Re: [Marxism] Paul Mason "What was the point of Tsipras referendum?"

[Anthony Hartin via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

ioannis aposperites wrote:

> ... The irony of the history is that the SYRIZA government
> is about to be the first so far "left" government to fall
> because of its OWN Coup d'état!

The other great irony is that it may be the troika itself which prevents 
Tsipras selling out despite all his efforts. As Varoufakis argues, the 
Germans want to crucify Greece to serve as a lesson of discipline to the 
French


From the Frankfurter Allgemeine:
' The EU, IMF and ECB are “cautiously positive”, says the report but 
they want any new bailout programme to contain “structural benchmarks, 
milestones and quantitative benchmarks” for the future. And the reforms 
are not enough to meet primary surplus targets given the “significant 
deterioration in macroeconomic and financial conditions. '


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Paul Mason "What was the point of Tsipras referendum?"

[Michael Karadjis via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

OK, my two cents. I’ve largely kept out of this for most of the year, 
not out of any grand illusions in the Tsipras-Varoufakis leadership 
(really, Synaspismos was always reformist to its very bones, but it was 
the momentum of the split within Synaspismos, the left becoming the core 
of Syriza and the right becoming the disgusting sect Dimar, that seemed 
to offer hope), but more from the good old anti-sectarian viewpoint. I 
am very sympathetic to the idea that Syriza was negotiating between an 
almost impossible rock and hard place, and given that I wouldn’t have 
wanted to be in their place, I felt that premature bouts of righteous 
criticism coming from those of us far far away from the action was not 
just pointless but presumptious and posturing in the circumstances.


That said, my sympathies have always been with the arguments put forward 
by the Left Tendency, by people like Kouvelakis and groups like DEA. My 
main difference with groups in the West supporting them, such as DEA’s 
ISO/Salt allies, was, for the reasons above, I thought there was little 
point in shouting it loud, and I guess I gave some more credit than they 
did to Tsipras in particular as a kind of honest radical left 
“reformist”, for want of a better word.


Faced with what is unquestionably outright capitulation in the face of 
our momentous class victory on July 5, it seems to me the only road we 
can now support is the road of “rupture” and grexit combined with rapid 
bank nationalisation and more thorough capital controls.


I don’t mean to say that is going to be easy. But for those 
non-economists among us, we are faced with some very highly qualified 
left economic experts saying a grexit would be very difficult but still 
feasible (I take it as a given that we are talking about grexit with a 
clear class direction), and others saying it would be impossibly 
catastrophic. Perhaps what we need is good hard discussion about this 
real issue, rather than mere denunciations of betrayal, no matter how 
justified they may seem.


If it is correct that “socialist-oriented grexit” is just feasible, then 
I can’t see how it can’t be better than the starving masses being driven 
further into impossible austerity, at least eventually, and no worse in 
the short term. It may be off the table if Syriza splits and the right 
wing tries to implement the memorandum in alliance with Pasok/ND/Potami, 
but if so the struggle led by the Syriza left and the working masses 
would be the only salvation.


If it is correct that any kind of grexit is impossible and catastrophic, 
then perhaps the arguments being put forward by Hans Ehrbar here are the 
best that can be said in the circumstances. But in that case, the Syriza 
leadership is not blameless for the disaster:
1. If there is nothing left in Greek banks, and so bank nationalisation 
nationalises air, and so there really is no short-term alternative to 
capitulation, then frankly the elementary democratic measures of bank 
nationalisation (done by plenty of ordinary capitalist governments) and 
rigorous capital controls should have been implemented much earlier.


2. If a grexit is ultimately necessary in order for an elected left 
government just to carry out its most minimum program it was elected 
on – and it seems obvious that it is – then Syriza should have been both 
carefully preparing for the option behind the scenes, and having a frank 
public debate with the Greek people about it. If Greece at this moment 
is economically, institutionally and politically unprepared for grexit, 
then part of the reason is that the Syriza leadership apparently 
believed its own spin; of course, they were right to try to negotiate 
with the troika to the bitter end, to try to get the best possible 
short-term deal, and to demonstrate to the Greek people that they were 
trying to fulfil their contradictory mandate (ending austerity and 
staying in Eurozone). Given class reality, however, it was always 
extremely unlikely that this double mandate could be achieved (only 
massive pressure by the European working classes could have done this, 
and let’s face it, it didn’t happen). Surely, if Tsipras-Varoufakis 
understood this class reality, they would have combined the necessary 
tactic of honest negotiations with realistic political/economic 
preparation for the (likely) second option. On the other hand, if they 
honestly believed they could talk good sense into the EU/IMF 
blood-suckers, then I guess they wouldn’t prepare – as seems to be what 
happened.


Likewise, with the referendum: it is quite true that it didn’t give an 
*explicit* mandate for Syriza to leave the Eurozone (t

Re: [Marxism] Paul Mason "What was the point of Tsipras referendum?"

[ioannis aposperites via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On 11/07/2015 09:51 πμ, Anthony Hartin via Marxism wrote:


The Left platform has effectively split but whether it stays to try and
overthrow the centrists, or it looks to make a new formation with
Anatarsya - the heart of the street movement (I have no hope for the
KKE) remains to be seen


Yet it is a pitiable harvest for the comrades of the revolutionary left 
inside Syriza. DEA, for example, has spent 15 years inside SYRIZA to 
obtain just two negative votes against a (parliamentary) Coup d'état 
which transformed the 61,3% of the working class NO to a parliamentary 
majority of 88,7% in favor of YES on the same question. The irony of the 
history is that the SYRIZA government is about to be the first so far 
"left" government to fall because of its OWN Coup d'état!


JA
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Paul Mason "What was the point of Tsipras referendum?"

[Anthony Hartin via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Tsipras: “We are confronted with crucial decisions. We got a mandate to 
bring a

better deal than the ultimatum that the Eurogroup gave us, but we
weren't given a mandate to take Greece out of the eurozone,”

So this is the crux of the matter. What Tsipras refuses to see is that 
the #OXI was a no to more austerity in general, not one particular 
version of it. Oxi was a rejection of the whole process of humiliation 
over the last 5 months of "negotiation" with the troika & the last 5 
years of economic barbarity. Moreover the referendum was one of the most 
stunning working class votes for decades - not to recognise and build on 
that is criminal.


Tsipras was at last honest to the electorate in the week leading up to 
the referendum. Now he should say that the troika makes it impossible to 
both oppose austerity & stay in the eurozone.


Tsipras can try and sell his version of austerity - but when his 
administration sends the police to smash up the next round of 
anti-austerity protests, he is objectively the class enemy. Thats not 
some form of abuse but just the reality when you join forces with ND & 
Pasok remnants to impose a new round of austerity & privatisation


The Left platform has effectively split but whether it stays to try and 
overthrow the centrists, or it looks to make a new formation with 
Anatarsya - the heart of the street movement (I have no hope for the 
KKE) remains to be seen

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Paul Mason "What was the point of Tsipras referendum?"

[Marv Gandall via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On Jul 10, 2015, at 8:53 PM, Hans G Ehrbar via Marxism 
 wrote:

> This is just one skirmish, more is to follow, and both the Greek voters
> and Syriza are learning a lot from this.

Alas, I think Hans’ apologia for the wholesale capitulation of the Tsipras 
leadership - the culmination of a five month negotiation with the troika which 
was more fiasco thsn “skirmish" - will be echoed by a majority of Syriza 
supporters and parliamentarians, including some hitherto identified with the 
party left. They will loyally and dutifully close ranks behind the party and 
its leadership and current direction, consoling themselves, like Hans, that the 
retreat from the party program is really, somehow, an advance. 

A substantial minority, however, will draw a more honest balance sheet of the 
government’s record to date and recognize that it does not represent an advance 
over the preceding New Democracy administration on the key issues. Neither has 
secured significant debt relief; both have acquiesced to demands for labour 
market “reforms” designed to weaken the unions; both accept rigid fiscal 
“targets” to constrain government spending and job creation; both accept major 
increases in consumption taxes; both accept further cuts to pension benefits, 
etc. 

It is undeniably the case that the balance of forces has been overwhelmingly 
weighted against Syriza and tiny, embattled Greece. But the Syriza leadership 
full well understood this when it vied for governmental power, and its 
disillusioned and embittered supporters may be forgiven for asking: “If the 
objective circumstances simply don’t allow a left wing party to effect any 
meaningful change and, in fact, lead to further economic deterioration and 
erosion of living standards, what is the point of electing it in the first 
place”?


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Paul Mason "What was the point of Tsipras referendum?"

[Marv Gandall via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*


On Jul 10, 2015, at 8:53 PM, Hans G Ehrbar via Marxism 
 wrote:

> This is just one skirmish, more is to follow, and both the Greek voters
> and Syriza are learning a lot from this.

Alas, I think Hans’ apologia for the wholesale capitulation of the Tsipras 
leadership - the culmination of a five month negotiation with the troika which 
was more fiasco thsn “skirmish" - will be echoed by a majority of Syriza 
supporters and parliamentarians, including some hitherto identified with the 
party left. They will loyally and dutifully close ranks behind the party and 
its leadership and current direction, consoling themselves, like Hans, that the 
retreat from the party program is really, somehow, an advance. 

A substantial minority, however, will draw a more honest balance sheet of the 
government’s record to date and recognize that it does represent an advance 
over the preceding New Democracy administration on the key issues. Neither has 
secured significant debt relief; both have acquiesced to demands for labour 
market “reforms” designed to weaken the unions; both accept rigid fiscal 
“targets” to constrain government spending and job creation; both accept major 
increases in consumption taxes; both accept further cuts to pension benefits, 
etc. 

It is undeniably the case that the balance of forces has been overwhelmingly 
weighted against Syriza and tiny, embattled Greece. But the Syriza leadership 
full well understood this when it vied for governmental power, and its 
disillusioned and embittered supporters may be forgiven for asking: “If the 
objective circumstances simply don’t allow a left wing party to effect any 
meaningful change and, in fact, lead to further economic deterioration and 
erosion of living standards, what is the point of electing it in the first 
place”?




_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Paul Mason "What was the point of Tsipras referendum?"

[Sheldon Ranz via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

"I think the no vote was an expression of confidence,
that the Greeks knew that their government was doing the best they could
to fulfill their electoral mandate."

No, it was not.  It was a rejection of the Troika's austerity demands
 According to reliable news reports, both Tsipras and the referendum's
wording underscored that.

"If the Institutions do not accept Syriza's offer, then it will be clear
to all that Greece did not leave the Eurozone voluntarily but was kicked
out."

There is more honor in quitting than in being fired.

"Despite the fact that they were forced to accede to
austerity demands in the end, their honorable and courageous battle and
their respect for democracy will encourage the voters in Spain, Ireland
and elsewhere to vote for their own left parties."

They were not forced to accede - there were alternatives within a Grexit
maneuver that would make Greece survivable for the masses.  We've seen here
on this forum links to articles by economists both Greek and American as to
how this would be possible.  And "respect for democracy" by pissing on the
NO vote? WTF??? Can you spell 'Orwell'?

Coming up next...Tzipras invites Golden Dawn into the government.

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 7:05 PM, he5513--- via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
>
> Not sure if Andrew Pollack is misreading Paul Mason, but to me, Paul
> Mason made sense.  Here is my own take on it.  I do understand why the
> Greeks want to stay in the Eurozone.  The Euro has strong symbolic value
> for the unity of the European people.  The possibility to travel without
> having to go through customs and without having to go to the currency
> exchange window is a great unifying experience for the ordinary person.
>
> (1) What was the point of the Referendum?  I think the referendum should
> be taken at face value.  Tsipras needed to know whether the Greek masses
> were willing to accept the conditions of the Institutions.  This would
> make a difference for further negotiations.  I don't think he expected
> to lose, but he assumed that there was a good probability he might lose.
> He needed the referendum exactly because he did not know whether the
> answer would be yes or no.  In case of a yes vote, others would continue
> the negotiations.  I think the no vote was an expression of confidence,
> that the Greeks knew that their government was doing the best they could
> to fulfill their electoral mandate.
>
> (2) Why did Varoufakis resign?  Again I think the official story is
> basically correct.  After the resounding no vote, Tsipras expected that
> the Institutions would see themselves forced to make more concessions.
> And as an ice breaker, Tsipras sacrificed Varoufakis in order to get the
> negotiations going again.  Not because Varoufakis did something wrong,
> but because Varoufakis knew too much; he embarrassed the negotiators on
> the other side by being the better economist.  Varoufakis showed to the
> whole world that the negotiaions were not about economics but about
> power.   His latest Guardian op-ed
>
> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/10/germany-greek-pain-debt-relief-grexit
> is another proof of a much more penetrating insight into the process
> and history than available from the other negotiators.
>
> (3) Now the important thing is the reaction of the Institutions to the
> Referendum and to Tsipras's good-will gesture of withdrawing Varoufakis.
> Their reaction was: nothing.  Not a single conciliatory gesture, instead
> they insisted on the deadlock before the referendum and said "it is up
> to the Greeks."  This ultimate intransigence showed their disdain for
> democracy and also showed that they did not want Greece in the Euro zone
> any more.  Perhaps Merkel had maneuvered herself into a position where
> she was not able to make concessions any more, or perhaps---Varoufakis is
> not the only one to say this about Schauble---Schauble had not been
> negotiating in good faith, he wanted the negotiations to fail.
>
> (4) What did Tsipras do when he, and everybody else, saw the true
> position of the Institutions?  He saw the expulsion of Greece coming and
> he did not want it blamed on Syriza.  He did not have the mandate to
> leave the Euro, and I think it is also strategically wrong for
> socialists to voluntarily leave the Euro or the EU

Re: [Marxism] Paul Mason "What was the point of Tsipras referendum?"

[Andrew Pollack via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Columns like this are why I don't read Paul Mason.
I remember months ago reading something by him (don't remember the issue,
but that really doesn't matter) and saying to myself, "this guy's just a
half-smart, not-too-radical commentator, why waste my time?"
But it's a damned shame his self-satisfied support for the "wisdom" of
Tsipras can be so misleading in a crisis like this.
(If someone can convince me I'm misreading his column I'm all ears.)

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Dayne Goodwin via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
> What was the point of Tsipras referendum?
> by Paul Mason
> Channel 4 News blog, England, July 10
> 
>
> The new Greek government proposals, published late last night are
> clearly based on those submitted by Jean Claude Juncker last Thursday,
> before the referendum.
>
> It’s left many Greeks frustrated,  asking: what was the point of the
> referendum? It’s left many foreign observers saying the same.
>
> Here are the most obvious answers:
>
> First, the Greek government’s hope that a referendum mandate would
> allow swift negotiations with their creditors, and relaxation of
> terms, did not materialise. Instead a renewed ultimatum materialised.
> If they can’t meet it, the ECB and EU will collapse the Greek banking
> system and throw them out of the Eurozone. Indeed, one of the main
> “achievements” of the referendum was to flush out that clear threat,
> from politicians who had never admitted it before.
>
> The Greek government has no mandate to leave the Euro, as the 61% vote
> No last Sunday was clearly won as a “stay in and fight” mandate.
>
> Secondly, the deal makes no economic sense without debt relief. The
> referendum, combined with US pressure, seems to have prompted key
> European voices, including Angela Merkel and Donald Tusk, [to] accede
> in principle to the need for debt reprofiling – which is a sneaky way
> of writing off debts.
>
> Thirdly, it is still redistributive on balance. Syriza can still sell
> this as a very different programme from those previously designed by
> the conservative led coalition. 29% corporation tax is one example.
> However it does make concessions on pensions and on VAT on the
> islands, which currently enjoy a discount.
>
> Fourth, it is the work of Euclid Tsakalatos. Tsakalatos, as I’ve been
> explaining since mid-January, is existentially committed to two
> things: Euro membership and the use of government to foster widespread
> modernisation and social change. He wants to stay in power – not lose
> it to a government of “technocrats”.
>
> Fifth, the deal comes with a request for a loan to make Greece’s debt
> repayments over the next three years. If someone else pays your debts
> for three years, that is a very fiscally beneficial thing, and leaves
> Greece with money to spend it did not have.
>
> Most importantly, this is not a done deal. If it gets through the
> Greek parliament and is then thrown back into the Greeks’ faces it
> will solidify and prepare Greek society for Grexit.
>
> It will most likely prompt a few resignations from Syriza, but I am
> told the Left Platform in Syriza will mainly accept it. But getting it
> through parliament is not the problem. Getting it through the EU is
> the problem – and it’s left many Greeks still predicting this is the
> last gamble before Grexit.
>
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at:
> http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/acpollack2%40gmail.com
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com