There is no business where chance plays as big a role as politics and the winds of popularity are very unstable. The poorer or more desperate the citizens are, the greater to need to compensate their frustrations into an exaggerated idolisation of a political figure. Greece historically prone to calamities is predisposed to early enthusiasm only to regret its choice, but it is then too late. Fortunately, Greece has learnt that democracy is the lesser evil and power has been exercised in rotation. This time the power has shifted from a populist captivating trailblazer to a leader serious, competent but unlike his predecessor not predisposed to rabble-rousing.
Recent past shows us how the rise of populism can snowball in catastrophic proportions if the rise of SYRIZA based on discontent with the previous socialist party is well documented, the conditions under which it took power merit some flashback. George Papandreou (the third scion of a political family) ascended to power in October 2009 during the world economic crisis taking PASOK to a comfortable majority of 160 seats but lacking the wisdom of his grandfather and the cunning of his father he cried wolf. This was to cause the demise of his party. By putting in the open the precarious debt situation, instead of working discretely with the debtors, he precipitated Greece in one of its worse crises in its history. Some of the debt that had been conveniently camouflaged in bonds through clever manipulations of Wall Street gurus during the Simitis government, eager to place Greece in the Euro, was sold short exposing the weakness of the Geek economy. Europe itself trying to manage its own problems called for very demanding terms for a series of bailouts. As the economy plummeted and unemployment rose the popularity of the PASOK party and that of Nea Democratia, who reluctantly had to support the second bailout, plummeted. It was on this occasion that Kammenos decided to leave Nea Demokratia and form his own party denouncing the support of Nea Democratia for the bailout. He in the process joined the ranks of the anti-memorandum protestors that included other small populist parties in particular SYRIZA, a small alliance of minute extreme left and marxist parties that had had combined in a coalition to have sufficient voices to be represented in Parliament and a neo-nazi fringe party called Golden Dawn. It was no surprise when, in the elections of 2012 Nea Democratia, had to ally itself to barely be able to achieve the majority to form a government. SYRIZA meanwhile had become the second party with 71 votes in the parliament, Kammenos achieving a mere 20 seats. Whereas the new government was progressively restoring the country towards growth, it was forced to resign due to its inability to raise the 3/5 majority. Had Kammenos’ ANEL party joined forces with government, new elections would not have been necessary.
The new elections of 2015 although marking a striking victory for SYRIZA with 149 seats failed to produce the absolute majority to form a government and Tsipras the great populist of the left found his partner in a populist of the right Kammenos whose number of seats had dwindled from 33, subsequently 20 and then to a mere 13 seats. In the recent elections ANEL did not gather sufficient votes to be represented in the Parliament and Kammenos has lost his “small fortune” probably for good. The descendent of PASOK, KINAL has managed to increase its seats from 17 to 22, a very marginal gain which within a demoralised party has only comforted Fofi Genimata. The party is split within a social democratic line and an extreme socialist wing that seeks to regain the ground lost to SYRIZA since 2009 elections. Rather than reinforcing the traditional socialistic values the leader seeks to regain the vote from the left which has flown to SYRIZA who promises everything and delivers very little. To reinforce her power she has isolated, displaced or simply dismissed the more competent personalities of the party. Alas for her she lacks the charm of Tsipras and her party as it is likely to evolve into an amorphous mass of left leaning sycophants. As she has not the capability of regaining the large segment who voted left feels more at ease with Tsipras, the mimic of Andreas Papandreou who has mastered his mentor’s crowd rousing techniques, the party is more likely to dwindle or split. A very small fortune will be left.
Meanwhile Tsipras with 86 members in the chamber can comfort himself that he has weathered the change of wind very satisfactorily. But where can he go? Under the clamping arms of Europe and the IMF he was forced to apply fiscally and monetarily orthodox policies that gave him in the world the aura of centrist leader, everything he is not. Hidden to the world public, his restrictive investment and privatising policies have not only slowed down Greece but contributed in the eyes of a large sector of the population that private capital and foreign investments area poison for the Greek economy. However, he is now caught between a moderate suit and red underwear. How will all this fare within a party where most personalities are fundamentally extreme left if not openly communist at least in ideas? What is clear is that there are quite a few golden bullions at risk. Will they go to the “oscarable” Varoufakis or disappear into thin air? Only future will tell.
Depending on the achievements of the present government and the assistance from a less doctrinal Europe, the Greek people will realize that populism is a dream of the past and that one has to vote for competent parties mainly interested in working for the good of the country. We have seen how abusing populism has made parties make a small fortune out of a big fortune. It is to hope for Greek democracy that the present government more interested in pragmatic achievements than empty accolades will serve as an example that will help a modern and appropriate opposition party to emerge.
Digenis