CONTACT | SUBSCRIBE | ΝEWSLETTER - ΔΕΛΤΙΟ

Sunday, February 5th, 2012 | Classifieds | ABOUT

CounterSpin

Blogs - Ιστολόγια

The anti-Greece campaign of the international media

Written by Ingeborg Beugel for NRC Handelsblad, translation by Jérôme Roos.

There’s only one word that adequately describes the majority of Dutch media reports on Greece right now: a witch hunt. Of all the arrogant stupidity, full of gut feelings of Dutch superiority, De Telegraaf takes the cake. ”Boom, kick them out of the eurozone. Our citizens no longer want to pay for these wasteful Greeks,” was this newspaper’s headline on May 19, following the results of a Telegraaf survey of over 11,000 participants. Or what about the following headline, on May 13th: “Again, billions of euros thrown into a bottomless pit.” Apparently this kind of nonsense works. By now, 58 percent of Dutch people are opposed to ‘giving’ even a penny to Greece.

For what it’s worth, the average Greek retirement age is nearly 65. Some Greeks that I know who take up their retirement funds early, usually receive between 200 and 600 per month. At that point, sitting on your ass is not even an option. These people have to immediately find employment elsewhere, usually more than one job. After the first round of cuts last year, a high school teacher now earns an average of 800 euros per month. 500 euros of this goes to rent and other fixed costs. You’re left with 300 euros to live off. As a teacher, you simply can’t start a family. And what do you do if you’re a kindergarten teacher or a hostess with a salary of 650 euros per month? A Greek widow (my 94-year old neighbor on Hydra) lives off 400 euros a month. That’s not even enough for her diapers and medicine. She manages to pull through under appalling conditions thanks to her family and neighbors. I don’t know any Dutch person working three jobs to make ends meet, but I do know dozens of Greeks who work three jobs just to survive. Yes, there are Greeks benefiting from high and early retirement. They are an exception, not the rule. By the way: on Hydra, there’s a retired Dutch teacher, a carefree baby boomer, who retired at her fiftieth, never having to work again and enjoying Greece for the rest of her life without any financial worries. Not a single Greek colleague of hers could do that.

According to the latest Eurostat statistics, the Greeks work 40.6 hours a week, most of all 27 EU member states. That says nothing about productivity and efficiency — which is lower — but it does say something about the alleged laziness of the Greeks. According to OECD figures of 2009, the Greeks are the only ones among western countries who exceed the line of two thousand working hours per year: Greece, 2119 per year; Australia 1690; Belgium 1550; Netherlands 1378. That the average Dutch people in the street, or average Dutch journalists are ignorant, fail to inform themselves, and utter the most insulting remarks, doesn’t surprise me given our social climate, but if politicians and notables express themselves in the same way, it’s time to ring the alarm bell.

Geert Wilders, the Dutch far-right populist, calls the Greeks ‘junkies’, to whom you shouldn’t give any money. Our national demagogue has found his new Moroccans in Europe — the Greek people and the inhabitants of other “garlic countries”. Piet Moerland, Rabobank CEO, believes that “the Greeks have to feel the threshold of pain”. What Greeks? Anyone but the honorable ladies and gentlemen with whom he knowingly did business? Or the ordinary Greek citizen, who had nothing to do with it, but who’s paying the bill? The Dutch, who are only sensitive towards their wallets and who have no regard for history, causality, or the social consequences of the often unjustified measures that have until now affected the weak in Greek society (simple workers and pensioners), are living up to their reputation.

In 1974, after seven years of dictatorship, Greece became free and independent for the first time, after decades of foreign interference and oppression by right-wing governments that didn’t care for the people. When, in 1981, Andreas Papandreou, the father of the incumbent prime minister, took power to become the first left-wing prime minister in the history of Hellas, he played into the pressing needs of the people at the time: the need for freedom (everything should be allowed, including demonstrations, powerful unions and ‘free state’ universities where the police wasn’t allowed to venture), the need for national pride, and the need for a caring state. He thought the economy would grow by pumping in money, increasing incomes and creating employment. So he began to borrow.

Papandreou was anything but successful, even though he had been a professor of economics at Berkeley. His strategy would have worked only in a protected economy, but Greece was a member of the EEC. The extra income of the people went straight to consumer goods that were imported from abroad. The money borrowed from abroad flowed right back into those very same countries. Industry in Greece slowly faded. Companies went bankrupt. Northern Europe was stronger and better.

The same happened with other countries in Europe’s southern axis. Weaker economies served as a growing market for the stronger economies in the European core. With the introduction of the euro in 2001, this development proceeded even further. Germany and the Netherlands benefited enormously, both through collecting interest on loans and through the growth of their exports.

All in all, Brussels and the European banks gave in to their own drive for profit maximization without any self-restraint, lending some 2,000 billion euros to Ireland, Belgium, Portugal and Spain — and to Greece, while everyone was fully aware that cronyism there still reigned supreme after entrance into the European Union, that the public sector was bursting at the seams, that the business climate was poor, that the political elite on the left and on the right was corrupt, that the rich engaged in mass tax evasion, that the institutions functioned poorly, and that European money was not being used well. If you do that for thirty years, without any checks or sanctions, can you still keep a straight face while blaming the Greeks alone for their mismanagement?

Did Brussels not know by 2009 that the Greek budget deficit was not 6, but 12 percent? Nonsense. Brussels and the banks were simply standing there, looking on and doing business with anyone who all those people who are now being called a “bottomless souvlaki”.

As long as the Greek economy kept growing at a remarkable 4-5 percent rate, thanks to the tourism and shipping industries (in which the Greek shipowners are considered the absolute world leaders), nothing could go wrong. The structural instability caused by excessive borrowing remained invisible until the crisis of 2008 did hit Europe, but left Greece untouched for the moment. The EU, under the presidency of France, decided to support the banks. Greece participated, although Greek banks did not use the support at the time. They did not need to, because — unlike Dutch banks — they had not participated in the “American casino games”. In that respect, the Greek banks were more solid enterprises than the Dutch ones. Their problem was — and still is — just that they (also) had Greek bonds in their portfolios. In 2009, the global shipping industry collapsed as a result of the global crisis. Tourism decreased dramatically. In the spring of 2009, European Commissioner Almunia warned repeatedly that things would go wrong for Greece. Nobody did anything. There were Greek elections in June and September. In such moments, it’s customary for Brussels not to bother a member state. Moreover, the right-wing prime minister at the time, Karamanlis, who was an ally of neoliberal Nothern Europe, felt that support measures could wait.

Only in the autumn of 2009, after the “confession” and “Mea Culpa” on the Greek deficit by prime minister Giorgos Papandreou in Brussels, right at the moment when the global crisis was starting to be felt in Greece, did the full extent of the country’s problems emerge. Ever since, the propaganda machine has been running at full speed. Contrary to reality, the Greeks are not just being blamed, but they are suddenly also considered to be Mediterranean profiteers, living like a louse on a sore head, at the expense of the righteous North European taxpayer. The angry statements by EU bosses like Barroso, Trichet, Juncker and Merkel were raining down. Papandreou did not even get time to sort things out. No, Greece should immediately display good behavior. Speculators smelled blood. They openly started betting on a Greek default.

Greece was drained by the markets. It no longer received any credit and had to beg the EU for assistance. Under the leadership of Angela Merkel, the IMF was called in. Tough conditions were set, even harsher than the IMF desired: punishment was enacted. Punishment for what? Punishing Greece is like a perverse confirmation of the EU’s inherent powerlessness, and a confirmation of the fact that the EU is mainly a bureaucratic institution that fails to act politically when it has to in order to stave off catastrophe.

The ordinary Greek people are now expected to foot the bill for the extremely high interest repayments to the European banks. Unfortunately, the Greek prime minister started last year what he should have ended with. Taxes have been raised. Salaries were already much lower than in the Netherlands, but they have now been reduced by an additional 15 percent. Social security has been minimized. All kinds of public services have been cut out entirely.

Most Greeks are struggling just to keep their head above the water. Every day, desperate people demonstrate in downtown Athens. They are not, in other words, on the beach drinking ouzo. But it’s not enough. The merciless figures show that the situation in Greece has actually gotten worse. The Greek market has collapsed. Tax increases are failing to raise revenues (you simply can’t squeeze any milk out of an empty cow). All the public sectors in Greece — postal services, ports, utilities, etc. — have to be privatized, not so much to help the Greeks, or to actually increase the efficiency of these often poorly-functioning institutions, but rather to for them to serve as collateral for the European banks. Sharply lower incomes and higher taxes, combined with top-heavy loans, do not only destroy the economy, but also social cohesion. Unemployment has already reached 16 percent. Next year, it will be 22 percent. Greek people have no prospects. Among those under 35 years of age, 37 percent wants to emigrate.

Dutch Finance Minister Jan-Kees de Jager sees only one solution: “A very radical, painful adjustment package for the economy, cuts and privatization, whether there is political opposition or not”. So what does he envision? Do those Greeks who have bought houses, but who can no longer pay for them because the housing market has completely collapsed, have to be evicted en masse? Do defaulters have to have their water and electricity cut off? Do all Greek buses have to go back to the depot, do schools and hospitals have to be closed? How far do De Jager and his neoliberal buddies want to go?

As far as I’m aware, there is not a single Greek who is not aware of the fact that the debt has to be repaid, but they justly demand lower interest rates and longer repayment terms. They also want the cacophony of ominous and hateful statements from European leaders to be stopped, so that Greece can get some air to recover.

The scourge of our time is that we are formulating ever more simplistic solutions, in childish neoliberal doublespeak, for the extremely intricate and complex problems we face. The reality of globalization and extreme interdependence of financial institutions is different and screams for greater insight, reflection and good governance. Nobody offers any perspective. ”Simple solutions” do not exist. Brussels doesn’t know anymore. Neither does Dutch politics.

In a solidary Europe, the question shouldn’t be: how do I get my money back with maximum profit? It should be: how do I help a country get out of a recession for which I am partly responsible, and who will foot the bill for that? In the first place, part of the money should be taken from those responsible for causing this mess — from the elite. The Greeks who have committed fraud for years on end, who evaded their taxes, who obfuscated their money and who speculated irresponsibly, are going free, partly thanks to a recent law on parliamentary immunity. It’s an eyesore to he Greek people that Papandreou has failed to sue even a single corrupt politician, to punish even a single entrepreneur or ship owner, and to recover even a single penny from the billions of euros that have disappeared into various pockets. And in no way does Brussels seem to be pushing for such measures. In fact, on this subject, Brussels has remained silent as the grave.

Undoubtedly, this silence serves to disguise other dubious practices — such as the money from Siemens, which lavishly handed out bribes in exchange for a monopoly position at the Athens Olympics of 2004; or Germany, which forced Greece to buy expensive German submarines, which it doesn’t need, at a price twice as high as Turkey had to pay for them; or France, which forced Greece to buy wildly expensive fighter planes in return for its ‘aid’.

Indeed, the propaganda of the mainstream mediaprovides Europe and the Netherlands with a convenient scapegoat to exploit.

HellenesOnline | 16 / 11 / 2011 | Tags: Greece, Greek debt, media | Comments 1

ROAR on BBC World: why the media lies about Greece

by Jérôme E. Roos
Post image for ROAR on BBC World: why the media lies about Greece

In a short BBC interview today, I argued that the media’s witch hunt against Greece perpetuates a false impression that the Greeks themselves are to blame.

With special thanks to Naveena Kottoor, I was able to appear on BBC World Have Your Say today, for a brief segment on the international media’s coverage of the Greek debt crisis.

Asked whether I agreed that the international media are engaged in a ‘witch hunt’ against the Greek people, I pointed out that all talk about the Greeks being profligate, lazy and spoilt is simply not true (video below, my contribution from 34m50s onwards — somehow the audio got messed up):

Unfortunately, however, I didn’t get the time to back up these assertions with hard facts — so I would like this to use the opportunity to do so here.

Special thanks for the data below go out to Alex Andreou and Ingeborg Beugel.

MYTH #1: The Greeks are profligate

The unquestioned assumption in the international media is that the Greek debt crisis was caused by excessive state expenditure, an overburdened welfare state and an inflated public sector.

TRUTH #1: The Greek welfare state is actually anemic

Here are the facts:

Public spending: according to the Center for American Progress, public spending in Greece is only 44.6% of GDP. This is lower than the EU average, lower than Germany’s 46.6% and considerably lower than Sweden’s 55%.
Tax collection: the real problem is not social expenditure on the poor but the lack of tax collection from the rich. From 2001 to 2007, Greece collected only an average of 39.4% of GDP in taxes, compared to the EU 44.4% average.

MYTH #2: The Greeks are lazy

Another unquestioned assumption is that the Greeks don’t work enough — they retire at 50, take crazy amounts of paid holidays and lie around in the sun drinking ouzo most of the day. Angela Merkel, for example, recently called on the people of southern Europe to “work more, play less“, i.e. work more hours, retire earlier and take less holidays.

TRUTH #2: The Greeks actually work most of all Europeans

Here are the facts:

Hours worked per week: According to Eurostat data of 2005, the Greeks worked 43.1 hours per week (compared to 35.7 hours in so-called ‘thrifty’ Germany, with its much-touted ‘Protestant work ethic’).
Hours worked per year: More recent OECD data shows the Greeks to work an average of 2,119 hours per year — 690 hours more than the average German, 467 more than the average Brit and 356 more than the OECD average. In fact, out of all OECD countries, only the Koreans work more.
Amount of paid holidays: The paid leave entitlement in Greece is 23 days per year. This is actually below the EU average, and significantly lower than the minimum of 28 days in the UK and 30 (!) days in Germany.
Retirement age: Again, Eurostat data from 2005, shows the average age of exit from the labour force in Greece to be 61.7. This was higher than in Germany, France or Italy and higher than the EU27 average. It is being raised even further now as a part of the EU-IMF bailout conditions.

MYTH #3: The Greeks are spoilt

In a truly terrible piece of journalism earlier this week, Sean O’Grady (economics editor of The Independent) wrote that “for many in northern Europe, the rioting in Athens must remind them of a tantrum by a spoilt child.” He refers specifically to popular opposition to the cutting of the so-called “13th and 14th salary” as a key indicator of this ‘spoiltness’.

TRUTH #3: The Greeks suffer more than anyone else

Here are the facts:

According to Eurostat, even before crisis, in 2008, one in five Greeks (among them almost half a million children) lived under the formal poverty line of 500 euros per month.
An independent survey by Kapa Research and the London School of Economics found even worse data: a third of the Greek population now live in formal poverty (and mind you: this was in 2007 – it’s actually gotten a lot worse since as a result of these draconian austerity measures).
Every child in Greece is born with a 40,000 euro debt on their name.
Greece’s youth are now referred to in the country as Generation 700: because that’s the maximum monthly wage that young Greeks will typically make – that is, if they are lucky enough to find a job: according to the Financial Times, over 35 percent of young Greeks is out of work right now.
The so-called 13th and 14th salaries (Christmas, Easter and summer bonuses) are not additional salaries. As a Greek reader on this blog, Amalia, pointed out: “Greeks do not get two extra salaries a year; their annual salary is simply divided by 14 and they get two installments at Christmas, one and half at Easter and one and a half sometime in the summer.”
The Dutch get a 13th month worth of salary and Austria has a 14th month. Since these countries are not experiencing a similar budget crisis, this simply can’t be the cause of Greece’s debt.
The bottomline is: it doesn’t matter in how many installments you receive your salary (whether it’s in 12, 13, 14 or 2,000 parts); what matters is your annual salary. As long as you make less than 6,000 euros a year (as is the case for 20 percent of Greeks) you live in poverty — period.
Living costs in Greece are the highest of all of Europe.
As a result of this lethal combination of low wages and high living costs, millions of Greeks are forced to work two or three jobs just to survive.
Since last year’s bailout, the Greek economy contracted almost 5%, 50,000 to 65,000 business have been closed, unemployment increased by 400,000, industrial activity declined by 11%, the construction sector contracted by 73%. Partly as a result, suicide rates are reported to have nearly tripled.
All in all, this is a humanitarian tragedy of unprecedented proportions. How could Mr. O’Brady possibly keep a straight face arguing that the people experiencing all of the above, are somehow spoilt children?

MYTH #4 — the bailout is helping the Greek people

Part of O’Brady’s logic assumes that the Greeks should actually be grateful for receiving EU money in return for austerity measures. After all, EU taxpayers are footing the bill for the failures of the Greek people, no?

TRUTH #4: — it’s an indirect subsidy for Europe’s insolvent banks

Here are the facts:

First of all, the bailout is not a handout: the Greek people don’t actually benefit from the EU-IMF bailout. Even if the bailout money really did go to the Greeks, this wouldn’t necessarily be beneficial for the Greek people at all. After all, the bailout is a loan for which the EU and IMF charge an exorbitant 8 percent interest rate, meaning northern European tax payers and the IMF should make a handsome profit from their so-called ‘rescue aid’, while the Greeks will only be further indebted by it.
The bailout serves not Greece but Europe’s insolvent banks: as former IMF Chief Economist Kenneth Rogoff pointed out last year already, “a lot of European banks are insolvent.” The real problem of the European crisis isn’t the fiscal crisis in the periphery, it’s the financial crisis in the banking sector of the core.
Private bank exposure to Greek sovereign debt: BNP Paribas: 5bn – 7 percent of equity; Société Générale: 2,5bn – 6 percent of equity; Postbank: 1,2bn – 21 percent of equity; Kommerzbank: 2,9bn – 27 percent of total equity. That’s just a handful. More data here.
Central Bank exposure to Greek debt: the European Central Bank has 190bn of exposure to Greek debt.
ECB close to insolvency: according to a recent report by Open Europe, asset losses as small as 4.25% could tip the ECB into insolvency. Greek default alone would chip 2.35% to 3.47% off of the ECB’s capital base. Add in a Portuguese or Irish default and you have the European Central Bank – the flagship of European capitalism – literally going bankrupt.

But no one really seems to care about Europe’s ailing banks and the ECB. Indeed, hardly anyone is talking about it. Instead, we prefer to talk about the handful of Greek workers who retire at 50, the ‘spoilt children’ who refuse to accept the EU’s generous aid packages.

By narrowly channeling our ire onto the suffering people of Greece, we have completely lost sight of the infinitely larger structural problems we face in the European Union. Our private banks are insolvent. Our central bank is on the verge of bankruptcy. This is the real crisis.

Yet apparently, in all this misery and chaos, bashing the Greeks seems like an infinitely more enjoyable pastime for Europe’s populist politicians and the factually illiterate international media. It’s time we put these lies to an end and start speaking truth.

Thanks again to Naveena Kottoor and BBC World for allowing me a brief minute to highlight these concerns. I just wish there had been a little more time to delve into the real issues in depth./

ROAR magazine Summer 2011

HellenesOnline | 16 / 11 / 2011 | Tags: Economic Crisis, Greece, Roar magazine | Comments 1

Papandreou Co-Opted “Revolution” – Now, the Greek People Must Reclaim It

by: Panayota Gounari, Truthout | News Analysis

Little did the Greek people know when “socialist” prime minister George Papandreou, back in June 2010, in one of his notorious speeches proclaimed the “revolution of the self-evident,”[1] that he was creating a new semantic field both for what is considered “revolutionary” and for “self-evidence.”

Fifteen months later, Greek society and the entire world witness a tour de force in the theater of the political absurd, where the only “self-evidence” is that Greece plays the leading role in an unprecedented financial and political experiment. But there’s a spoiler: the lead role hero dies at the end of the play. In the Greek prime minister’s dictionary, “revolution of the self-evident” means impunity for politicians, former ministers and other high-power public figures who have been involved in economic scandals and public money squandering, ongoing political corruption, increasing militarization of the country, total repression of dissent and criminalization of public space, welfare and protection for the rich, despair and “sacrifice” – as it is euphemistically called – for Greek working people, privatization of public services, the selling off of natural resources, and the “revolutionary” list goes on.

The tool for this new “revolution” is the politics of submission: Greece’s submission to international markets, speculators and money sharks, Greeks’ submission to new austerity measures in the name of progress, media submission to the official government line, the prime minister’s cabinet’s submission to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the European Central Bank (ECB), people’s minds’ submission to the “self-evident.”

Re-appropriating and distorting the word “revolution,” the government set the stage for the most neoliberal, antisocial and authoritarian policies the country has ever witnessed in its history (and Greece was under a colonels’ dictatorship between 1967 and 1974). There is something to be said when the word “revolution” is used to signify the overthrow of democracy and the abolition of the constitution and of any justice principle.

Discursively, the “revolution of the self-evident” ushered in a new era. Antonio Gramsci would raise his eyebrows at such a glorious implementation of his “common sense” concept. The Greek government‘s regime of truth and its discourses are redefining what is “common good,” “public,” “country,” “progress,” and “sacrifice.”

How else can one explain that it is considered self-evident to make sacrifices and mortgage our people’s future for the sake of optimizing capital accumulation and facilitating business interests? The language of common sense (or self-evidence, if you want) appears to be natural and works to justify policies, political decisions and practices that are largely designed to oppress, debase, stupidify and block dissent. The goal is for people to not only embrace this commonsensical, self-evident language, but, at the same time, to recreate and reproduce it along the same lines.

Beyond the discursive level, it has been a long, tormenting year of IMF/ECB occupation that emerged last May as the only solution for fiscal sustainability and “rescue” from national bankruptcy. Τhe government has not questioned the illegal and usurious debt that scourges the country and is largely the result of international financial gambling in the casino economy. In only one year, under the guidance of IMF officials, the ECB and the European Union – and adhering to unprecedented loan terms – the Greek social and welfare state has been collapsing through draconian cuts in wages and pensions, massive layoffs and the violation of vested rights, of labor laws and of collective bargaining rights.

The war on the public good has resulted in rampant unemployment, a hostage situation for many employees who have no alternative but to become “flexible labor,” enjoy the reduction of their income and the loss of their benefits, court national depression, and, of course, stagnation of any type of real economic growth and development, since the solutions imposed to satisfy creditors will not ever balance the budget or induce growth. IMF and ECB officials did not hesitate to dictate “changes” that directly violate the Greek constitution. International finance capital has an insider in Greece: the current “socialist” (in name only) government and a willing prime minister.

“It is an unprecedented adjustment, but it is feasible, and the government is committed to getting the job done,” reads the first memorandum of understanding, which clearly indicates that we have a government on a mission. The wholesale abdication of ideologies, politics and national assets to global capital is not only a symptom of a deep crisis of the political system, but a manifestation of a structural crisis of global capitalism. The unprecedented and extremely austere stipulations and regulations of the loan agreement and the memorandum of understanding essentially sell Greek national sovereignty to a foreign economic oligarchy, since, according to it, Greece “irrevocably and unconditionally waives all immunity to which it is or may become entitled, in respect of itself or its assets, from legal proceedings in relation to this Agreement, including, without limitation, immunity from suit, judgment or other order, from attachment, arrest or injunction prior to judgment, and from execution and enforcement against its assets to the extent not prohibited by mandatory law.”[2]

The state switches from a state of social welfare to become a garrison state and guarantor of private – and largely, foreign – interests. This is a reduced state in terms of the civilizing and welfare functions and social provisions, a largely antisocial state that functions as crisis manager, provides symptomatic “solutions” only, has no long-term social vision and exercises ephemeral politics. In this sense, the state asserts its role as “the hand-maiden for the global economy”[3] only. Accordingly, “society is no longer adequately protected by the state; it is now exposed to the rapacity of forces the state does not control and no longer hopes or intends to recapture and subdue- not singly, not even in combination with several other similarly hapless states”[4] where states have, more and more, acquiesced power to global corporations within the designs of neoliberalism.

What we have in place is another example of what Henry Giroux calls “proto-fascism.”[5] In his account, fascism as a mass movement that emerges out of a failed democracy and as a social order, “resides in the lived relations of a given social order and the ways in which such relations exacerbate the material conditions of inequality, undercut a sense of individual and social agency, hijack democratic values, and promote a deep sense of hopelessness and cynicism.” Giroux opts for the term “proto-fascism” not only because it provides a more nuanced account of the phenomenon, but also because, “in many cases it reveals a deliberate attempt to make fascism relevant in new conditions.”[6] Characteristic features of the proto-fascist state can be easily identified in the Greek case, and I will discuss them in detail below.

Disappearing public space is a central feature of Greek proto-fascism. For global capital and finance, the beast that needs to be gutted is called “public.” Everything public. Public space here is understood both materially and discursively. It includes places, resources and services that historically belong to the people, but also the immaterial and symbolic space where alternative voices can emerge, where democracy can be direct, where debate can blossom. The privatization program of a neocolonial type currently under implementation has converted Greece into a marketable commodity for sale, from public utilities (water, electricity), to transportation (ports, airports, trains), to public education and research, to national land, coastline and assets, including monuments. Large areas are now sold off to private capital, with no stipulations or restrictions as to how their exploitation could return some revenue or benefit to the Greek people.

On the contrary, successful profit-making public companies such as OTE, the Greek telecommunications giant, are priced at the very minimum and sold for nothing to foreign companies. At the same time, public space disappears through criminalization of dissent and protest. The concept of the city as a public site is redefined. Through police force, the government is reclaiming the major squares from the protest movements, while labeling protesters as low-life criminals, junkies and troublemakers, stripping them from their political agenda. Squares around Greece, which, early this spring, became new agoras for debate, dialogue and direct democracy, are primary targets of the “revolution of the self-evident.” It is self-evident that the government’s “revolution” wants no resistance from the people.

This takes us to another characteristic of proto-fascism: militarization. The repressive state apparatus is exhausting its force and unleashing its brutality on youth, women, pensioners and working people protesting in the streets of Athens and other cities. The presence of police forces in the streets of Athens on a daily basis brings to mind dark times of Greek history when the country was under cruel dictatorship. Amid daily new scenarios involving default, restructuring the debt, exiting the eurozone, return to the national currency and general speculation about the future that makes Greeks more and more insecure and desperate, material and symbolic violence are taken to a new level.

Alongside symbolic violence manifested in economic, political and discursive form, there are very real human consequences, but also an intensified move towards militarization and authoritarianism. In an unprecedented show of state violence and power, the Greek police brutally attacked protesters demonstrating on general strike days in May. In the course of only one day, they used over 3,000 tear gas bombs. Many protesters ended up in hospitals with respiratory problems or other severe injuries caused by police. The repressive apparatuses took central stage on an ideological and material level again – reminding us that fascism never really dies as long as peaceful protest is criminalized. Under the auspices of neoliberal ideology that divests the state of any responsibility for social provisions (as evidenced in the degradation of the welfare state and cutbacks for working people), the weakened social and welfare state resorts more and more to material and symbolic violence, including increased militarization, exponential increases in the police forces and the omnipresence of police.
New “rampant nationalism and a selective populism bolstered by the relationship between the construction of an ongoing culture of fear and a form of patriotic correctness”[7] is another characteristic of Greek proto-fascism. In these dark times, we witness more and more incidents of racist violence against immigrants in Athens and other Greek cities. At the same time, ultraright nationalist parties gain new ground, and pseudopopulist discourse is taken to new heights as immigrants are blamed for the economic situation.

No proto-fascist state could work without the special services of the mass media through “government regulation, consolidated corporate ownership, or sympathetic media moguls and spokespersons.” The Greek government has been particularly successful in this endeavor. All mainstream media are docile servants and beneficiaries of the government.

Finally, there is an interesting “rise of the language of eternal fascism that diminishes people’s capacity to think critically.” Through the adoption of an “economese” discourse, markets are now faceless entities that nonetheless have claims, requirements, demands, insight and say in our national politics. They “restore” or “gain confidence.” There is a “deterioration of market sentiment” (who knew markets had feelings!). However, as development economist Colin Leys states, “contrary to the impression given by neoliberal ideology and neoclassical economics textbooks, markets are not impersonal or impartial, but highly political.”[8]

Markets are systems of rules and regulations that are linked in complex ways to other markets, and they are embedded, directly or indirectly, in a vast range of other social relations that are inherently unstable. More important here is to make the linkages between economic events and human consequences because there is a clear dichotomy in neoliberal ideologies between economics and policies. In other words, neoliberalism presents itself as an economic doctrine that professes free markets, deregulation, and freedom from government restrictions and trade controls, but elides the social costs of implementing such an economic order. This neglect has given rise to alarming poverty indices, a pandemic of financial crises and the erasure of the social state. How do markets “feel” about social costs? French sociologist-philosopher Pierre Bourdieu notes that, “All the critical forces in society need to insist on the inclusion of the social costs of economic decisions in economic calculations. What will this or that policy cost in the long term in lost jobs, suffering, sickness, suicide, alcoholism, drug addiction, domestic violence, etc., all things which cost a great deal, in money, but also in misery?”[9] Clearly, “neoliberalism provides a unique set of conditions for both producing and legitimating the central tendencies of proto-fascism.”[10]

The elements of proto-fascism discussed above create the mosaic of a state that, instead of mitigating fears, agonies and diffuse anxieties, increasingly removes power from politics and invests it in transnational capital movement, a militarized economy and repressive apparatuses (army, police, prisons). We live in revolutionary times, however, not in the way the Greek prime minister has implied. This is not how Greeks had imagined revolutionary times – that is, dragging the country to a “helping” or “support” mechanism (note the euphemism here), often called an “adjustment program for the economy” that aims only at ceding our national sovereignty.

Opposing the prime minister’s proposition (imposition) for the “revolution of the self-evident,” it is about time that we articulate the self-evidence of the revolution. We cannot negotiate with the rationality of the irrational, and the clock is ticking. The ongoing mobilization of the Greek people shows that, in terms of organization, resolve, consistency and insistence, a popular movement – a movement that sees no other way but the self-evidence of the revolution – is growing stronger and stronger.

Notes

1. George Papandreou’s speech in the Conference of the World Council of Cretans, Agios Nikolaos Creta, 7/30/2010.

2. Loan Facility Agreement, Governing and Jurisdiction, 14 (5), 5/3/2010

3. Zygmunt Bauman, Liquid Fear. (Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2006), p.134.

4. Ibid, p. 147.

5. Henry Giroux, Against the Terror of Neoliberalism Politics Beyond the Age of Greed. (Boulder, Colo.: Paradigm Publishers, 2008). pp. 21–22, 24

6. Ibid, p. 19

7. Ibid, pp. 21-22

8. Colin Leys, Market driven politics: neoliberal democracy and the public interest, (London: Verso, 2001), p. 3

9. Pierre Bourdieu, Acts of resistance: against the tyranny of the market, (The New Press, New York, 1999), p. 40

10. Giroux 2008, p. 21

Panayota Gounari

Panayota Gounari is associate professor of applied linguistics at the University of Massachusetts Boston. She holds a Ph.D. in Language and Literacy Education/Cultural Studies in Education from Pennsylvania State University. She has earned a BA in classics with a concentration in historical and comparative linguistics from the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, and an MA in Applied Linguistics from UMass Boston. Her research focus is on the role of language and discourse in education, in human agency and in social transformation, and the implications for critical pedagogy. She has co-authored “The Hegemony of English” (in 2003) and co-edited “The Globalization of Racism” (in 2005) with D. Macedo. Both books have been translated into many languages. More recently she has co-edited “Critical Pedagogy: A Reader” (in Greece with G. Grollios). She has published numerous articles and book chapters.

HellenesOnline | 06 / 11 / 2011 | Tags: Hellas Greece, Panayota Gounari | Comments 1

Defense Minister E. Venizelos: “No pressure to shrink military”. Really?

As recently reported by Kathimerini: Defense Minister Evangelos Venizelos denied on Thursday that the European Union and the International Monetary Fund are putting pressure on Greece to reduce the personnel in its armed forces by 30 percent as part of public spending cuts.

“We may have limited control over our public finances due to the crisis but this does not mean that issues of foreign policy and national defense have moved beyond the authority of the government and Parliament,” he said in response to a question from MPs.

Does this mean then, that it is up to the authority of the government and the Parliament to do so? Because in that case, we should certainly expect the government and the Parliament to act along those pressure lines and reduce Greek military personnel in the very near future. At the same time, Turkey continues to build up militarily. What do you have to say/do about that Mr. Daniel Cohn Bendit and Co. of the European Union? Not much I guess.

A.Antoniadis | 25 / 04 / 2011 | Tags: Defense, Ethnika Themata | Comments 1

Baloney Detection Kit: Warning signs that suggest deception

I found this article interesting. Read it, and next time you see one of those signs, think about the baloney kit! Here it is:

” Based on the book by Carl Sagan, The Demon Haunted World.

The following are suggested as tools for testing arguments and detecting fallacious or fraudulent arguments:

Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts.

Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.

Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no “authorities”).

Spin more than one hypothesis – don’t simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.

Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it’s yours.

Quantify, wherever possible.

If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work.

Occam’s razor – if there are two hypotheses that explain the data equally well choose the simpler.

Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in principle, be falsified (shown to be false by some unambiguous test). In other words, it is testable? Can others duplicate the experiment and get the same result?

Additional issues are:

Conduct control experiments – especially “double blind” experiments where the person taking measurements is not aware of the test and control subjects.

Check for confounding factors – separate the variables.

Common fallacies of logic and rhetoric

Ad hominem – attacking the arguer and not the argument.

Argument from “authority”.

Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an “unfavorable” decision).

Appeal to ignorance (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence).

Special pleading (typically referring to god’s will).

Begging the question (assuming an answer in the way the question is phrased).

Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses).

Statistics of small numbers (such as drawing conclusions from inadequate sample sizes).

Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (President Eisenhower expressing astonishment and alarm on discovering that fully half of all Americans have below average intelligence!)

Inconsistency (e.g. military expenditures based on worst case scenarios but scientific projections on environmental dangers thriftily ignored because they are not “proved”).

Non sequitur – “it does not follow” – the logic falls down.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc – “it happened after so it was caused by” – confusion of cause and effect.

Meaningless question (“what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?).

Excluded middle – considering only the two extremes in a range of possibilities (making the “other side” look worse than it really is).

Short-term v. long-term – a subset of excluded middle (“why pursue fundamental science when we have so huge a budget deficit?”).

Slippery slope – a subset of excluded middle – unwarranted extrapolation of the effects (give an inch and they will take a mile).

Confusion of correlation and causation.

Caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack.

Suppressed evidence or half-truths.

Weasel words – for example, use of euphemisms for war such as “police action” to get around limitations on Presidential powers. “An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public”

(excerpted from The Planetary Society Australian Volunteer Coordinators Prepared by Michael Paine ) “

A.Antoniadis | 21 / 12 / 2010 | Tags: Deception, Propaganda | Comments 1

“Passport free Schengen proof of a Europe of the people”: no kidding!

A very unique notion of a “Europe of the People” built for the people, but without asking the people, blessed with a freedom of movement and rubber stamped by the powerful EU buraucracy.

The question though remains very simple: has anybody bothered to ask, face to face the …so called new born Europeans?

I guess Mr. Carlos Coelho will not be asking the question any time soon. He is upbeat and more concerned with the “techncial system” and its integrity, and that the proof of the identity of a “european people” is in the pudding, ie a passport free Schengen.

Nor would he be raising a serious flag about the security/ safety of EU’s SE borders and the influx of millions of illegal entrants coming through the “passoir” of Greece.

Is that a joke, or part of another grandiose plan? Mr Coelho, did you ask me if I want it? Ask me and I will tell you in plain language. Then go do “somethin”.

Here is the “interview”:

Schengen – 02-07-2010 – 12:23

Portuguese MEP Carlos Coelho has specialised on border issues. Recalls queuing up at border controls

Portuguese MEP Carlos Coelho stressed the need to ensure the external borders to the passport free zone are secure
Travelling around Europe without passport controls is one of the most tangible aspects of the European Union. Launched at the small Luxembourg town of Schengen a quarter of a century ago, it has become more successful than its founders had dared. However, the importance of the external border to the Schengen area have become crucial and the free movement of people has raised concerns. We spoke to Portuguese centre-right MEP Carlos Coelho who has authored several reports on Schengen.

What was the defining moment?

The most important date was definitely 1985, when we began the Schengen adventure because it represents a switch from the idea of economic integration to a Europe of citizens. Before that we spoke about the internal market, goods, money, services, but, after, we started to speak about people.

Now we have to build the Europe of people, of citizens. 1985 marks the point when we began to pull down internal borders and assure the freedom of circulation in the EU.

What are the main advantages of Schengen?

The first advantage is about people having the right to circulate inside the Schengen area, inside the EU and the countries that are associated with the area – Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and, probably soon, Liechtenstein. I remember people queuing to travel from Portugal to Spain and vice-versa, stopping at the border, so the police could check the amount of candy we had in our cars. It’s unbelievable but true – and not so many years ago!

There are also a lot of advantages connected with fighting crime. We know that trans-border criminal organisations are growing. These types of crimes – trafficking of human beings, drug trafficking, money laundering, nuclear and the dangerous chemical trade – are increasing and no country, no government, can fight these trends alone.

In the Schengen area we have a lot of tools for information exchange, police and judicial cooperation to fight international crime. The Schengen area therefore provides better security as well as better freedom for European citizens.

What are the main challenges the system faces?

There are two main challenges: the first is to respond to those countries that want to join the Schengen area, and because we have no internal borders, we have to ensure that the common external borders are well controlled. That means that someone trying, for example, to enter Spain from North Africa is in effect also entering Portugal, France and so on. So we have to trust each other and the main challenge is to be sure that countries asking to join the Schengen area respect all the conditions.

We have to trust their border controls as we trust the border controls in our own country. In my opinion, the evaluation system, which is still intergovernmental, could be improved by becoming a European system.

The second challenge is to increase security at the external borders. This is directly connected to “SIS II” (Schengen Information System – the computer database central to its workings), the second generation Schengen Information System. Today’s SIS is a very good tool. It means that when someone tries to enter Portugal, border control can access information available from other Schengen area countries.

That’s good, because nobody can enter Portugal if there is a judicial indictment or an arrest warrant for that person, or a suggestion from a police force to submit that person to surveillance. This is vital shared information. So the SIS is working well, but it is not enough.

We want to seriously upgrade the SIS, essentially with two new tools: first, biometric data, in order to fight wrong identification. If we can connect identity documents to the bearer through biometric data, we can solve a lot of problems connected with wrong identification.

With SIS II, we will be able to check if a car is connected in any way, for example, to a dangerous international paedophile network or a terrorist organisation or something similar.

That’s why I think the most crucial challenge for the Schengen area right now is to make the second generation of SIS operational. It was supposed to happen in 2007, which is why the EP is very critical of the management of this programme: we are in 2010 and nobody can tell us when SIS II will be operational.

You have been closely involved in Schengen issues in the EP. How would you describe your involvement?

Some colleagues call me “Mr Borders”. Since I started in the Civil Liberties Committee I have worked on this, because for me Schengen is the core of real freedom, security and justice. Everything is connected to it. Schengen is successful integration at the European level and the heart of the new space we are creating.

Over time I drafted several reports and then led Parliament’s work on the SIS. I think that it was after that everybody realised that I was trying to do an even-handed job. You can see, from right to left – notwithstanding some political differences – that a broad consensus has built up and that most of my colleagues are prepared to follow my advice in this field

HellenesOnline | 01 / 08 / 2010 | Tags: EUROPEAN UNION, europeans, Schengen | Comments 1

If you read this, you have entered a country that is quite different from your own.

“Here, we work until we’re 67-years old…

Congratulations! And instead of joining the fight to reduce it to a more humane level, to make room for younger generations and to give them a head start in life, you were upset that in my country women and mothers were pensionable at 60, and men at 65.

Here, we don’t have to pay anyone a 1,000-euro bribe for a hospital bed.”

Of course not. And you also need to mention that alcohol consumption accounted for 5.5% of all deaths and 970 000 years of potential life lost and your total burden to your health system just from alcohol abuse, is about €24 398 million, amounting to 1.16% of your country`s GDP, or €296 per person. That brings your direct medical and non-medical costs to €8.441billion, while indirect costs to €15.957 billion (69% mortality and 31% morbidity costs). Cheers!

“And yes, Germany also has high debt, but we can pay it.

I guess all your hard work until 67 years old is not enough to pay down your debt. Do you really see a time that your debt will be zero? Are you saying that you need to raise that pensionable age level even higher?

We wake up early and work hard,…

Good for you. Actually we sleep at 4 am because we stay out most of the night dancing, although we too wake up very early in the morning, but we cannot help it, since the sun rises earlier and it is brighter much longer. But let me tell you, you wouldn’t even dare think to work under the same conditions as we do, while getting a fraction of your salary.

…because we want to save our money for a rainy day;

Yes, yes,… and since your life expectancy is about 77 years, your life time savings will be spent in about 10 years worth of rainy raining days. And most of them are rainy days, except the ones you will be spending enjoying your life and our Greek hospitality and food at one of our islands. Lots of your compatriots are doing that as we speak.

…and because we have companies, whose goods are in demand around the world.”

Granted, that is definitely true, you have strong companies with history going back to the 2nd or even the 1st WW. That includes pharmaceutical ones with famous, innovative drug products some of which were tested during the war, or peoples’ automobiles, or clothing of the masculine type manufacturers built at a point in time for which you do not feel so proud about. Yes, they are thriving. You also have some that bribed all their way through in order to get EU funded infrastructure projects in Greece, while your justice system protects some of their obliging executives. Need not tell you that you are enjoying the monetary benefits of those companies’ business practices in my country. You also have a few others that got paid to fulfil defence contracts and delivered products of the “tilt” quality type while they are in the water.

“Prime Minister, we want to be friends with Greece. That’s why we’ve given your country 50 billion Euros since you joined the EU.

Seriously, you are paying for our …”friendship”? That’s a first. You mean you’re not getting your money’s worth back with interest, and padded with user fees that you will be collecting from generations of Greek people? Or are you saying that those investments in infrastructure you made in Greece, with EU funds, were not intended to make your products more accessible to the Greek people? Are you saying that the Greek people do not buy your products? The whole thing reminds me of companies that give away electronic printers for free, but charge a bundle for paper and ink to recuperate their “free printer” investment and then some. You must have made a lot of friends, my friend. Especially friends with countries that you have selected to pay war retributions to so that you can maintain your friendship. And by the way, part of your “friendship dues” to Greece has not been paid yet. But it’s sure, all that will be dealt with in due time, wouldn’t you say?

But let’s be clear: A good friendship requires you to be honest.”

Right. Let’s do that. A good friendship requires you to be honest indeed. Let’s be clear. If you are asking for a company in your misery, the answer is no, we are not a good match.

And let us be more clear: Blaming the people and not the “system” that we have all subscribed to without being asked, that, can only bring out the worst in all of us. That, can turn us one against the other. Is that what you want? Isn’t that what you are really upset about?

Oh! Goethe must be turning in his grave counter clockwise with German precision.

HellenesOnline | 10 / 03 / 2010 | Tags: Economic Crisis, ECONOMY, Hellas Greece | Comments

FYROM’s President insults EU’s vision

amac

The Australian Macedonian Advisory Council (AMAC) is appalled by the latest statements made from FYROM´s President Gjorge Ivanov. According to MINA news, President Ivanov controversially stated “We will not cave under any pressure to change our name or identity just to be a part of the European Union.

We’ve lived this (hi)story many times before, not again. Whatever the outcome of the talks in Brussels, Macedonia (FYROM) will stay right here” threatening to remain outside the EU as the ´Republic of Macedonia´. Ivanov continues: “Europe unfortunately still has leaders who allow to be carried away by someone’s petty interests and hidden agenda.. We see the absence of vision at the EU”.

These statements have revealed FYROM´s ongoing disregard for reaching a compromise to the name dispute with Greece, that has delayed it entry into the EU and NATO. AMAC hopes FYROM will change its current hardline policy, and not continue to insult the European Union and its member states, but instead to tackle the real issue at hand.

Australian Macedonian Advisory Council (AMAC)

HellenesOnline | 12 / 12 / 2009 | Tags: Balkans, NO "MACEDONIA" TO SKOPJE! | Comments 1

BBC: British Bullshit Corporation

What is it with the BBC? Here is a supposedly reputable news outfit, which spends its time and energy scouring the darkest corners of Russia for something to complain about. This time, having run out of stories dredged from a few disgruntled workers in orphanages, we have a piece about pollution in a remote corner of Siberia.

The title itself is as risible as it is ridiculous: Toxic truth of secretive Siberian city – so secretive indeed that it allowed a BBC team in and around the city – Norilsk – and provided them with a guide. To compound the extreme insolence of insulting the host (as the BBC does so readily in Russia’s case, but seemingly nowhere else), the piece even insinuates that the man guiding them around the plants, Engineer Igor Dmitriev, is a liar.

The “truth” about Norilsk Nickel, the company which owns the smelting plants, where copper, nickel, palladium, platinum, gold and silver are produced, is that the administration itself admits that the pollution exists, and is doing all it can to reduce the emission of toxic gases, in line with the directives issued from Moscow.

The truth about Norilsk Nickel is that it has recently delivered a plan entitled “The Comprehensive Framework of Norilsk Social and Economic Development until 2020” to the local City Administration. This plan makes detailed suggestions for the social and economic welfare of the region in which it operates.

The truth about Norilsk Nickel is that it has a Regional Policy Institute (how many British companies have one?) to study the effects of mineral exploitation on the environment and population. The truth about Norilsk Nickel is that is has an Expert Analytical centre, staffed by specialised scientists, who hold regular round tables to discuss such themes as social and cultural development, activities for the Norilsk citizens, development of small businesses and so on.

The truth about Nosilsk Nickel is that it even has a Corporate University with centres in Moscow and Norilsk, performing services as an educational institution, providing university-level skills to current and future employees.

However none of this information was included in the BBC’s “balanced and objective” report, as the deontology of journalism dictates. Instead, absurd references to “Stalin’s GULAGs”, pollution, dying trees and sick children. Sure, children get sick in Siberia – it’s cold.

Suppose the BBC tried for once to report the truth about Russia and stopped distorting it? Or suppose the BBC concentrated on alternative stories, such as British massacres in Ireland and India (since it likes to quote the past so often), or from more recently, the nuclear leak at Sellafield Nuclear Power Plant which it did not bother to report, the acid rain caused by British factories which blows over to Norway and the filth it dumps into the North Sea on a daily basis, making it so polluted that seals are born with mutations.

As usual, those with glass roofs are the first to throw stones.