Surviving Capitalism (Not) : Alexis Tsipras, Greece’s rising star, is a radical in name only

We’ve lived so long under the spell of hierarchy—from god-kings to feudal lords to party bosses—that only recently have we awakened to see not only that “regular” citizens have the capacity for self-governance, but that without their engagement our huge global crises cannot be addressed. The changes needed for human society simply to survive, let alone thrive, are so profound that the only way we will move toward them is if we ourselves, regular citizens, feel meaningful ownership of solutions through direct engagement. Our problems are too big, interrelated, and pervasive to yield to directives from on high.
—Frances Moore Lappé, excerpt from Time for Progressives to Grow Up

Friday, June 8, 2012

Alexis Tsipras, Greece’s rising star, is a radical in name only

Click here to access article by Jerome Roos from Reflections on a Revolution.

Those who make revolutions halfway only dig their own graves.

This is the central thesis of his article. The author argues that Alexis Tsipras and his party, Coalition of the Radical Left (SYRIZA), although wrapped in radical rhetoric, is essentially a social-democratic scheme to rescue capitalism in Europe.

As history as shown time and again, whenever capitalism is wracked with extremes of wealth distribution to the extent that their very system is threatened, they will either resort to fascism or social-democratic methods to save their cherished system. The former method is obviously very odious, while the latter method offers only temporary relief for working people. Thus, temporary relief for so many suffering working people is often grasped in place of a permanent solution of system change.

The first method promises more of the same with a twist: bailing out banks that are owned by the One Percent, imposing more austerity on workers, but putting down resistance using police state measures. The second method also intends to protect the One Percent's banks by bailing them out with public debt, but then using their debt money to finance public services to provide more jobs, and making some adjustments to the existing sovereign debts.

Here in the US, these two choices represent the liberal and right-wing of the ruling class. Up till now it has been evident that the right-wing is very much in the ascendency. There are signs that financial elites are getting panicky (see this and this) over the continuing economic crisis, and the two camps are lining up to push their agendas to save the system. In Quebec, the ruling class has so far opted for method one. In France we see the second option being favored with the election of Socialist Party candidate Francois Hollande.

Obama's speech this morning is arguing for the second method which he could have pursued after promising such policies during his campaign. However, after his election victory along with many congressional Democrats during the first two years of his administration, he quietly put these promises to rest. In the last congressional elections two years ago, people erroneously thought they could turn to the other party for more action--the old Tweedledee-Tweedledom phenomenon--and voted in reactionary Republicans.The real decision-makers of the ruling class obviously issued orders to Obama to pursue policies of austerity. Governor Walker's recent recall victory in Wisconsin aided by huge funds from the right-wing illustrates the power of those who currently favor the first solution. This will become a very dramatic contest as the two camps vie for leadership in the capitalist classes both in the US and Europe.