall of the Greek military junta, the collapse of the Nixon administration and the US defeat in Vietnam. In the UK, a mass strike movement led by the miners brought down the Conservative Government of Edward Heath in February that same year.

When he asks what good was done by those promoting “an agenda of social change,” Varoufakis refers to a host of petty bourgeois groups that gravitated around the Labour Party and the trade unions that were themselves rapidly careening to the right. This was an era in which his co-thinkers on the euro-communist wing of the Communist Party, from which Syriza later emerged, were proclaiming Thatcherism as an all-conquering radical force and proof that the working class no longer represented an agency of social transformation.

Varoufakis only echoes this political apologia for the betrayal of the labour and trade union bureaucracy when he blames the working class for having either “dropped out” or been “co-opted into the neoliberal mindset.”

The political logic of his approach is that Syriza must save capitalism at all costs. Therefore how will he approach workers who simply don’t get the message, or those “sectarians” from the left who oppose such an agenda and argue for revolution? They must be opposed and, if necessary, suppressed.

There is nothing particularly remarkable about Varoufakis’ biography. His equivalents can be found in The Left Party in Germany, the New Anticapitalist Party in France, the International Socialist Organization in the US or the Socialist Workers Party in the UK. Such parties constitute a definite social tendency that is rooted in and expresses the interests of the affluent upper-middle class, which desires nothing more than a more favorable distribution of wealth within the top five-to-ten percent in return for their political services on behalf of the bourgeoisie.

It is to them that Varoufakis offers his final piece of advice:

“The trick is to avoid the revolutionary maximalism that, in the end, helps the neoliberals bypass all opposition to their self-defeating policies and to retain in our sights capitalism’s inherent failures while trying to save it, for strategic purposes, from itself.”

So I wonder, what good is to the people a man who actually believes there is no alternative to this capitalism (with all it's horrific expressions) and thus wants to save it from itself? Why should people succumb and listen to the unjustified and unhistorical defeatism of characters like Varoufakis? Why he chose to enter politics and represent the "Left" in the first place and not some of the other pro-EU parties, while having the established conviction that the Left is defeated? If one wants to trully serve the people, then he ought to serve the people's clearly expressed will (which was "End Austerity no matter what") and not their own paradoxical utopian theories that aim to rescue Capitalism. To my eyes, these obvious contradictions can be rationally explained only by him being an idiot or an agent. And Varoufakis is too smart to be easily excused as an idiot.

Here we should recall the total disaster that was Varoufakis negotiation with Eurogroup's Jeroen Dijsselbloem back in February 2016. It set the ideal conditions for a perfect storm of liquidity starvation and the unconditional surrender that would follow in the summer of 2015. The enormous extend of this self-inflicted defeat can be best expressed by German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble's own words right after the agreement Varoufakis signed:

"The Greeks certainly will have a difficult time to explain the deal to their voters".

_http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eurozone-greece-idUSKBN0LO0O620150220

He is speaking some cold truth here. Anyone will have a hard time explaining the jaw-dropping concessions of this deal after reading it, considering that SYRIZA was at the time a strong newly elected government with a clear mandate, enjoying even spontaneous pro-government rallies in support. I admit was in shock when I first read it, but then out of wishful thinking and my blissful longing for a better day, denial kicked in and I thought: "They cannot be so shamelessly treacherous! They must have some masterplan that no-one can foresee at the moment!". Well, facts prove there was none. All Varoufakis wants is to save holly Capitalism from itself.

Unfortunately, lies are always easier to believe or to miss until their consequences come and bite you.

 

[spyraal]

This article from the World Socialist network is one of the best articles I have found so far about Varoufakis. IMO, it exposes using his own words how irrelevant and harmless he is for any meaningful fight against the establishment. Be it by folly or conscious intent. I should mention that bellow I post some selected bits, and not the complete article which can be found on the following link.

_https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/21/varo-f21.html

Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis’ mission to save capitalism

Varoufakis has been portrayed as leading the fight, along with Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras, against the austerity programme imposed on Greece by the European Union. This, in turn, is said to be proof that Syriza constitutes a model “left” party to be emulated throughout Europe and internationally.

The frank account given by Varoufakis of his political beliefs, motives and history belies such claims.

His is a highly revealing statement, one that is very rare in that he clearly feels the need to explain himself and attempts to do so with a degree of honesty. In doing so, he lays bare not only his own political outlook, but that of an entire social layer.

In his essay (_https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/feb/18/yanis-varoufakis-how-i-became-an-erratic-marxist), adapted from a lecture delivered in 2013, Varoufakis makes clear that he is neither a Marxist nor a revolutionary, but at best someone whose politics can be described as vaguely reformist. He is not a member of Syriza, but was chosen to represent the government precisely because of these views. He wants nothing more than to convince the ruling elite that they risk plunging the continent into an economic and political catastrophe and to advise them to take an alternative path.

Varoufakis begins by stating that the crisis of 2008 was not merely a “cyclical slump,” but one that “poses a threat to civilisation as we know it.”

“[T]he question that arises for radicals is this: 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 European capitalism?”

“To me, the answer is clear,” he replies. “Europe’s crisis is far less likely to give birth to a better alternative to capitalism than it is to unleash dangerously regressive forces that have the capacity to cause a humanitarian bloodbath, while extinguishing the hope for any progressive moves for generations to come.”

“For this view,” he adds, “I have been accused, by well-meaning radical voices, of being ‘defeatist’ and of trying to save an indefensible European socioeconomic system. This criticism, I confess, hurts. And it hurts because it contains more than a kernel of truth.”

Varoufakis says that he has “campaigned on an agenda founded on the assumption that the left was, and remains, squarely defeated.” He now wishes to “convince radicals” that they too must work to defend “a repugnant European capitalism whose implosion, despite its many ills, should be avoided at all costs.”

Varoufakis studied at Essex University from 1978, and then began his academic career in the UK. Under the heading, “Thatcher’s lessons,” he describes his experiences in the 1980s as seminal:

"The lesson Thatcher taught me about the capacity of a long-lasting recession to undermine progressive politics,
is one that I carry with me into today’s European crisis. It is, indeed, the most important determinant of my stance
in relation to the crisis. It is the reason I am happy to confess to the sin I am accused of by some of my critics on the left:
the sin of choosing not to propose radical political programs that seek to exploit the crisis as an opportunity to overthrow
European capitalism, to dismantle the awful eurozone, and to undermine the European Union of the cartels and the bankrupt bankers."

The “left”, he adds, “became more introverted, less capable of producing a convincing progressive agenda and, meanwhile, the working class was being divided between those who dropped out of society and those co-opted into the neoliberal mindset.”

As a result, Thatcherism, he asserts, “permanently destroyed the very possibility of radical, progressive politics—and not just in Britain".

He asks, “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 trap? Precisely none. What good will it do today to call for a dismantling of the eurozone, of the European Union itself, when European capitalism is doing its utmost to undermine the eurozone, the European Union, indeed itself?”

Varoufakis concludes from these experiences that, given the failure of the “left”, the only possible outcome of the present crisis of European and world capitalism is fascist reaction. If preventing this “means that it is we, the suitably erratic Marxists, who must try to save European capitalism from itself, so be it.”

With Europe’s elites “behaving today as if they understand neither the nature of the crisis that they are presiding over, nor its implications for the future of European civilisation … the left must admit that we are just not ready to plug the chasm that a collapse of European capitalism would open up with a functioning socialist system.”

Varoufakis’ extremely demoralised outlook assigns to a grocer’s daughter from Grantham the world-historic role as the gravedigger of the entire socialist project. It is a position that is both ahistorical and which turns political reality on its head.

He leaves out entirely the period of intense and potentially revolutionary struggles that unfolded on a global scale in the period between 1968 and 1975. This began with the May-June 1968 General Strike in France and included the 1973 military coup in Chile, the fall of the fascist dictatorship in Portugal in April 1974, followed in July by the fall of the Greek military junta, the collapse of the Nixon administration and the US defeat in Vietnam. In the UK, a mass strike movement led by the miners brought down the Conservative Government of Edward Heath in February that same year.

When he asks what good was done by those promoting “an agenda of social change,” Varoufakis refers to a host of petty bourgeois groups that gravitated around the Labour Party and the trade unions that were themselves rapidly careening to the right. This was an era in which his co-thinkers on the euro-communist wing of the Communist Party, from which Syriza later emerged, were proclaiming Thatcherism as an all-conquering radical force and proof that the working class no longer represented an agency of social transformation.

Varoufakis only echoes this political apologia for the betrayal of the labour and trade union bureaucracy when he blames the working class for having either “dropped out” or been “co-opted into the neoliberal mindset.”

The political logic of his approach is that Syriza must save capitalism at all costs. Therefore how will he approach workers who simply don’t get the message, or those “sectarians” from the left who oppose such an agenda and argue for revolution? They must be opposed and, if necessary, suppressed.

There is nothing particularly remarkable about Varoufakis’ biography. His equivalents can be found in The Left Party in Germany, the New Anticapitalist Party in France, the International Socialist Organization in the US or the Socialist Workers Party in the UK. Such parties constitute a definite social tendency that is rooted in and expresses the interests of the affluent upper-middle class, which desires nothing more than a more favorable distribution of wealth within the top five-to-ten percent in return for their political services on behalf of the bourgeoisie.

It is to them that Varoufakis offers his final piece of advice:

“The trick is to avoid the revolutionary maximalism that, in the end, helps the neoliberals bypass all opposition to their self-defeating policies and to retain in our sights capitalism’s inherent failures while trying to save it, for strategic purposes, from itself.”

So I wonder, what good is to the people a man who actually believes there is no alternative to this capitalism (with all it's horrific expressions) and thus wants to save it from itself? Why should people succumb and listen to the unjustified and unhistorical defeatism of characters like Varoufakis? Why he chose to enter politics and represent the "Left" in the first place and not some of the other pro-EU parties, while having the established conviction that the Left is defeated? If one wants to trully serve the people, then he ought to serve the people's clearly expressed will (which was "End Austerity no matter what") and not their own paradoxical utopian theories that aim to rescue Capitalism. To my eyes, these obvious contradictions can be rationally explained only by him being an idiot or an agent. And Varoufakis is too smart to be easily excused as an idiot.

Here we should recall the total disaster that was Varoufakis negotiation with Eurogroup's Jeroen Dijsselbloem back in February 2016. It set the ideal conditions for a perfect storm of liquidity starvation and the unconditional surrender that would follow in the summer of 2015. The enormous extend of this self-inflicted defeat can be best expressed by German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble's own words right after the agreement Varoufakis negotiated and signed over:

"The Greeks certainly will have a difficult time to explain the deal to their voters".

_http://www.reuters.com/article/us-eurozone-greece-idUSKBN0LO0O620150220

He is speaking some cold truth here. Anyone will have a hard time explaining the jaw-dropping concessions of this deal after reading it, considering that SYRIZA was at the time a strong newly elected government with a clear mandate, enjoying even spontaneous pro-government rallies in support. I admit was in shock when I first read it, but then out of wishful thinking and my blissful longing for a better day, denial kicked in and I thought: "They cannot be so shamelessly treacherous! They must have some masterplan that no-one can foresee at the moment!". Well, facts prove there was none. All Varoufakis wants is to save holly Capitalism from itself.

Unfortunately, lies are always easier to believe or to miss until their consequences come and bite you.

 

[Niall]

This article from the World Socialist network is one of the best articles I have found so far about Varoufakis. IMO, it exposes using his own words how irrelevant and harmless he is for any meaningful fight against the establishment. Be it by folly or conscious intent. I should mention that bellow I post some selected bits, and not the complete article which can be found on the following link.

That article criticizes Varoufakis because he was not ideological enough!

Remember, we liked what he attempted last year because he sought a pragmatic resolution of Europe's imbalanced capital flows. And it's not that we liked his 'solution' per se - which may or may not have worked in practice. It's that the vehement reaction to its proposal, and everything that resulted from said reaction, exposed (briefly, but quite markedly) the 'man behind the curtain', i.e. the brutal nature of 'our dear Western leaders' and 'the West', aka Atlantis Re-born, in general.

In the end, however, Varoufakis is not pragmatic enough. He believes in all that ideological nonsense about 'freedom and democracy', which is as realistic as us suddenly believing that man can be freed, en masse, from his mechanicalness.

 

[Alana]

This thread started a looong time ago, and since then, the situation in Greece for the Greeks has gone from bad to worse. But because we talked about Golden Dawn in this thread before, I thought I'd share this new development here.

As a few of you might know, some of Golden Dawn's members are still undergoing trial for criminal acts, murders even. You can read up on it in this wikipedia entry if you want the summary. Despite all these, GD has 18 seats currently at the Greek parliament, and for years now they have been refusing that they are neo-nazis, they call themselves "Greek Nationalists".

Two days ago, efsyn.gr, a Greek newsite/newspaper, posted a video of a "concert party" that took place in Athens on January 30th 2005. Members of GD, including their leader, organized and where present at this party, and

- they are seen singing the Greek national anthem in the Nazi salute

- the only flags present are the flag of the SS and the war flag of the Wehrmacht

- The slogans they sing are also nazi, the Sieg Heil (Long live the victory) and Juden Raus (Out the Jews), as well as the (forbidden in Germany) Nazi anthem «Deutschland über alles» (Germany above all). They are also singing a song that goes something like "Africa is for the monkeys, Europe is for the white people/ Put the monkeys on a ship and send them to drown."

For greek nationalists, the absence of any Greek flags is telling.

Here's the video, it's in German and Greek with Greek subtitles, but anyone can get the "spiriit" of that night from the visuals:

http://<iframe width="560" height="...Y4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

When they highlight certain people in the video, those are Golden Dawn party members who are currently in parliament, including Michaloliakos, their leader. So yes, this is what real neonazi racists look like.

 

[latulipenoire]

This thread started a looong time ago, and since then, the situation in Greece for the Greeks has gone from bad to worse. But because we talked about Golden Dawn in this thread before, I thought I'd share this new development here.

As a few of you might know, some of Golden Dawn's members are still undergoing trial for criminal acts, murders even. You can read up on it in this wikipedia entry if you want the summary. Despite all these, GD has 18 seats currently at the Greek parliament, and for years now they have been refusing that they are neo-nazis, they call themselves "Greek Nationalists".

Two days ago, efsyn.gr, a Greek newsite/newspaper, posted a video of a "concert party" that took place in Athens on January 30th 2005. Members of GD, including their leader, organized and where present at this party, and

- they are seen singing the Greek national anthem in the Nazi salute

- the only flags present are the flag of the SS and the war flag of the Wehrmacht

- The slogans they sing are also nazi, the Sieg Heil (Long live the victory) and Juden Raus (Out the Jews), as well as the (forbidden in Germany) Nazi anthem «Deutschland über alles» (Germany above all). They are also singing a song that goes something like "Africa is for the monkeys, Europe is for the white people/ Put the monkeys on a ship and send them to drown."

For greek nationalists, the absence of any Greek flags is telling.

Here's the video, it's in German and Greek with Greek subtitles, but anyone can get the "spiriit" of that night from the visuals:

http://<iframe width="560" height="...Y4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

When they highlight certain people in the video, those are Golden Dawn party members who are currently in parliament, including Michaloliakos, their leader. So yes, this is what real neonazi racists look like.

Alana, I'm really shocked to know about these developments, it seems to be similar to Ukraine's situation, in both cases people with deviant personalities and various pathologies speak on behalf of the people and meanwhile destroy everything that represents humankind.

I hope that these Golden Dawn types get exposed for what they really are, for good. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Ant22]

Given how badly Greece suffered during the recent credit crunch and - who what forces were behind it - I guess Greece may be suffering from some form of the Stockholm Syndrome? I wonder whose playbook the idea to expel Russian diplomats over unproven 'security threats' comes from? Hmmmm...

I get that the one world government means that individual countries have little control over their over managing their own affairs but this farce is just sad to watch.

Greece Recalls Ambassador From Russia - Source

Tensions between Athens and Moscow have been running high recently, as in July, Greece expelled two Russian diplomats from the country over national security concerns, prompting Russia to retaliate.

Greece has recalled its ambassador to Russia, Andreas Fryganas, the source told Sputnik.

"The decision has been made. The decision was made personally by Greek Minister of Foreign Affairs Nikos Kotzias," the source said.

According to the source, in the coming days, Fryganas will return to Athens and another ambassador will be sent to Moscow, but it is not yet known when this will happen.

The Greek move comes amid a spat between Athens and Moscow. On Monday, the Greek envoy was summoned to the Russian Foreign Ministry, where he received a note where Moscow rejected all accusations and announced that the retaliation would follow.

Earlier this summer, Athens expelled two Russian diplomats and imposed a travel ban on two more, accusing them of meddling in security issues and attempting to bribe Greek officials.

Explaining the decision over the Russian diplomats, Athens stated they intended to thwart a deal between the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) and Greece, which would allow Macedonia to join NATO.

A decades-long conflict between Greece and Macedonia was settled this June, after Skopje decided to change the name of the country.

Expulsion of Russian Diplomats: Greece Aims to Make it Up to Trump - Belgian MP

The incident with the Russian diplomats in Greece has nothing to do with broader bilateral relations, a Greek official told Sputnik Wednesday.
"From the government, we can only say that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is going to take all measures necessary in order to protect our national interests. And further actions that will be taken will be considered in due course… But I have to say that this has nothing to do with our broader relationships with Russia. You remember with Skripal affair, we had a different line [than the other states], we refused to expel diplomats. So it is not particularly Russia. It has to do with a particular incident," the official said.

However, Frank Creyelman, honorary Belgian MP and former chairman to the Committee on Foreign Policy, European Affairs and International Cooperation, says that the expulsion of Russian diplomats on the day of the beginning of NATO summit isn't a coincidence as the US is "doing an attempt to collect more ‘involvement' — read: money and American arm — of the NATO partners."

"Greece was till now reluctant on condemning Russia for all that goes wrong in the world. Now Greece tries to make it up to Trump who by the way today was criticizing the fact that Germany is depending on Russian energy sources. In the end that what it's all about. Demonizing Russia, keep the sanctions alive and in the end be dépendant on the US for energy and arms", Creyelman said.

Earlier in the day, the Kathimerini newspaper reported that Greece had decided to expel two Russian diplomats and ban two more from entry into the country over illegal actions against the country's national security.

The Russian Foreign Ministry has vowed to give a mirror response to Greece's move. Later in the day, Greek Cabinet spokesman Dimitris Tzanakopoulos said that Athens would take measures in respect to "behavior that does not show respect for the Greek state."

PS to Moderators: I'm not sure if it deserves its own thread, maybe it we be better to merged it with this one for example? Events in Russia

 

[Laura]

I think Greece has bet on the wrong horse.