Galery

3

2

1

Anastasia Balezdrova

The lawmakers who supported the austerity plan for Greece called the anger of hundreds of Greek citizens. It’s been a week since the people’s representatives, who came to parliament with the ballot of the ruling PASOK party, have become victims of attacks by groups of angry citizens who invade television studios during live broadcasts, block the way of deputies’ cars, throw yoghourts against them and curse. Posters with the pictures and names of local MPs appeared in several areas in northern Greece, and the large letters bellow read, "They voted for the austerity plan. Let's not forget who say only "yes" to the power" and "Wanted for crimes against the people and legitimizing state violence."

Public abuse and attacks provoked an exchange of sharp lines between the ruling PASOK and the radical left coalition SYRIZA that refuses to publicly condemn these acts. The only MP elected from Zakynthos was even declared "persona non grata" on the island by the chairman of the local committee of the far-left party. Yesterday, the Minister pf Citizens Protection Christos Papoutsis said that there is information about such action held in front of his house and he warned the organizers not to reach his wife and child.

GRReporter contacted Haridimos Tsoukas - Professor of Strategic Management and Organizational Sciences at the Universities of Warwick and Cyprus - who analyzed this new and dangerous phenomenon.

Mr. Tsoukas, what do you think is the reason for these reactions?

I think people respond angrily. Their reactions are not political and that is the difference from terrorist acts. We can understand that someone is driven by political incentives when placing a bomb somewhere, destroying or even taking a human life, which is typical for organizations such as 17 November, Red Brigades, etc.

There is nothing similar here. We are witnessing a profound anger that is expressed with such abuses. These acts have no political character themselves, but produce political results. The moment when violence is consolidated in political life it becomes a political event, and it, in turn, impedes the efforts of the organized society to tackle its problems in a serious and rational way.

The ruling PASOK party continuously attacked the radical left coalition SYRIZA over the past few days that it organizes these attacks. What is your comment?

This is quite natural, although the victims are not just government MPs. The ruling party is suffering the consequences of the political damage caused by the policy it is pursuing. But I would like to remind you that the New Democracy MP Kostis Hadzidakis was also attacked in a very bloody and violent way seven months ago. I mean, that most of them really are government MPs, but I feel that the people’s anger does not aim only at them, but at any representative of the Greek Parliament potentially.

Unfortunately, in Greece all this tangles with the competition between the parties. This is not serious. I do not think one particular party has turned the violence against lawmakers into a strategy. The fact that the authors are groups of people who carry out the attacks and possibly one particular party does not clearly oppose them is another matter. But I do not think the attacks stem from somewhere in an organized manner.

Could they be organised gradually?

Yes, they could be. I hope this would not happen and there would not be a separate movement of violence. It would be disastrous for the country. It should be clear that the existence of violence in the political sphere is morally unacceptable. It is something that should be firmly opposed.

This does not mean that I have no right as a citizen to express my disapproval of a MP. There is nothing negative in this action when it is within the legitimate political response. When I feel offended and disagree with something I can express my response in a verbal manner. However, when the manner implies violence, then we are talking about actions that are unacceptable for a democratic country and that lead us to the impasse.

Where does this violence come from?

See, when the policy does not solve the problems in a coordinated, organized and constructive manner, when we do not express aloud our feelings and political positions and when we do not feel that those to whom we turn hear this voice, I could understand why a person could use more primitive methods of response, such as violence. Of course, it leads to frustration and degrades the person using such methods. Let me remind you also that the major social movements for human rights, especially those in America as the movement of Martin Luther King, were explicitly based on nonviolence. This is not by accident. The followers of these movements sought to gain moral advantage. And this happens when we oppose the established order in a rational way. This gives a moral advantage, because we are conscious as a part of a wider public sphere and respect our opponents. This was the great moral achievement of these social movements. Unfortunately, our primitiveness is such that we have failed to reach this level.

All this seems to be a Greek phenomenon.

Yes, it is unfortunately. According to the information I have from friends and publications in the international press, there is no such violence in countries that introduced such economic measures, like Portugal for example. There is a phenomenon in Greece that I would call "Greek nihilism", which is expressed through an almost auto-catastrophic mania. We see it in the fury with which groups of people destroyed the city center. This phenomenon should be considered and explained. It is something of deep concern to me. I am witnessing a thorough nihilism in Greece, which is not a harbinger of positive events of course.

Could you identify such cases of violence in difficult times in the course of Greek history?

I'm not the most competent to give such information. However, based on the encyclopedic knowledge of the New Greek history, I could not mention many such examples. There always have been individual acts of violence during protests. But even when there have been heavy clashes, they were within one political proposal. Let us take for example the 1960s. There were protests at that time, which could switch to violence. But this happened because the police had violently attacked the protesters.

But today things are different. We are talking about a MP who went to speak at an event and was hampered physically, abused and cups of yoghourt were thrown at him. In other words, we are talking about a qualitatively different phenomenon. I do not think there have been similar phenomena in Greek society in the last 50 years. But I repeat that I am not certain about the data. A historian would be much more competent in this field. 
 
Of course, the left coalition SYRIZA is not accused for the first time of organising protests.

Look, the reasons for blaming SYRIZA are clear. This is а party - movement. This kind of parties is always willing to listen to social protest movements. They, in turn, could transform in time from a purely peaceful protest movements to dynamic movements, then in movements inclined to violence until getting to raw violence. A party that defines itself as a party - movement does not condemn social movements from their inception. It stands up and tries to capture them. In this attempt, it deletes the boundaries between the clear speech that we have when trying to analyze a phenomenon and the political speech, which has an opinion on this phenomenon. I mean that those who have a positive attitude towards social movements from the beginning are in very difficult situation because they balance between the explanation and the political position. The explanation calls for understanding the phenomenon and therefore for not condemning it. But the political position in a democratic framework calls for condemnation of the phenomenon. Well, SYRIZA is balancing between these two extremes.

What do you think will be the future of the movement of the discontented?

I think it would calm down first, because the summer is coming and second, because it is tired. I also believe that some components could stem from the movement of the discontented which would resort to more violent acts. I could not suggest anything else for the moment.

But in the autumn when next year's budget will be discussed, we will all feel very strongly the new economic measures on our own backs and the government will continue to have no moral legitimacy. And then the movement will rise again. So, I do not think the phenomenon of popular anger and resentment will calm down easily. I think then the movement will join forces with trade union movements that will oppose the privatization and the rest of the measures.