GREECE IN THE THRESHOLD
OF 21st
CENTURY[1]
(Fight for the
territorial integrity, national survival
and Direct Democracy)
By Kostas Lampos (PhD)[2]
1.
Greece as a universal
dimension and as a diachronic ‘bone of contention’
Greece, as a geopolitical
dimension, has always presented a particular strategic significance for
·
Greece is in the crossroad
between North-South and West-Orient and whoever controls that crossroad
simultaneously controls the wider area [of Eurasia]
and the wealth that is being produced and distributed in that wider area.
·
Greece has enormous amounts of mineral wealth and valuable metals that
are known since Antiquity – in which petrol and natural gas have been added
lately – [and] the control of them has a vital significance for the forces that
claim global hegemony, especially nowadays where the identifiable deposits of
central Eurasia[4] are
dangerously depleted.
·
Greece, as a distinguishably beautiful area of the planet with a
continuous history of thousands of years and as the unquestionable cradle of
sciences, arts and the civilization of “man is the measure of all things” (Protagoras)
instead of profit-making barbarism, presents a [unique] interest and its
control adds prestige to each barbarian or “civilized” conqueror.
The current global crisis of the twilight of
capitalism constitutes one more factor that we should bear in mind in our
effort to understand the so called “Greek crisis” and the austerity policy that
was imposed to Greece by the European creditors, the “partners of the European
Union and the Eurozone” and the North American “allies” and rulers of the
International Monetary Fund and NATO.
But, let’s start, once more, from the beginning. The
goal of the hegemons and the wannabe hegemons or co-hegemons was and still
remains stable; the control of the area and primarily of Greece-as-crossroad and in
addition, most recently, of Greece-as-a-privileged oil plot.
The consequence of
this geostrategic position of Greece has always been and remains an ongoing
conflict between the prospective rulers, which takes the form of a permanent
Greek Civil War, which is supplied with controlled political exponents, with
technical and financial support from the courts of the concerned major powers,
starting from the Persians, the Romans, the Venetians, the Turks, the Germans,
the British, the Americans and now again by the Germans and the Americans.
Constant foreign intervention and the civil war conflict resulted in the almost
incessant political instability, which in turn did not allow a cumulative
economic growth. On the contrary, it was accompanied by successive major
disasters in the infrastructure of the economy and by frequent movements of
large populations which had as a result the continuous dependence and subjugation
of Greece.
The question was whom will overhaul and in
which fashion will such a control be reserved, that is to say, how? The
[question] of whom is being derived between the EU and the USA, separately or
in cooperation, without underestimating of course the ambitions of Russia and
China to play a hegemonic, locally or globally, role. The [question] of how was
not treated under the ambiguously one-dimensional tactics of “Butter stat
Kanonen” (Butter or Canons), but with the flexible tactics of “Butter as well
as Canons”. The success of that tactics was exemplar because, under the
subscription of their “willing” collaborators of the Greek government, the
hegemons loaded the country with overwhelming and abusive loans and because
both sides that were signing these loans for the purchase of useless armaments
and Defence Systems or for the “facilitation” of luxurious product imports from
the capitalist metropolises; hence, both sides were aware of the fact that the
Greek people didn’t know and didn’t approve these loans and, moreover, these
loans were not serving the actual needs of the Greek people.
In this way, the conquest of Greece
via bankruptcy took the form of Memorandums, new loans and harsh austerity
instead of “treaties of surrender” as in war defeats. The consequences of the
involvements were equally destructive for the economy of the country and Greek
society as with those of a destructive military defeat. The overcoming of these
destructions and this new and permanent enslaving defeat presupposes a modern
Social and National Liberation Front and a new long-standing resistance that
overcomes ideologies, personalities, [political] parties and the parliament and
acts in the field of new institutions and structures that gradually formulate
the new society of equality within the society of inequality which we want to
change. The Greek people, mythicized as Hercules, was always achieving in
respective conditions to overcome the crises and to retrieve the road towards
the direction of “man is the measure of all things”. Furthermore, the Greek
people was always achieving to reweave the destroyed social web and to give new
dimensions and perspectives in humanity’s visions for a better world. And it
will happen this time again, no matter how difficult it may be, whatever
sacrifices may be needed.
2.
In our days, the question is not an unattainable
“better” capitalism, but an attainable, necessary and unavoidably better world
The pro-memorandum conquerors
pursue new accomplished facts and anticipate the subordination of the Greek
people to their programs and their goals, in the contexts of a loot-capitalism
that is controlled at a metropolitan level, a politically castrated parliament
and a corrupted party system which doesn’t negate capitalism and paternalism
essentially but, on the contrary, promises to the Capital a “better” management
of public affairs by misguiding the electorate with the promotion in the
foreground of “new incorruptible personalities” and “radical left parties”. The
result is, to a lesser or greater extent, the mistrust of the Greek people
towards the bourgeois parliament, the challenging of the capitalist system as a
whole and the disallowance of delegation of the exclusive responsibility of
government formation to a single political party. In parallel, the Greek people
do not stand with folded arms. On the contrary, they participate by hundreds of thousands in
demonstrations in public squares and streets and posit daily the issue of the alternative from the capitalist crisis as an exit
from capitalism through the tendency of Direct Democracy in the sense – and
under the perspective – of Classless Society.
When this movement of Direct
Democracy, a) was treated as a nightmare by the “ruling class” and b) faced the
shameless hostility of the totality of the system of power and the chokingly
harassing “friendship” of various social-democratic and other “left”
authoritative parties, then it decided to retreat from the public squares but
not to disappear in general, as many would want to argue. Nowadays, we come in
contact with it in the form of thousands of collectivities that either
reappropriate the abandoned public or private spaces and act as institutions of
social solidarity, political counter-information, culture and art, or promote
direct socialization, that is to say, the cellular action of democratic,
self-organized, solidaire and even non-monetary social economy that de-commodities
human relations by acting outside and against the capitalist market. Moreover,
we come in contact with it as a re-localization in the form of
eco-communities that re-conceptualize the relations and the forms of social
cohabitation without hierarchically organized power structures[5].
Lastly, we come in contact with it as laboratories of social and scientific experimentation
that are expanded from the field of research to:
a) the implementation of
independence in the section of energy-use[6],
b) the liberation of software,
c) 3D printing,
d) the socialization of Internet
for the liberation of information and
e) free communications,
and many other forms of intervention that aim to the
extension of the spectrum of free and common goods, actions that change in a
fundamental and at the same time peaceful way, the relations of production and
hence the social relations and structure.
Of course, the parliamentary system
defames these new social movements when it cannot control and destroy them
under the guidance of police enforcement. It seems that the forces of Labour,
Science and Culture, more and more, gradually realize that these social
movements should be protected from the totality of the system and party
paternalism, in order to function as catalysts that transform the chemistry of
the morbid individualist Ego into chemistry of the social, united, powerful and
liberational Us/We, in the contexts of which the Ego is being brought to
fruition as a social and individual Self that makes useless the religious,
political, entrepreneurial, football-club and other identities which are alien
to the real interests of the society of the working classes. In the 21st
century, the liberation of the forces of Labour, Science and Culture from the
dehumanized and disastrous capitalism is possible, necessary and unavoidable if
it will be assigned by these forces themselves and if they won’t delegate it
one more time to contractors and mediators. Every other option of salvation by
“messiah leaders”, political parties – “rescuers” or “left governments” that
promise a better and “respectable” capitalism and “good” global hegemons is nothing
but a new illusion that still holds Prometheus Bound and grounded into
the rocks in order to feed the vultures of capital with his continuously
renewed nutrient liver.
3.
The promise for a “left management” of capitalism is a
fraud and a chimera.
In the 20th century,
many believed that the soviet model of state capitalism, as it was
formulated in the end by the soviet nomenclature – with Lenin, Trotsky and
Stalin as its architects –, was constituting the alternative against actually
existing capitalism. Until the second betrayal of the October Revolution took
place, as a peaceful passage from “actually existing socialism” to real,
existing and manic capitalism of the so called “free market”, and as a result
the discussion for the Humanist Socialism under the form of Direct Democracy
and under the content of Classless Society started to revitalize, as the only
and necessary solution against the intensified contradiction between the
advanced forces of production and the backward capitalist relations of production.
Every political proposal that could not or did not want to overcome the
conservatism of the neo-classical economic proposition and the neoliberal
political solutions on the one hand, and the ideologies of Second, Third and
Fourth International on the other, is a trap for the forces of Labour, Science
and Culture, even if it’s hidden under the labels of an allegedly “orthodox”,
“radical” and “revolutionary” left. And, of course, things don’t change even if
every political proposal – like the aforementioned – wears a black, green, pink
or red anticapitalist cloak, because the only genuine anticapitalist proposal
is that of the forces of Labour, Science and Culture that, in the place of
actually existing capitalism, want, are able and know how to construct the
Society of Equals, that is to say, the Classless Society upon the basis of
common ownership and social self-management and nothing less from that.
After the
dramatic and continuous failures of the two ruling parties (PASOK and ND), the
party apparatus Coalition for a Radical Left (SYRIZA) appeared as the
parameter of plenty left organizations which were the fragments of the serial
disintegrations that occurred in the erstwhile potent, dogmatic and pro-soviet Communist
Party of Greece (KKE) that which, with its disastrous policy, imposed the
Yalta Agreement upon a people which – through their anti-fascist and
social-liberational resistance – used to occupy 95% of the country. KKE
contends itself with a symbolic parliamentary presence without contesting the
political power neither with parliamentary nor with revolutionary means, as it
just waits for the people to gain the power and then transfer it to itself.
SYRIZA on the contrary aims to claim the political power with the usage of
parliamentary procedures. Among the multitude of SYRIZA Coalition’s components,
some were, according to their statement, oriented towards Direct Democracy (the
most prominent being Manolis Glezos’ Active Citizens Movement). SYRIZA – as a
multilingual federation of political organizations – gradually obtained a
powerful access inside the universities thanks to the powerful presence of its
members to the academic status quo of the country (due to their
relations with the Panhellenic Socialist Movement and especially the “Simitis’s”
faction) and achieved in a relatively short period – and under the assistance
of some mass media that support the regime – to manifest an “anti-dogmatic”
left and neokeynesian social-democratic face and with that face achieved to
coil behind it an important part of Greek society. In its effort to increase
its influence upon Greek society and without being capable (or, perhaps without
wanting) to express the left of the 21st century, namely the
humanist left of Direct Democracy, it copied and pasted the PASOK; but
SYRIZA, in their effort to gain influence in the middle class (i.e. small
entrepreneurs, low level industrialists and the general conservative middle
class part of society) copied and pasted the greedy for power, neoliberal,
decadent and bankrupt PASOK and as a result it has stuck in second place with
regard to the preferences of the electorate body. However, it knows very well
the fashion in which it could climb in the first place and performs as many
compromises that are necessary for that, strengthening its ties with the
European and global hegemonies. So, recently, SYRIZA did whatever the system
suggested for the political management of capitalism and thus it did two steps
backwards by abolishing the autonomy of the components of the Coalition
that actually had created SYRIZA and transformed itself into a classic
bourgeois political party that is hierarchically organized and divided between
professional executives and members-fans; however, SYRIZA didn’t achieve until
now to muzzle every internal voice of its components. By adopting actually, for
purely electoral reasons, all of the requests and slogans of the social
cancers, that is to say the powerful and vulgar guilds that disorientate the
society from its own vision, it automatically lost its political autonomy by
tumbling into an apolitique populism and by promising things that
under capitalist conditions are impossible – something that characterizes all
the bourgeois political parties. This demagoguery accompanied by attempts to impose the so-called
'democratic centralism' in order to contain internal party democracy has
reached such a point that forced the veteran leftist fighter, Manolis Glezos,
to disagree with the mutation of SYRIZA into an elitist club, ie a leading
party, and even to confess publicly that SYRIZA has not yet convinced itself
about where its going to find the money to fulfill its political program[7].
All these indicate that
SYRIZA chose to be a bourgeois leftist party in a bourgeois parliament and not
a social catalyst for a left society that chooses to exceed the capitalist
system on a path of direct democratic reconstruction of the institutions, and the economic and
social structures that will guarantee social self-management and classless
society.
A characteristic example of
SYRIZA’s bilinguity is the contradiction among its leading executives – where
in their face various rallies of organized party (and, of course, extra-party)
forces are expressed – with regard to the top issue that concerns the relation
of Greece
with the European Union and the Eurozone. Thus, the official position of SYRIZA
that is being expressed by Tsipras is that “Greece will not leave and must not leave the Eurozone.
The exit of Greece
from Eurozone will not be detrimental
only for Greece, but
dangerous for the
EU itself”[8]. The same opinion is expressed by the economic mastermind of SYRIZA Giannis Dragasakis who considers,
under the current circumstances, the withdrawal of the country from the
Eurozone and the return to – the former national currency of Greece – the Drachma[9]
as something disastrous; on the contrary, the so called “Left Platform”, under
the guidance of Panagiotis Lafazanis, claims that the exit of Greece from the
EU and the Eurozone would be beneficial for the country and, therefore, the
return to the Drachma would be also beneficial[10].
Of course, the obscurity and the multilingualism may add some voters in favour
of the party of the loyal opposition, but the question remains for SYRIZA:
which one out of SYRIZA’s plenty proposals for each issue will be implemented
when SYRIZA will form a government and how will this occur without compromises
and political partnerships with other parties, without the loss of the trust of
the electorate and without a political breakup.
[SYRIZA], in its formally
social-democratic program[11],
criticizes strictly the superstructure, that is the political, and only
on skin deep level the socio-economic system of Capital and, moreover, talks
about a political[12]
change and not a social one; and
when they talk about direct democracy, it is not perceived as social
self-management and classless society, but as a decorative supplement of
representative democracy[13].
They also talk about socialism: “For us, socialism is … inextricably
connected with democracy; democracy not merely in the formal sense, but always
essentially; indirect democracy that is based on representation but also
direct democracy under the active participation of everyone”[14].
SYRIZA, as a faded social-democracy, attempts to have the whole cake and
eat it too but this is something that concerns either demagogues or
illusionists in kindergartens.
Usually, they refuse the validity
of the Memorandums, they also curse but not refuse the validity of capitalism
and it is more than obvious that the leading nucleus of SYRIZA does not ignore
that capitalism produces memorandums and not vice versa, and, as a
result, one cannot abolish capitalism by simple abolishing or by renegotiating
the memorandums. But SYRIZA doesn’t seem to be disturbed by capitalism and what
is at stake for them is the “defeat of the policy of memorandums and a
governmental change”[15],
that is to say, to replace the government. Without a solid political plan for
an anticapitalistic and direct democratic social reconstruction, but with a bourgeois
and strictly verbalistic leftist radicalism, struggles for the climbing, under
parliamentary means, to the political power in order to provide Capitalism with
a “left government” or even a grand coalition government together with the
right-wing party New Democracy (ND)[16],
something that will have the cost of popular legitimization due to the fact
that the people will be treated simply as a bunch of voters behind the options
of one or another hegemon of the area. The leading nucleus and the authoritative
apparatus of SYRIZA – and, of course, not their voters – ignore or simply don’t
care that a policy like this may throw the country into the embrace of
Americanism[17] once
more (a process that signals a new disaster for Greece), that which, since the
distribution of the western Balkans to Germany after the NATOic dissolution of
Yugoslavia, seems to pursue the role of Gauleiter for Greece in the
eastern Balkans, something that will finalize the American control over them.
SYRIZA also desires to ignore that Americanism, accompanied by Neogermanism[18],
doesn’t care for the abolishment of memorandums but for the destabilization and
the dissolution of the EU, because there is a fear that sooner or later the
European peoples will achieve to free themselves from Americanism, Neogermanism
and the reactionary directorate of the EU and will transform the EU from
“Europe of Capital” to “Europe of the Peoples” which will be based on Social
Justice and Direct Democracy; hence, things will acquire a different dynamics
and will follow the road of the definitive global overthrow of capitalism.
Under these conditions, such a
political party will rise into the position of “government formation” through
the same rules that every bourgeois party does, that is, only when the grand
economic interests will certify that they won’t face any problems, and will be
forced to govern or co-govern against the society and through an alliance with
the traditional collaborators of Capital – even with New Democracy as some of
the leading executives of SYRIZA mention. So, SYRIZA, after its contribution to
the system with some services of relief from social pressure and of
legitimization of the policies for a “better” capitalism, will become useless
or even annoying to the system and will be treated like the neoliberal PASOK by
the system as well as the voters. But, such a development will signal a new
punch to the popular movement and those who think that a new defeat of the
popular movement could constitute a new “revolutionary” opportunity for the
popular movement are wrong. On the contrary, the possible outcome of this
process would be the eviction of the popular movement due to this new “tactical
mistake” by the bourgeois and the petty-bourgeois left and the control of the
country by a few domestic Neo-Nazi, New World Order and NATOic fascist forces.
In the historical unfolding of
bourgeois parliamentarism it has been proved that the dominant economic power
and the respective “protecting power” create new parties, lift them into
political “power” to do the dirty work and once they are used up, then the
“protecting powers” traduce and disband them by forming military juntas in
order to gain some time and re-construct new parties through the demolition
materials so that the game of the misdirection of the peoples will continue to
be played. This story, that is being repeated as a misfortune of the
forces of Labour, Science and Culture, should become a lesson for them
in order to undertake their historical role as the liberators of themselves
and, simultaneously, to stop waiting for their liberation from bourgeois
parliaments and authoritative “avant-garde” parties.
The 21st century offers all the objective
conditions for the direct-democratic liberation of Labour, Science and Culture,
as a result of the struggle and sacrifices of thousands of previous generations
that is crystallized in modern sciences and technologies. In this historical
process the meaning and content of the Social movement and the Left will be
constantly redefined. From the bourgeois, social-democratic left of neoliberal
capitalism and the dogmatic Third and Fourth International left of state
monopoly capitalism, societies begin to move towards social and humanistic
direct democracy left as a final answer against the fascism, imperialism and
any form of class-oriented, exploitative, inhumane and destructive power.
4.
From the “Left avant-gardes” of 19th
and 20th century to the society of the Left of 21st
century
Across from the plummet of the capitalist system
and its political representatives, the social forces of Labour, Science and
Culture reorientate, reconstitute themselves and attempt to formulate the
necessary public space and to trigger a new fruitful public debate.
Those who, individually or collectively, participate in this debate are various
social networks and collectives, citizens which are politically oriented
towards an anti-parliamentary Left, people that are discontented from the
so-called Left and the progressive parties, neomarxists, neocommunists,
situationists and “council communists”, “anarcho-autonomists”, anarchists and
antiauthoritarians that struggle for an abstract democracy or for “anarchy” and
“libertarian communism”; all of the aforementioned have in mind a certain
figure of direct democracy. In parallel to the debate, the participants strive
– under a series of multiform and multileveled collective activities – to
implement a small-scale direct democracy by whatever means through their
experiences and the knowledge they acquire through them and, as a result, they
try to change the topic of the social dialogue, slowly but surely, in favour of
direct democracy by moving from the abstract to the definite and from the
conceptualization of Direct Democracy to specific democratic forms of action
and cohabitation.
The relation of those social movements and
forces with the so-called central-left (PASOK, DIMAR) and Left (KKE, ANTARSYA)
parties and as well as with SYRIZA is a relation of rivalry because there is
absolute cosmotheoretical and, hence, programmatic objection that leads to a
“mouse – mousetrap” relation in which some of the inexperienced actors (movements
and networks) become victims of their own good faith approach to the political
parties that consciously make an effort to consume them in their ranks. But the
majority of the political actors that constitute the aforementioned new social
movements, which are experienced actors to some extent, appear in a continuous
polemics with SYRIZA's politics and with the party's “mechanisms of planning”.
They perceive SYRIZA's “mechanisms of coordination” as structures that
manipulate the content of the new social movements and that downgrade them into
the levels of a foyer for the recruitment of voters. This is the only way that
SYRIZA could be nominated as the “Left manager of Capital”. It should be
considered as a fact that a foreseen rise of SYRIZA into the given structures
of power, the polemics between SYRIZA and the social movements will culminate
till the complete unravelling of SYRIZA's bourgeois character. Such an
involvement might lead to the strengthening of the new social movements and the
tendencies that promote the dialogue for direct democracy will increase, both
quantitatively and qualitatively, into a higher level of collective planning
and actions that will open the perspectives for a local, regional and global
solidarity and cooperation; this is essential because direct democracy does not
have many possibilities of success at a local (in the strict sense) or even at
a national level. It must be realised that Direct Democracy is the
expression of social solidarity and equality at a local level and the
realisation of the ecumenicality of humankind and human civilisation.
Some voices that consider the alliance between
these social movements and SYRIZA as necessary or even propose the construction
of the Party of Social Movements – or, the Party of Direct Democracy[19]
– are either naïve or suspicious because such an option will lead the new
social movements to a commitment of a political suicide due to the fact that
their historical role has nothing to do with the political game of bourgeois
parliamentarism. On the contrary, their role needs to remain autonomous towards
a struggle for the leftization of society and against the leftization
of capital. The current historical circumstances do not demand “improvement
policies” but a definitive and a universal repeal of the decadent capitalist
system; they demand, in addition, the abolition of the backward relations of
production and the development of new relations that will be equivalent to the
advanced forces of productions which, in the present era of 21st century, are
capable of establishing social equality, Direct Democracy and Classless
Society. The struggle for Direct Democracy is not a “speed race” for the seizure
of power under the ideological hegemony of bourgeois democracy but, on the
contrary, it is a “marathon race” for the moral, ideological, political and
operational disarmament of the capitalist system, that is to say, it is a
struggle for the maturation of the majority of the people that live in
contemporary societies towards social self-management and classless society
and, as a result, the subversion of every form of power.
5.
From Class-Based Social Inequality
to Classless Social Equality
The heroic story of the National
Liberation Front (EAM), which achieved, qualitatively speaking, the leftization
of the Greek people at a great extent, was not only caused by the
patriotism of the Greek people against the fascists and Nazi occupiers. Anyone
who knows the history of national resistance of Greece probably should know the
crucial role of EAM’s “Code Poseidon” [20],
which was the code name for the “Instructions for Popular Self-Administration
and for Popular Justice” that abolished every form of local governance and
cancelled every state-centered or occupational command by designating the Local
Assembly of the People into the sovereign political unit of each local
society. It was exactly this new revolutionary perception for social
self-management and direct democracy that started – with self-organization,
expropriation of large property and self-administration of the Communities – in
a small mountain village of the municipality of Evritania around 1942 and,
thereafter, it was quickly developed in the whole country and boosted EAM and
ELAS’s resistance leading to the gradual liberation of most of the Greek
territory from the German Occupation. The internal sabotage of EAM by its
leadership and therefore by KKE, was the swan song of resistance which,
although it defeated the foreign occupiers, due to the compromises and the
subordination of its leadership to the Yalta Agreement (1945), was defeated by
the internal occupiers and therefore paved the road for the degradation of
Greece into another U.S. protectorate.
This reference to history took place
in order to give a definite answer to those which, by ignorance or
self-interest, question the existence of popular political consciousness and
treat societies as a sheep drove (as “the masses”) that allegedly don’t have
class and revolutionary consciousness and that, as a result, they need
shepherds or wise avant-gardes in order to gain their liberty. Given that
contemporary conditions start to look like those of the Nazi occupation, and,
in addition to the progressively evolved removal of the people from the
parliamentary system and the parallel pursuit of solutions outside the
capitalist system, it may be rightful to anticipate an explosion of the popular
consciousness towards a new leap onwards for a better world, the world of
social equality and direct democracy. The Future does not exist until we create
it but it is also known that history is moving in the direction of the “arrow
of time”[21], due to the compression
of the solid social bulk of the forces of Labour, Science and Culture, slowly
and even sometimes with manoeuvres and steps backwards but in the end surely,
beginning from the Past towards the Future, from the actually existing
situation of our times towards a better situation and from the anti-human and
disastrous capitalism towards classless democracy[22]
and Universal Humanism. In this sense, a better world is being born by making
the old one useless. It is the world of the spiritually, ideologically,
intellectually, politically, organizationally and functionally self-emancipated
forces of Labour, Science and Culture; it is the world of social equality.
Let’s open our eyes and let’s admire this new world. Let’s use our hands in
order to construct it, complete it and make it truly ours once and for all.
The conclusion is that, as history teaches that
as there is no individual salvation in capitalism, so there can be no salvation
for a single country in conditions of imperialist globalization, hence the struggle
can only be collective and international. In the 21st century, the first word
gradually stops to belong to the economic elites and their parliaments, as well
as the petty bourgeois 'left' parties and passes on to the independent forces
of Labour, Science and Culture, which become more progressive against the
institutions, the structures and all the functions of the capitalist productive
model and its’ supporting bourgeois political system. Until the completion of
this historical process, in which the classless so-called “utopia” is,
objectively and subjectively, a necessary, feasible and inevitable fact, a lot
can happen and Greece, Europe, and Humanity still have much to suffer until
they realise that the degradation that capitalism brings to humanity must be
overcome and the simultaneous building of a direct democracy within the context
of a classless society are essential steps towards an ecumenical humanist
culture[23].
[1] I would like to thank
Thanos Georgilas for
coordination, Nikolaos Gkimpiritis for
translating from Greek and Dimitris-Nicolas Lampos for editing of
this text.
[3] Lambos Kostas D.,
Abhängigkeit und fortgeschritene Unterentwicklung dargestellt am Beispiel der
Landwirtschaft Griechenlands, RITA G: FISCHER VERLAG, Frankfzrt am Main 1981,
Lampos Kostas, Dependency, advanced underdevelopment and agricultural economy
of Greece, ECHMI publication, Athens 1983.
[4] For the meaning and the
importance of Eurasia, see, Brzezinski Zbignew, The Big Chessboard, LIVANIS
publications, Athens 1998 & Brzezinski Zbignew, The Choice, LIVANIS
publications, Athens 2005
[5] Kolempas Giorgos.
Localisation. From universal to local. An ecological world is possible
(Antigone Publications, Thessaloniki 2009).
[6] See, Lampos Kostas. Who’s
afraid hydrogen? The hydrogen revolution, the free energy and liberation of
humanity from fossil fuels and capitalist barbarism (NISSIDES Publication,
Thessaloniki 2013). See also Rifkin Jeremy The hydrogen economy. The creation
of the global energy net and the redistribution of authority in Earth. The next
great financial revolt (LIVANIS Publication, Athens 2003).
[8] Alexis Tsipras,
speaking at a round table held at the
University of Austin in Texas, United States of America, on "can save the Euro and Europe? , See
daily printed and
electronic press on 5 and 6 November 2013.
[9] «I want to be clear. Return to
drachma under the E.U., with existing correlations, from the working classes
view; it means continuation of the hard frugality with other means». Dragasakis
Giannis Drachma means brutal frugality with other means, at: http://tvxs.gr/news/ellada/gdragasakis-draxmi-simainei-agria-litotita-me-alla-mesa
[10] See Karalis Spyros, Lafazanis
Amendments for the leftwing turn of SYRIZA, in: ELEFTHEROTYPIA newspaper,
Friday July 12 2013.
[11] «It’s a program that laying
the groundwork for the reform of political system» (and obviously not the
overthrow of the capitalist system), referred into Founding Declaration of
SYRIZA, and also into the Political Decision of the Congress of SYRIZA, July
2013.
[12] «SYRIZA is here to organize
the democratic subversion of the political system and the structure that
support it, for the opening the road to a Leftwing government», referred a.b.
[13] « A number of issues of
jurisdiction and must be left to the responsibility of stakeholders under
direct democracy, while the direct involvement ... control institutions, the
practice and institutions of representative democracy», stated ibid.
[16] According to
statements of SYRIZA M.of P. Petros Tatsopoulos, see newspaper PROTO THEMA, of
08.07.2013.
[17] See, Lampos Kostas,
Americanism and globalization. Economy of fear and decadence, PAPAZISIS
publication, Athens 2009.
[18] Lampos Kostas,
Neogermanismus: Der neue Albtraum Europas? (Der Dekalog der Griechen), in: http://lefthumanism.blogspot.gr/2012/02/normal-0-false-false-false.html
and Neogermanism. The new nightmare of Europe?
(The Decalogue of Greeks), POLITES magazine, issues 35/February 2012 and
36/March 2012.
[19] There are already around
forty controversial and Person movements,
organizations and parties 'leadership',
which directly or indirectly on direct democracy, but cut off from society and rivals such as the end
result turns out to be negative.
[20] Tsouparopoulos Thanasis. The
people’s democracy institutions of the National Resistance, GLAROS publication,
Athens 1989, Manolis Glezos, National Resistance 1940-1945, volumes 2,
STOHASTIS publication, Athens 2009 & Mpeikos Georgoulas, The people’s
authority in liberated Greece, THEMELIO, Athens 1979, volumes 2.
[21] Prigogine Ilya, The laws of
chaos, Travlos publication, Athens 2003 and Prigogine Ilya and Stengers Isabel,
Order in from the chaos. The new dialog of man of Nature, KEDROS publication, Athens 1986.
[22] See on, Lampos Kostas,
Classless Democracy and Ecumanical Humanism during 21st century, in:
Direct Democracy at 21st century, NISSIDES publication, Thessaloniki 2013. See
also, Lampos Kostas, Capitalist barbarism or Classless Democracy?, at Festival
of Direct Democracy, Thessaloniki 2013, http://www.anixneuseis.gr/?p=75155 και http://tvxs.gr/news/egrapsan-eipan/kapitalistiki-barbarotita-i-ataksiki-dimokratia-toy-kosta-lampoy
[23] See Lampos Kostas, Direct Democracy
and Classless Society, NISSIDES publication, Thessaloniki 2012.
