The following was posted as a comment n the blog by Ivan Horrocks, a regular commentator here. I thought it worth sharing more widely, with minor editorial changes and an addition because it expresses a sentiment with which I entirely concur:
There's a massive outcry about Greek debt and how and why it must be repaid otherwise the world as we know it will collapse. This, however, has very little to do with any form of rational argument. It is, quite simply, a device to wreck the Syriza government as quickly as possible, and to make sure that what happens can be laid at the feet of that government, and not blamed on the ECB, IMF, EC, or any other EU country, or — and this is most important — global capital (by which I primarily mean multi-national corporations, the 1% and their agents and supporters).
And why is that necessary? Because the full significance of the recent events in Greece are far, far broader and deeper than simply whether Greece repays its debts or not. For the first time in Europe for a very long time a progressive political party that is not either beholding to and/or implicitly supportive of the neoliberal project has got into power. Not only have they got into power, but they've done so with a clear mandate for pursuit of an entirely un-neoliberal agenda.
Now think of what happens if having won power Syriza goes on to deliver even half of the policies that they've promised to pursue (and I understand some of these will be passed through the Greek parliament as early as Wednesday). Where does that leave the likes of our own government, that of Germany, almost every newspaper and media owner in the world, the big four, almost every politician in a so called “left” or social democratic party (e.g.. Ed Miliband), every organisation that makes its money from lobbying in support on big business or providing any other service that promotes or delivers any aspect of the neoliberal project, the rich, The City, the EC, and so on and on. Any and all of these have spent years telling us there is no alternative.
In short, Syriza represent a direct challenge to those who have spent decades designing and imposing neoliberalism on Europe and the world. They are equivalent to the Allende government in Chile in the 1970s — and many of us are old enough to remember where that threat to the “world order” — as so many so called democrats saw it at the time — ended.
For me then — and for the sake of Syriza and the Greek people — the debate needs to move away from debt as fast as it can, because that's just a smokescreen to hide the true nature of the forces that are about to be deployed to undermine the potential success of this movement. From a neoliberal perspective there's a need for haste in destroying Syriza, before any success they might otherwise have emboldens Podemos in Spain, and then a general reawakening of non-neoliberal movements across southern Europe. I've no doubt that would then spread to France, and then who knows. Consequently, over the next three months Syriza will be subjected to the most concerted (and often secret) attacks any government in Europe has known for decades - probably since the birth of labour movements in the inter-war period. We must hope and assume (given their backgrounds) that those involved in the Syriza government are fully aware of this.
The agents of neoliberalism have spent 40 years establishing the hegemony of their project and they are not going to allow that to be challenged now and anything and everything will done to ensure that remains so.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Allende is not the only comparison (who can forget Heath’s Foreign Secretary, Alec Douglas Home, airily dismissing the critics of the toppling of Allende by saying his coalition had only secured 44% of the vote – I.e. FAR more than the Tories in 1970).
No, the other coup against an elected PM with a full mandate, was Gough Whitlam, toppled by a “palace coup” (literally, given he was sacked by a Governor General, using mediaeval monarchical powers). And all because he called into question the whole rationale of NATO, SEATO and US hegemony!
Indeed
Was this a British PM?
Stevo! Sorry, I assumed everyone would know. Gough Whitlam was Labour PM of Australia between 1972 and 1975, when he was dismissed by Sir John Kerr, the Governor General EVEN THOUGH he had a secure majority in the Lower House, but not in the Australian Senate, where there was a tie, enabling Whitlam’s budget to be blocked. Whitlam went to see the Governor General to ask for a dissolution, and was sacked, just as if the Governor General were say Charles l.
Suggest you Google not only Gough Whitlam, but also include John Pilger, who wrote a real laudatory encomium on Whitlam on his death – at 98!! – only last October. You might also read the Penguin “Death of the Lucky Country” by Donald Horne,(Penguin 1976, so probably out of print). The “hegemony” didn’t approve of Whitlam, so he was toppled.
That post is long on slogans and short on solutions. The debt is not a distraction – it is crippling the Greek economy. The question is: what is to be done about it?
There are few options, and they are all unpalatable – and they don’t include making banks take the loss (because the banks don’t hold the debt).
The solutions are not unpalatable
The ECB takes a hit of €150bn or so
It’s printing €1.1 trillion right now
Why is one unpalatable and the other essential?
Please explain
Ciaran. The purpose of my post was to attempt to position the issue of Greek debt within a much broader and deeper context not to suggest it should be ignored. Greek debt and its economic situation – as with our own – is directly causally related to a much more fundamental sytemic, institutional and political/ideological project – most usually referred to as neoliberalism, though I have no reservation in claiming that what we are now seeing in many countries is closer to a form of neofeudalism (e.g. with 60% of young people in Greece unemployed and with limited support from the state they are effectively serfs).
Tackling the debt “crisis” deals with a symptom of the neoliberal project. Syriza have rightly realised that they need to get much closer to tackling the cause. That is the overarching issue. Whatever faux concerns about inequality might have been evident in Davos last week they won’t move us one iota closer to solving either Greece’s (and Spain’s, Ireleand’s, the UK’s, etc etc) debt problems or any other symptom of the sickness that now lies at the heart of global capitalism. Indeed, any threat to that hegemony will be aggressively resisted, as we are about to witness.
Why is the debt “crippling the Greek economy”? The cost of servicing the debt is zero until 2022 and it doesn’t mature for nearly 30 years. It just sits there.
Greek borrowing rates are so high because the markets don’t trust them to repay any new debts, and I can’t see that defaulting on the historic debt and increasing public spending will fix that.
The debt crisis, as explained on this blog, is largely now a fiction to suppress Greece
So you agree that it’s wrong to say that the debt is crippling the Greek economy? That it’s actually irrelevant and focussing on it is missing the point?
Please rad the excellent blog post by Ivan Horrocks on this blog this week
Again, from ZH, an extremely thought-provoking article:
“Our socioeconomic system, while purported to have been created in order to benefit all (though not necessarily equally) is in fact used to subvert, exploit and enslave the general population for the benefit of those few at the top of the heap”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-27/tighten-those-chin-straps-folks-because-here-comes-rapid-unscheduled-disassembly-rud
It needs to be perused as a whole……
Good article John, though a tad depressing. 🙁
I read it too, Anthony, and you’re not joking. But a good read no less, and spot on with its analysis.
Greek people were attacked by a financial mafia, notice the msyterious deaths of those who opposed bankers. How much of money owed by Greece ended up in swiss bank accounts of the corrupt former elite.
Didn’t Goldman Sachs hide Greek debt with financial engineering in order to to join the EU, and Goldman hit Greece with massive interest payments for this ‘service’?
And as this was done under a previous administration, isn’t there an argument that the Greek debt should be written off as odious debt?
Pragmatically the debt is unpayable and was unserviceable when lent
It is odious
Thanks for upgrading to a blog, Richard, and apologies in advance to anyone who reads it for some examples of less than perfect grammar. I’d been thinking through what’s occurred in Greece all day – becoming more and more frustrated at the way the debate is being deliberately and/or lazily forced into a narrow narrative about debt – but unfortunately wrote the comment in haste, with only minimal proof reading before I posted it.
All good blogs are written that way
That’s what differentiates them
And makes them important
He would say that, wouldn’t he;o)
I gave a link yesterday (IT skills up to junior school level now) to Paul Krugman, who though “liberal” is not a left wing economist. He wrote a post which gave the prediction of the troika as to what would happen after Greece accepted the cuts. There was a fall of a few percent then a recovery leading and surpassing the 2010 GDP.
In fact the economy plummeted over 20%. The troika must have included the top level economists of the neo-classical view of economics, which underpins the nod-liberalism. When their predictions are so far out-as was Osborne’s that the Uk deficit would be eliminated over the course of this parliament-then we have grounds for challenging the model they are using.
What strikes me about so many of the comments I’ve read, and been recommended, on the Guardian and Independent, is that the people who want to suck yet more money out of the Greeks, smugly assume they understand the reality of economics and the ‘Lefties’ they denigrate, do not.
The ‘agents of neo-liberalism’ should be challenged. Ivan, i think you’re right about the ‘smokescreen’ to justify greed and ambition. Let’s hope pride is very close to the fall.
We can only hope
The blatant hostility towards the Greeks is shocking, so say the least
Expect lots more right-wing venom in the coming weeks against the Greeks who dare to question the status quo. A banker is being quoted on the BBC describing the new Finance Minster (a very respected professor of Economics not a towel-folder from Selfridges) as ‘a rough guy from the very far left of the political spectrum’. Tells you everything about what happens when we speak truth to power.
Just remember that when commentators refer to ‘lazy Greeks’ it should be pointed out that they worked the second longest hours in the OECD in 2013, following that other feckless country, Mexico. And where does Germany and the Netherlands rank? Right at the bottom:-
http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?DataSetCode=ANHRS
The BBC should be ashamed of their ceaseless portrayal of Syriza as ‘far/hard/extreme’ left.
Thank goodness for the balanced reporting by Jon Snow and C4 News this week. At the end of his excellent interview with the Yanis Varoufakis, Jon had the good grace to wish him and the new government well.
We have to keep pushing this argument: all their predictions have been proved wrong, so their model must be wrong.
Greece, going bust? Never.
Apart from 1824, 1843, 1860, 1890 and 1932.
The last time Greece was in a currency union, the Latin currency union, that ran to 1932, they got kicked out in 1908 for fiddling the figures. Sound familiar?
Of course Greece can go bust
It hasn’t got its own currency
We know Greece can go bust
We are arguing Germany should not force it to do so
Would you please like to engage with the issue in hand?
1824, 1843, 1860 – not in currency union then.
Just showing Greece has a history and what’s happening today is not unexpected. I remember everyone saying when Greece joined the Euro that the rules where flouted. Even the BBC says that every time Greece has been in a currency union, it’s fallen out.
Anyway, didn’t you previously say Greece didn’t have a debt crisis?
Greece ha not got a debt crisis
The ECB has
Nothing to see here, move along please.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_government-debt_crisis
That’s not even an argument
Please do not waste my time again
Thanks Ivan for an excellent and timely post which puts the finger firmly on the underlying issues.
I am mid-way through reading Owen Jones’ book “The Establishment – and how they get away with it” and have no doubt about the validity of your conclusion – that any serious challenge to the status quo will be resisted by all possible means, fair or (mostly)foul.
From Chris Cenuittia: “Even the BBC says…”. How telling and scary is that? The message is already going out to millions in the UK and beyond that Greece has made a bad decision.
Oh yes
This seems a very good analysis of the situation:
¨It could be easy to get carried away celebrating the electoral success of a left-wing anti-austerity party, but in order to do so it would be necessary to ignore the fact that much more powerful governments and institutions (IMF, EC, ECB, Germany, UK, US, numerous European banks) have vested interests in making sure that Syriza are perceived to fail.¨
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/what-now-for-greece.html
I wish them well: but the trap they’re in has two pits, and maybe three.
Firstly: austerity, a crushing deflation of the economy that can be escaped by… Deciding not to pursue austerity.
They’ll need *some* assets, or access to funding, in order to climb out of the pit, and I worry that exclusion from the world’s capital markets – or economic sanctions peddled as debt management – might push them back in, and keep them there.
Secondly: they’ve made no progress on tax compliance. That’s going to need cultural change, and many Greeks who oppose Syriza are definitely going to oppose that change.
Note that this isn’t about debt: it’s about having the cashflow and the resources to reflate the economy.
Thirdly, the risk that other commentators here have pointed out: hostile actions from neoliberal governments. I really do believe that we’ll see measures that are economic sanctions in all but name; and I fear that worse things will be done to destabilise their government and their economy.
As I say, I wish them well. If they have the will, I think that they’ll do better than Cuba under Cold-War economic warfare from the USA. If doing better than *that* sounds like faint praise, I would remind you all that Cuba has full literacy and better healthcare than half of America – and better than Austerity-stricken Greece has got, right now.
They also have rather fewer people in prison and performing involuntary labour than some Western economies I could name: neoliberalism isn’t delivering nearly as much freedom as you might think.
Richard, I don’t think debt will be Greece’s problem. The eurocrats are petrified of any nation leaving the Eurozone, so I feel certain the ECB will use their QE or part of it to pay the Greek Debt. What Syriza/the Greek government really needs is a massive public spending programme to kickstart the economy. Will they do this? Only time will tell. Bill Mitchell has written a good piece on this: http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=30037
Could the new Greek government be pinning hopes for fresh revenue, on a future gas pipeline coming through Turkey from Russia? Perhaps they’ve come to some ‘agreement’ with the Russian government(https://euobserver.com/foreign/127393). Now wouldn’t it be ironic if the other states in Europe now had to pay a fee to the Greeks for their gas? 😉
Anyone fining the analogy with the 1970’s Chile ‘revolution’ not being allowed to succeed a little far-fetched might instead reflect on what the USSR did to the then Czechoslovakia in 1968.
In each case a brave state looked as though it was challenging every orthodoxy of it’s perceived half of the Communist/Capitalist divide. In neither case could it be allowed to succeed.
Were the troops and tanks that were deployed that time so very different from any crowd-control techniques we may yet see within Greece if this all turns ugly?
In praise of blog-typos; I’m all for them, they can raise a smile in the darkest of moments – at times Richard sounds like the gendarme in ‘Allo-Allo’ – but we never lose the meaning.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, wholeheartedly agreed Ivan.
I think it is of vital importance that we all look beyond the immediate scenario and see this for what it really is.
(I hesitate to use the term ‘New World Order’ for fear of being labelled a conspiracy theorists, although in fairness the term has admittedly been appropriated by some pretty left-field individuals, but if I may borrow it as a short-hand for the nebulous and often shadowy group that includes the 1%, big pharma, the GM companies, the big bankers et. In other words everyone you might expect to find at Bilderberg /Davos /both).
The great strength of the New World Order has been in its ability to infiltrate every major institution in the western world without ever appearing to represent one unified body. Through this ability it has managed to wage a series of battles against socially inclusive ideologies and institutions without ever creating the impression of a war. But a war it is, a war that, if won will see the absolute control of the Earth’s resources by the 1% that make up the NWO.
If we return to basics there are three conditions of ‘The State’;
The State- being an organic outgrowth from ‘the tribe’ or ‘pack’, based on the pooling of personal resources for mutual gain in return for general principles of equity and adherence.
The Failed State; the Failed State occurs when such adherence and participation fails to provide the individual with the basis for survival.
The Corrupt-Failed State occurs when The State fails to provide individuals with vital necessities and yet absolutely precludes those individuals from providing those things for themselves or changing the State itself.
Neo-liberal economics have already led us to the conditions of the Failed State. But that was the easy bit. The undermining of institutions in the name of good governance and fiscal prudence was easily achieved with the collusion of a media that is almost entirely owned by the 1%. But the aspirations of the NWO lie within the Corrupt-Failed State, and the passage from covert subversion to open oppression is proving trickier. There comes a point in that transition where a majority of citizens recognise that their best interests do not lie in supporting the Corrupt-Failed State agenda and, where possible, express that recognition through the democratic process.
In Greece the electorate have done just this and consequently brought themselves into a direct confrontation with the New World Order. Those who would rule over us perceive a threat extending way beyond Greek shores. Anti austerity parties are thriving throughout Europe, particularly in its Southern half (I would suggest that anyone who hasn’t already, read about the extraordinary rise of Podemos in Spain). Like US involvement in South-East Asia in the middle of the 20th century, the Neo-liberal concensus, seeing the threat of a ‘domino effect’, will happily make ‘collaterol damage’ of the Greek State, it’s citizens, and its democracy.
We have reached a point in history where the New World Order is engaged in open warfare with the democratic process itself. And Greece is just the first battle.
“There’s class war alright, but it’s my class, the rich, that are making war. And we’re winning.”
-Warren Buffet
An excellent quote to finish on, Martin, which just about sums it up – and from someone who undoubtedly knows and has more than likely been party to (even if only a bystander) a fair few discussions about how to progress it. But damn, there I go again into conspiracy theory territory. I’ll be suggesting Lord Peter Mandelson is part of that group next 🙂
Martin you are spot on. Conspiracy Theorist is a just derogatory term for an open-minded free-thinker. 🙂
I think Greece may be the first battle in the Western world (ironically the home of democracy). In the non-Western world we’ve already seen the destruction of Libya and Syria and the harassment of countries such as Iran; states that economically have not ‘towed the line’ with Western capitalist interests. For all the bad things that can be said about people such as Gaddafi, thing is the people were well looked after in terms of health care, education etc. The NWO will have none of this. It must be the multinationals in control of assets. Let’s see what happens in Cuba, now that the Americans have a ‘foot in the door’. And make no mistake, Russia (and China) is another very big battle. Putin will not tow the Western line. So he too must be brought down.
Now hang on a minute. Not all people were well looked after under Gadaffi, Hussein, Castro, etc. They did, after all, murder dissidents in very large numbers.
This to the mistake of making my enemies enemy my friend, a mistake the left made with the Soviet Union.
We won’t stop the NWO by white-washing the crimes of totalitarians.
Doreen I don’t wish to whitewash these regimes but at the end of the day these regimes were not removed because they were totalitarian.
Yes, how great Libya, Syria, and Iran are or were: a perfect example of the moral poverty of the left.
I stress: I do not endorse Anthony’s views on this issue
Martin,
Another excellent and oh so pertinent summary. You,Ivan and several other regular contributors here echo my own thoughts on this but express them so much better that I ever could. So there’s little I can usefully add other than to say I also wholeheartedly agree. What can be done to get the message out to a wider audience? Reading readers’ virulent comments, even in the Guardian (I can’t put myself to look further!), is pretty despairing and I see little signs of an awakening in the UK.
Here in France, there are at least left-wing groups who actively and openly supported Syriza in the run-up to the election, notably Mélenchon’s ‘Front de Gauche’ and the Ecologists (EELV), but they are split among several parties. Whether they can somehow get their act together and – perhaps with the help of the left of the Socialist party (many of whom are known to be pretty unhappy with the current policies of the Hollande/Valls government which seems to have renounced on much of what they promised)- make the most of the opportunity presented by events in Greece to influence French policy remains to be seen. I’d like to think they might, but don’t hold out much hope.
Doreen,
You’re absolutely right about the historic mistakes of elements of the Left. I also remember many otherwise good people making themselves appear ludicrous by attempting to defend the indefensible.
But Anthony is talking about something else. The NWO care nothing about the individual citizens of those countries. Instead their actions are targeted at leaders who stand in opposition to the very principles of the Neo-liberal cause. They must be removed regardless of the cost. And can anyone say that the citizens of Libya, which daily descends ever deeper into a hell of Dante like proportions, are better off? Or Iraq? Or Syria?
And if this is about liberating the oppressed, what of all the oppressive Gulf States with whom we actively collaborate, despite their cruelty and inhumanity? If we are dispassionate about Russia we are faced with the fact that for all the repression Putin has incarcerated far less people than America. And, yes there is media suppression in Russi, but how free is our free press, wholly owned by the ruling hegemony. I share the popular dislike of Putin, but his continuing incumbency (or not) should be a matter for Russian Citizens. But Putin is a shrewd politician with a strong sense of history , and as such, is (like Allende, Castro and Ho Chi Minh before him) a direct impediment to the establishment of the NWO. Of course the recent plummet in the price of oil on which the Russian economy is so reliant could be a complete coincidence…
Most worryingly of all it should be remembered that the usury on which the NWO is founded is proscribed in Islam, and that is the biggest impediment of all.
You are absolutely right that we cannot defend the cruel and oppressive but we have a responsibility to question the motives of those who attack them.
@Ed Ryan
I am astounded that anyone seeking to lecture commentators on ‘moral poverty ‘ should include Libya, a country so devastated by the consequences of Western Military Intervention that thousands of them have risked (and often lost) their lives trying to escape. I’m sure that most Libyans would share your views now they have been thrown to the wolves that are ISIL. I’m sure that many of them daily thank their stars that they are rid of a dictator under whom they received free comprehensive health care and achieved the highest literacy rates in the region. Especially perhaps Libyan women who, under Gaddafi achieved almost 100% literacy and whom, under ISIL will be denied the right to education on pain of death.
The question in Libya is not whether Gaddafi was an oppressive megalomaniac (he undoubtedly was) but has our intervention made things better for Libyans. The answer to that is No. A thousand times, No. We have made their lives infinitely, infinitely worse.
And Syria, where the greatest humanitarian tragedy of modern times is playing out before our very eyes. Better, do you think for western interference?
And where exactly does your apparently superior moral compass point you on the regime change in Iraq? Would it be moral poverty to suggest that the removal of Sadam has made things worse for Iraqis? Again the question is not whether Sadam was a cruel monster, but was he more monstrous than Islamic State? Was his deposition worth the 600,000 and 1000,000 Iraqi civilians who lost their lives?
And in all these cases what, exactly, have we done to help these poor people rebuild their lives and their nations once the last piece of ordnance has been hurled. And if we are not in this to improve the lives of the people we are allegedly fighting to free, then what exactly is the motive for our involvement?
Your comment suggests you are either wholly ignorant of the reality in places like Libya, or pitifully näive about the reasons we were dragged into these conflicts.
I would suggest that before you trumpet your self-proclaimed moral superiority you take a long hard look at what the removal of these dictatorships has achieved.
I am really grateful for the courage being shown in arguments being presented here
Martin. In this comment and the one to Doreen you concisely but powerfully express what I, and I suspect many others, feel about the appalling impact of the military and foreign policies of the US and its allies over recent decades, and all carried out in “our” name and to protect “our” freedoms. I’m not sure whether you spotted it, but Gary Younge had a excellent piece in either last weekend’s Guardian or Observer about the hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy at the heart of the past few decades of US and western foreign policy, in which, for example, we fly our flags at half mast for the death of the head of state of a murdering, human rights violating, dictatorship, and send high ranking officials to the crowning of his successor, while simultaneously waging war on murdering, human rights violating dictatorship elsewhere. Whether the defining characteristic between them is that one buys reams of military equipment from the west and the other doesn’t – or doesn’t buy enough – we will never know, but as you so forensically point out, the whole ceaseless, ongoing policy stinks to high heaven. And the worst thing is I strongly suspect we – by which I mean the US and west – are now so deeply dug into this hole, and so obviously still digging it, that we’ll never, ever get out. It certainly makes the significance of the “dodgy dossier” and Blair’s and Bush’s actions all those years ago a whole lot greater and far more damaging over the longer term than we could have imagined at the time.
What worries me is how few people see this
Are we genuine liberals so rare?
Indeed Ivan.
re. Your last point I wonder if you have ever come across the following quote, (in which I have taken the liberty of modifying one word) from a Sunday Times report.
‘The people of England have been led in Iraq into a trap from which it will be hard to escape with dignity and honour. They have been tricked into it by a steady withholding of information. The Baghdad communiques are belated and insincere. Things have been far worse than we have been told, our administration far more bloody and inefficient than the public knows. It is a disgrace to our Imperial record and may soon be too inflamed for any ordinary cure. We are today not far from a disaster’.
The word I have changed is Iraq (originally ‘Mesopotamia’), and the report from which it is drawn is dated 22 Aug 1920. The author, one T E Lawrence.
… and No, Richard, I suspect we are many, we just don’t know it.
I do hope we are many
There were many in Spain today
I watched Emily Maitliss (is that how you spell her name?) interview the new Greek finance minister last night on Newsnight and I was appalled by the way he was treated.
I think Emily is one of the better post-Paxman Newsnight presenters but she did herself no favours at all. She did not allow him to develop any points and seemed to want to deliver a verdict on what was going on instead. He did stick up for himself however.
The Greek Finance Minister came across as reasonable, humble and intelligent with a good grasp of the problem but – more importantly for a politician – a sound grasp of why he was there – to execute the mandate he had been voted in to do by a democratic process. How novel!!
Emily kept banging on about capital flight as if that was the problem (as though this was a verdict on the new Greek government) but the Finance minister rightly in my view pointed out that this was a symptom of another deeper problem – austerity.
I have to say I was jealous of the Greek people to have such a politician in their midst – he was candid, articulate and came across very well. I wish Greece the very best of luck and hope that this particular effort to changes attitudes to European austerity bears fruit.
He looks great to me
And a credit to Essex University as it once was bit is sadly ceasing to be
http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2015/01/31/on-bbc-tv-newsnight/
Nice one Carol!
A great blog from this chap too!
I hope he does not stop.
And no – I did not imagine Emil’s rudeness either!
Thanks