|
U-Know! Forum » **Tsipras** |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic View: Flat | Threaded |
sanshee 1080 posts |
Mar 24, 2015, 21:48
|
||
|
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/mar/23/tsipras-raises-nazi-war-reparations-claim-at-berlin-press-conference-with-merkel **Tsipras raises Nazi war reparations claim at Berlin press conference with Merkel** Some view him as one of the good guys, I never did. Anyone else?
|
|||
Markoid 1621 posts |
Edited Mar 25, 2015, 16:25
Mar 25, 2015, 14:58
|
||
|
sanshee wrote: http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/mar/23/tsipras-raises-nazi-war-reparations-claim-at-berlin-press-conference-with-merkel **Tsipras raises Nazi war reparations claim at Berlin press conference with Merkel** Some view him as one of the good guys, I never did. Anyone else? What is your problem with the left? He's basically asking for loan to ask the banks to keep Greece afloat. Compensation was not part of the plan, just financial help. Why compensate Israel whom has been financially pinned up by the West since the 2nd world war and penalise Palastine and Greece ?
|
|||
|
sanshee 1080 posts |
Mar 26, 2015, 11:03
|
||
|
I have no problem with the 'left'. Do you? That's why I voted no in the ref, I am socialists at heart, and socialists aren't about separation. BTW I was referring to the demand that Merkel make up for what the Nazis did, he was chancing his arm there, quite distastefully IMO.
|
|||
drewbhoy 2557 posts |
Mar 27, 2015, 08:24
|
||
|
sanshee wrote: I have no problem with the 'left'. Do you? That's why I voted no in the ref, I am socialists at heart, and socialists aren't about separation. BTW I was referring to the demand that Merkel make up for what the Nazis did, he was chancing his arm there, quite distastefully IMO. Voting Yes was all about bringing a nations people together, to work together, to advance together. Instead we voted to keep the same old, same old.........we had a chance and blew it.
|
|||
grufty jim 1978 posts |
Mar 27, 2015, 12:04
|
||
|
drewbhoy wrote: Voting Yes was all about bringing a nations people together, to work together, to advance together. Instead we voted to keep the same old, same old.........we had a chance and blew it. As an outsider, I couldn't agree more. I know I've said this before, but it bears repeating. I have a couple of close friends who are Scottish, and I know of a (originally) German couple who have lived in Scotland for a long time now. All four of them voted "Yes". All four of them dislike the SNP and have no time for Alex Salmond and his "tory-lights" (a term my Scottish Green friend uses). My friends are members of The Green Party (one of them is fairly active). And yet, every single time the independence issue is raised, Unionists immediately insist on identifying a "Yes" vote with the SNP. As though the two were synonymous. As though an immortal cyber-Salmond was going to be made God Emperor of Scotland for all eternity. It's disheartening. Because there's nothing to be gained from debate with those who insist on wilfully misinterpreting your position and studiously avoiding the actual facts. And it's especially disheartening when the very people who pull that trick - those who scream "SNP SALMOND BOGEYMAN!!" with their fingers in their ears whenever independence is mentioned - get so offended when you apply the same logic to them. Check out the lists of official supporters of both sides: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_endorsements_in_the_Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014 Would my Yes-voting friends stand shoulder-to-shoulder with everyone on their list? Of course not. But if Scottish Greens are expected to discuss Alex Salmond every time independence is mentioned, shouldn't those who voted "No" have to explain why they're happy to rub shoulders with Cameron, Farage and Peter Robinson? What is it that makes them exempt from that same scrutiny? Why do Scottish Greens have to even talk about the SNP when Scottish Labour members can ignore the tories? (and BAE Systems, BP and the BNP) As for separatism? The German couple I spoke of voted "yes" precisely because they want closer international ties. They are genuinely concerned about the separatism and euro-scepticism in the tory heartlands combined with the rise of UKIP (a trend that a even a firmly internationalist Scotland has little influence over, because foreign policy is set in a parliament in which their voice is rarely heard). If it's a choice between a mildly Euro-friendly Scottish nationalism and an increasingly separatist British nationalism (a gross simplification of course), they know which one they'd prefer.
|
|||
|
drewbhoy 2557 posts |
Edited Mar 30, 2015, 10:19
Mar 30, 2015, 10:16
|
||
|
grufty jim wrote: drewbhoy wrote: Voting Yes was all about bringing a nations people together, to work together, to advance together. Instead we voted to keep the same old, same old.........we had a chance and blew it. As an outsider, I couldn't agree more. I know I've said this before, but it bears repeating. I have a couple of close friends who are Scottish, and I know of a (originally) German couple who have lived in Scotland for a long time now. All four of them voted "Yes". All four of them dislike the SNP and have no time for Alex Salmond and his "tory-lights" (a term my Scottish Green friend uses). My friends are members of The Green Party (one of them is fairly active). And yet, every single time the independence issue is raised, Unionists immediately insist on identifying a "Yes" vote with the SNP. As though the two were synonymous. As though an immortal cyber-Salmond was going to be made God Emperor of Scotland for all eternity. It's disheartening. Because there's nothing to be gained from debate with those who insist on wilfully misinterpreting your position and studiously avoiding the actual facts. And it's especially disheartening when the very people who pull that trick - those who scream "SNP SALMOND BOGEYMAN!!" with their fingers in their ears whenever independence is mentioned - get so offended when you apply the same logic to them. Check out the lists of official supporters of both sides: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_endorsements_in_the_Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014 Would my Yes-voting friends stand shoulder-to-shoulder with everyone on their list? Of course not. But if Scottish Greens are expected to discuss Alex Salmond every time independence is mentioned, shouldn't those who voted "No" have to explain why they're happy to rub shoulders with Cameron, Farage and Peter Robinson? What is it that makes them exempt from that same scrutiny? Why do Scottish Greens have to even talk about the SNP when Scottish Labour members can ignore the tories? (and BAE Systems, BP and the BNP) As for separatism? The German couple I spoke of voted "yes" precisely because they want closer international ties. They are genuinely concerned about the separatism and euro-scepticism in the tory heartlands combined with the rise of UKIP (a trend that a even a firmly internationalist Scotland has little influence over, because foreign policy is set in a parliament in which their voice is rarely heard). If it's a choice between a mildly Euro-friendly Scottish nationalism and an increasingly separatist British nationalism (a gross simplification of course), they know which one they'd prefer. Complete agreement with you. I'm a member of the Scottish Greens as well and don't mind rubbing shoulders with most of the SNP but wished people would recognise that voting yes wasn't purely an SNP thing. Plus some SNP people should get a grip and realise the whole thing wasn't about that them.
|
|||
Sin Agog 2253 posts |
Edited Mar 30, 2015, 12:58
Mar 30, 2015, 11:01
|
||
|
You'd've thunk everyone north of Stevenage would have gotten the message when the mines closed down: we want you all to gracefully just die out. Please stop flopping about on the deck, and suffocate with a bit of self-respect. On point, though- it's not so out of the question. Germany and Japan were being financially propped up by the U.S. for decades after the war, mostly so they could continue to remain viable trading hubs, whilst the UK was repaying WWII debts to the U.S. up until a few years ago for Roosevelt's covert help prior to actually getting involved. Seems a bit wonky that allies in the same cause carry on extorting each other over fifty years after the war ended. Sanshee seems to be against any tweaking to the current political paradigm, one in which every successful presidential candidate in the last few decades has also, coincidentally, been the one who spent the most money on their campaign. Why not just get rid of the whole election sham and replace it with Give the victory to whoever has the most money? Just because we fought for democracy doesn't mean it can't be tweaked and improved according to society's vicissitudes. The UK, for example, is one of only two countries in Europe which doesn't have proportional representation. We could never possibly have elected a Syriza, or anything outside of the current dynamic, without it (and unfortunately, the Liberals are the only ones who seem at all interested in PR). Right now, we and America are anchored down to a mid-19th century system of winner takes all. With Proportional Representation, every vote really does count, as even if the party we voted for doesn't get into government, they will have a say in how it's run. There's a scene in the first movie in the Up series of documentaries in which the richer of the kids are asked what they want to do when they grow up. They all say something along the lines of, "I will go to Eton, then Cambridge, and become a barrister, then a judge". Without exception, this is exactly what they end up doing- we follow them every seven years as they travel undeviatingly along the elevator of power. These are the types who end up ruling us, and that whole infrastructure has to be changed. On top of this, the papers are in the pockets of cats like Murdoch (who only agreed to get behind Blair because Blair agreed to help him any way he could after getting elected), and if there isn't an informed electorate then elections are utterly irrelevant. Only a retrogressive status quodiot would be rooting for Syriza's failure.
|
|||
thesweetcheat 6214 posts |
Mar 30, 2015, 12:45
|
||
|
Sin Agog wrote: Give the victory to whoever has the most money The hidden strapline on the Tory campaign poster.
|
|||
|
grufty jim 1978 posts |
Edited Mar 30, 2015, 14:29
Mar 30, 2015, 13:53
|
||
|
Sin Agog wrote: You'd've thunk everyone north of Stevenage would have gotten the message when the mines closed down: we want you all to gracefully just die out. Please stop flopping on the deck and suffocate with a bit of self-respect. ... snip ... Only a retrogressive status quodiot would be rooting for Syriza's failure. Pretty much agree with every word. If anything, I think you've undersold the position. I'd go so far as to say that anyone rooting for Syriza's failure is (unwittingly) rooting for a dangerous swing to the far right in Southern Europe. And it's not just on little-read web forums you hear this... the bloody Guardian is full of so-called "moderate leftists" suggesting that Syriza need to retreat to the centre, agree to EU/IMF instructions and calm down. There are two things to be said about that... firstly, it totally misreads the situation in Greece which is on a real knife-edge. And secondly, it is incompatible with being "of the left". At best it's an ignorant centre-right position. At worst it's a bit more sinister than that. There is genuine concern among my Greek friends about the volatility of politics there right now. The country is on the verge of complete economic collapse (in the sense of there being no money in the banks and no bread in the shops; not in the sense of middle class Greeks being unable to afford a second holiday this year.) And the reason for this is two decades of centrist corruption coupled with a European banking crisis. They had a centre-left/centre-right political class which actively falsified national accounts at the behest of wealthy oligarchs who refused to pay tax. Everybody knew it was happening. The far left and the far right, both screamed about it, but so long as the status quo permitted the Greek government to generate ECB credit notes; it was ECB policy to encourage it to continue. And then, surprise surprise, the whole thing collapses. The European financial institutions act shocked (just as they did when the Irish property bubble burst... because that was never going to happen, right?) and demand that the people of Greece be punished for the sins of their corrupt government. It was ECB policy to offer limitless credit to corrupt Irish property developers. And it was ECB policy to offer limitless credit to a corrupt Greek oligarchy (via the Greek Central Bank). I find it mystifying that so many people have bought into the idea that the citizenry of those countries be held responsible for the reckless gambling debts of a few private individuals and institutions. And that, of course, is the point being made by Tsipras when he demands German reparations. This seems to have gone over the heads of so many people (or else they are wilfully ignoring it). He's a pretty smart guy; he knows he's not going to get any bloody war reparations. He's merely pointing out a vast discrepancy... how the German people were supported after their government betrayed them, and yet the Germans (who are the principal drivers of the troika) are demanding the Greeks be treated entirely differently. It is not distasteful to point out a very relevant truth. And Tsipras knows he's not getting war reparations. He and Varoufakis are walking a tight-rope. The IMF/ECB intervention was not working in Greece. It didn't need "tweaking", it needed a new approach. In Ireland austerity is biting very hard, but fact is - life here now is still better than it was in the 70s and 80s, so people have adjusted. It irks me that they've accepted this debt with so little resistance, but that's how it went. In Greece though... circumstances are very different and the country has been decimated by the policies imposed by the troika. In 2005 Greece had the lowest suicide rate in Europe. Today it has the highest. Let that statistic sink in. And think about how radically a society must have changed for the worse for that to have happened... how socially damaging the policies of the troika have been to result in that outcome. And tell me you'd be happy with unaccountable international financial institutions doing that to your country. And worse still... all of the mainstream political parties have accepted this situation and are talking about "a further 10 years of austerity". Of course the Greeks have looked for an alternative. To not do so is literally suicidal. The policies currently being imposed on Greece today are very similar to those imposed on Yugoslavia in the 1980s by the IMF (under the behest of a rabidly anti-socialist Reagan administration). Are we really dooming ourselves to walking that path again? My Greek friends know that Golden Dawn are unlikely to gain a popular mandate the way Syriza did... but they also know that the Greek people will not return to the centre ground either. If Syriza fails, if the current government collapses, it is very likely that a right wing coalition will find themselves requiring the tacit support of Golden Dawn in order to hold power. And once you let fascists into government, it tends to be pretty tough to get them out again. My own view is that Tsipras has one card - and one card only - he needs to stall the troika until the Spanish elections and hope (against hope) that Podemos somehow do in Madrid what Syriza managed in Athens. If that happens, it's just about possible that a leftwing bloc within Europe, strong enough to demand policy change, could emerge. Very unlikely but it's really their best bet (and I suspect they know it). Hence all the delays and stalling and missed meetings and "promises to review". If you want Syriza to fail in Greece then you are either hoping for a hard-right government or - at best - another decade of the Greek people watching their grandparents kill themselves because they can no longer afford their medicine, and their kids kill themselves because youth unemployment has now passed 50% and is still rising. The Greek people don't deserve what is happening to them. And it is the centre that is doing it. So the only choice is "left" or "right"? Those who want the left to fail should - in this instance - be very careful what they are wishing for.
|
| U-Know! Forum Index |
