Ideological and social domination in the crisis years
Let us open up the image a little bit. Plunged as we are -not unfairly- into the difficulties of our homeland, we Greeks have let ourselves, once more, to miss far-reaching developments. While the two major political events of the last three years, i.e. the global financial crisis and the Obama election, have -in terms of ideology- vindicated ideas of the Democratic Left, in terms of relating social forces with election results they achieved the strengthening of right-wing parties. What really happened and the social democratic logic and soft power did not prevail and therefore the countries of the world, one after the other, bow to the sirens of populism, nationalistic entrenchment and the enforcement of trends and ideas which at other times would, without any hesitation, have been called extreme-Right?
I attribute particular importance to three reflective consequences of the crisis that combine psychological and political elements. The crisis might have been -on paper- a slap in the face of neo-liberalism, but also created the incubation conditions of a new Right rather than for some new expression of the Left: It filled citizens with insecurity and fear, shrunk up to disappearance the public space, reinforced the importance of small circles (homeland, family, individual) against the importance of great ideals (international solidarity, justice, equality). “Conservatism” moved from the area of ideology to the field of survival and thus its weakness was transformed into force. The Right realized this in time and effectively: on the one hand by appropriating achievements and ideas vindicated by history (from Sarkozy-type declarations on “humanization of capitalism” to promoting measures of clearly social democratic origin, such as "Economic governance’', Eurobonds, supernational authorities to control the financial system, even taxation on stock-exchange transactions) and on the other hand by hardening its attitude towards the two social issues which matter the most to its voters (security and immigration). By accepting this bilateral and hypocritically consensual positioning societies have allowed the third and greatest paradox: the abandonment of pretexts and the emergence of a "Right beyond limits'’.
Beyond the limit of foolishness (like the American “Tea-Party” whose candidates claim to have discussed with Jesus Christ or with UFO’s and consider Obama an Arab trying to destroy the foundations of the American dream), beyond the limit of common sense (the Greek right that purports to have the recipe to solve all problems within a year, without offending anybody’s interests), beyond the limit of legality (Berlusconi’s Right-wing coalition making laws on request and identifying collective interest with the protection of a Prime Minister- businessman-patron), beyond the limit of its own tradition (many Sarkozy’s acts tearing apart the image of France as the homeland of human rights).
All these elements lead to a question constantly emerging from the lips and minds of many citizens, a question confusing and embarrassing for the modern governing Left: are there real differences with the Right? The already reduced, because of supranational functions, potential of transforming ideology into action, has been converted by the crisis into a pulp, in which only the most conservative ideas survive. Yet the progressive forces would have found weapons to counterattack, if they had just analyzed the situation calmly and decided to overcome their timidity. They could try to confront an arrogant, irrational Right with common sense, moderation and collective interest, to promote European unification which is necessarily becoming more and more federalist, to carry out substantial reforms, to be committed to creating a fairer society than the Right could ever create or even dare propose. On all these fronts the Greek struggle against the crisis is an example, a testing ground but also a source of anxiety for progressive citizens all over the world.
Social Media