Skip navigation

Tag Archives: Syriza

ATHENS

ATHENS

DEMOCRACY RISING

THE GLOBAL CENTER FOR ADVANCED STUDIES (GCAS)

GCAS World-Conference Athens “Democracy Rising” (Free and Open to the Public)

The Global Center for Advanced Studies

Announces Our First World Conference

“Democracy Rising: From Insurrections to ‘Event’”

Date: July 16-19th 2015, Athens, Greece

 

Speakers: (The Following Speakers will be Present in Athens)

Keynote:

Costas DouzinasJodi Dean, Bruno Bosteels & Maria Aristodemou

Speakers:

Tariq Ali, Kenneth Surin, Stathis KouvelakisAzfar HussainPaul Mason, Alex CallinicosMaria Nikolakaki, Athena AthanasiouCreston DavisAthina Karatzogianni, Kostis KarpozilosLola Sánchez ,Giovanni TusaDimitris DalakoglouLeonidas VatikiotisClaudia Landolfi, Peter ThompsonAris Chatzistefanou IIJulie RescheTheodore KoulourisSigrid HackenbergSrecko HorvatPaolo GerbaudoDave Hill,Stavros Stavrides and special guests from Syriza and Podemos.

 

Description:

Margaret Thatcher’s slogan, “There is no alternative” was a declaration of war that installed the horrors of neoliberal policies that have eroded and systematically undermined democratic and public-based projects for more than 30 years.  The global financial crisis of 2008 exposed these neoliberal policies that have paved the way for the rise of an untouchable oligarchical class whose top 80 members now possess more wealth than the bottom half of the world’s population. It is now abundantly clear that neoliberalism has accelerated radical inequality and at the same time forced the world to conform to their unquestionable, anti-democratic policies, lest even greater disasters befall us.

Faced with no alternative, on their terms, in 2011 a new series of insurrections began to emerge from the Occupy movement to Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen, to Spain, Ireland, and Greece. The recent historic victory of Syriza brings forth the message that citizens must decide their own future and thus the reassertion of the primacy of politics takes place again in the world.

In the wake of Syriza’s victory and the hope it articulates for the world, we propose a conference comprised of academics and activists from the birthplace of democracy, Athens, Greece.  The purpose of the conference is to bring together intellectuals and activists to think through and propose strategic alternatives for democracy and its future.

 

Thematics:

  • Neoliberalism and Austerity Measures
  • Philosophy and Political Struggles
  • The Global Debt Crisis
  • Capitalism & Education
  • Democracy & Activism
  • European Union & the Euro-Zone
  • The Rise of Fascism in Europe
  • Neoliberalism and Globalization
  • Uniting the Workers with the Intelligentsia
  • The Hope of Left Governance
  • The Rise of Podemos in Spain
  • Organizing Locally & Globally
  • Inequality & Democracy

 

Format:

Academics and activists are invited to give papers on relevant topics that support the conference’s description.  Papers can be presented in Athens, Greece, or in some cases, via the Internet.  In either case, papers should be no longer than 20 minutes in length.  In addition to individual papers, we encourage panel proposals consisting of 2-4 participants.  Panel sessions should be no longer than 40 minutes in length.

This conference will be hybrid in that it will be broadcasted live on the internet making it one of the first academic conferences in the world to be live and available to all.

 

Call for Papers:

250 word Abstracts for Papers, and 500 word abstracts for Panel Proposals should be submitted no later than April 1, 2015 midnight Eastern European Time to: submit@thegcas.com. Please include a photo and a very short Bio in your submission.  Please also state in the subject title of your email either “Paper” or “Panel Proposal” and whether or not your paper or panel will be presented at the conference or via the Internet.

NOTE: Panel Presentations: If your panel is being delivered via the Internet the individual members that comprise your panel can present from anywhere in the world so long as their Internet connection is excellent. You will need to verify that all Internet connections range between 6-10 Mbps so that access quality is at a premium.

You can test your Internet speed here: http://www.speedtest.net/

Acceptance/Rejection emails will be sent no later than April 15, 2015. The papers will be judged by the Conference Organization Committee.

 

Registration:

Registration is free & open to the public for participants in Athens & $5 for participants on-line (to help cover Internet infrastructure including access (purchasing a subscription), security, equipment, and technical services).

Please register as soon as possible!  REGISTER HERE

Presenters Fees are $20 per person or $40 per panel presentation

Conference Dinner $30 Athens (TBA)

Registration deadline for on-line participants is 1 July 2015.

A course will be designed and offered on this conference, details forthcoming.

 

Outcome:

The Editors of Insurrections Series at Columbia University Press have agreed to consider supporting the proceedings for publication.  Some papers will also be considered for GCAS’s Journal via GCAS Press.

Language & Translation:

Greek & English

Translation capabilities will be available if enough donations are provided to support this service. Please consider donating.  When you donate please specify “GCAS Conference”.  Donate here.

Location: TBA

 

Organizational Committee:

Creston Davis

Maria Nikolakaki

Dimitris Dalakoglou

Kostis Karpozilos

Anghelos Palioudakis

George Souvlis

Bob Drury King

Evi Zevgiti

Che Brandes-Tuka

Steven A. Panageotou

Michael D Wassell

Salim Nabi

 

Scientific Committee:

Alain Badiou, President of GCAS

Azfar Hussain, Vice-President of GCAS

Maria Nikolakaki, Prof., University of Peloponnese & GCAS

Creston Davis, Director GCAS

 

Special Activities: 

There will be special tours of Athens that follow the events of the struggles for Democracy as well as other travel opportunities.

 

Accommodations: 

All participants are responsible for their own lodging.

Media Sponsor:  InforWar Productions

 

See more:

@ GCAS Blog: https://gcasblog.wordpress.com/2015/02/18/gcas-world-conference-athens-free-and-open-to-the-public/

Registration: https://globalcenterforadvancedstudies.wufoo.com/forms/z154dnz71hyo08b/

ATHENS

ATHENS

**END**

‘Human Herbs’ – a song by Cold Hands & Quarter Moon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Au-vyMtfDAs

Posted here by Glenn Rikowski

Glenn Rikowski @ Academia: http://independent.academia.edu/GlennRikowski

Glenn Rikowski @ ResearchGate: http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Glenn_Rikowski?ev=hdr_xprf

Online Publications at The Flow of Ideas: http://www.flowideas.co.uk/?page=pub&sub=Online%20Publications%20Glenn%20Rikowski

Volumizer: http://glennrikowski.blogspot.com

Rikowski Point: http://rikowskipoint.blogspot.co.uk/

Strength in Numbers

TO FIGHT AUSTERITY WE NEED A UNITED LEFT

By Simon Hardy, Anticapitalist Initiative (Britain)

October 9, 2012 –  Submitted to Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal

The urgent need for unity on the radical left is something that has been eloquently put forward by Dan Hind on the Al-Jazeera website. Asking a very pertinent question as to whether there can be a SYRIZA-type organisation in Britain, Hind draws out some of the most important lessons of the Greek struggle and poses a challenge to the British left — can we break out of the ghetto as well?[1]

To plot a possible trajectory we have to be clear of the political alignment that has emerged for the left under the Conservative Party-Liberal Democrat coalition government. While Ed Miliband’s Labour Party might be surging ahead in the polls, the possibility of a Labour left revival is simply not on the cards. The Labour Party is hollowed out and bureaucratically controlled and all the best intentions and actions of Labour left activists will not change that. The Labour left is reduced to the old argument that there is nothing credible outside the Labour Party. They mockingly point to all the twisted contortions of the far left in Britain in the last decade (Socialist Alliance, Scottish Socialist Party, Respect, Trade Union and Socialist Coalition, Left list, Respect renewal, etc.) to forge a new unity and conclude that the Labour Party is the only show in town.

But this is not an argument made from the Labour Party left’s strength, it is an argument about the radical left’s weakness. They cannot point to any meaningful gains made by the Labour left in recent years because there hasn’t been any. Even the Labour Representation Committee (LRC), the only significant bastion of the socialist left in the party, has failed to grow. On the crucial issue of the coalition government’s spending cuts they couldn’t even get any commitment from their municipal councillors to vote against cuts to local government budgets. Some have claimed that the Labour Party could act as a dented shield against the coalition onslaught, but the truth is that the Labour Party is no shield at all.

The most significant recent press offensive by the Labour Party has been to force the government to re-examine the west-coast mainline rail franchise deal, not to re-nationalise it but to try and keep Richard Branson’s Virgin Trains on the line. Yet barely a peep about the privatisation of the National Health Service, including privatising the pharmacies, some of which are also being taken over by Branson’s Virgin company.

The Labour left is generally principled on issues like privatisation and fighting austerity, but they are drowned out by the party apparatus, which is overwhelmingly neoliberal and anti-socialist. John McDonnell’s failure to even get on the leadership ballot in 2010 speaks volumes. As does the obvious non-growth of the labour left activist base. The magazine Labour Briefing, which recently became the official organ of the LRC, probably has a readership of around 500-600 people, smaller than some of the revolutionary left newspapers.

This is not to say that the Labour left has no role to play – far from it – they should just face reality squarely in the face and realise that reclaiming the Labour Party is a dead-end project.

But there is some truth in their criticism of the revolutionary left. Even where we have built new organisations that looked like they were about to achieve lift off (Respect, SSP), they collapsed in ignominy, usually caused by ego clashes and ridiculous control freakery by various organisations. While some of us criticised the political basis of these projects, the reality is that the political weaknesses barely even had time to come to the surface – the inveterate problems of the far left ran these initiatives into the ground long before they even had a chance to be put to the test of any kind of political power.

So a Labour left that can’t get anywhere and a revolutionary left that can’t get anywhere.

What lessons can we draw from these ”realities”? Certainly pessimism, although understandable, would be the wrong conclusion. The lesson of SYRIZA shows what can be done if the left gets its act together, puts aside its own empire-building projects and tries to do something that might actually make a difference. We have to start from the objective situation and work backwards – the reality of the cuts and a potential lost decade to austerity needs to sharpen our minds and our resolve. Starting from the necessity of a united, credible left we can work backwards to imagine the steps that we can take to get there.

I would go so far as to say that anyone at the present time who opposes attempts towards greater unity is, perhaps unconsciously, holding back the movement. The crisis is so acute and the tasks of the hour so urgent that we have no time for people who spend their hours constructing excuses for fragmentation, isolation and weakness. They are the past, and we desperately need a future.

Dan Hind is right and his voice joins a growing chorus of others who see the need for unity on the left. Does this mean every sect and group can just get together? No, of course real differences emerge. But there is so much that unites us in the current political context that it is criminal – absolutely criminal – that none of the larger groups are seriously talking about launching a new united organisation. The three-way division of the anti-cuts movement is the bitter fruit of this backward attitude on the British left — a situation that should deservedly make us a laughing stock in other countries.

If the success of SYRIZA raises the benchmark for what the left can achieve then the natural next question is, “How could we create an organisation like SYRIZA in Britain?“ I think this question should dominate the discussions on the left in the coming months. But let’s be clear – I am not saying we should just transplant SYRIZA’s program and constitution and graft it onto the British left. Such an attempt would be artificial. An organisation like SYRIZA means a coalition of the radical left, united against austerity, united against privatisation, united in action and united in fighting social oppression. The kind of program that any new initiative adopts is largely the result of who is involved in it, certainly it should have an anti-capitalist basis, though it can leave some of the bigger questions unresolved, at least initially.

Let’s focus on the goals that Hind identifies: “campaign for an end to the country’s predatory foreign policy, for the dismantling of the offshore network, for democratic control of the central banks, urgent action to address the threat of catastrophic climate change, and reform of the national media regimes.”

Each constituency does not need to dissolve itself, we just need to ensure checks and balances to prevent “swamping” of meetings. Each local unit of the organisation would retain certain autonomy while a national committee was permitted to adopt political lines, within the remits established at a conference. If an organisation or individual does not like any of the policies then they should have full freedom to speak their mind about it, while accepting that there is unity in the campaigns and actions the organisations agrees to pursue.

Everyone has to accept that they might be minoritised at some point. But they also have to understand that abandoning the organisation over a constitutional dispute or over this or that policy means abandoning the vital struggle for building a credible radical left in this country. Do people want us to live in glorious isolation for another decade or more, as people’s living standards plummet?

We also have to overcome the very real difference in size between constituent parts on the left. The Socialist Workers Party (SWP) for instance is still the largest group on the radical left in Britain, although it is much smaller than it was when I joined the left in 2001. Members of the SWP argue that launching a new party is not practical because, as they will numerically “dominate it”, it would cause problems (as it has in the past). But there are a number of ways to overcome this, if there is a political will to make it happen. Changing the culture on the left also means changing how we “intervene” into campaigns or broad organisations, and taking a more open approach, transforming sects into networks and “giving of yourself” for the greater need of the new organisation, these can all be thoroughly healthy steps to take.

Possible alternatives, definite pitfalls

The danger is that the left attempts some kind of united initiative, but limits it to an electoral coalition – replicating the Socialist Alliance (1999-2004) but without the enthusiasm. While a genuine socialist alliance would be a step forward from the current situation, it will suffer the same crisis as the last version, where all the left groups did their campaigning work under their own banners but stood together only in the election.

Let’s put it bluntly, British people generally don’t vote for electoral coalitions. They are here today and gone tomorrow, people respect the concept of a party or at least something more tangible that looks like it is going to last beyond the next internal spat. The Scottish Socialist Party was credible because it was united and forced the smaller groups involved to campaign as SSP activists first and foremost. Putting party before sect is essential to the success of any project, just as it was in the early days of the Labour Party or any of the Communist parties internationally.

The Respect débâcle shows the danger of personality politics (the “great man” view of politics, when the entire project is hung around one person’s neck). But its fragmentation also shows what happens when large constituent groups (in this case the SWP) act like control freaks and treat a coalition like their personal property. Although they blamed the disastrous outcome on John Rees, the fact is that the entire party was complicit in the mistakes that were made, both opportunism in political terms and bad practice in the organisational centre of the party. It was a feeling of loss of control when Galloway started to criticise the SWP’s handling of Respect that led the SWP leadership to “go nuclear” in the words of one protagonist.[2] While we can be critical of the conduct of Galloway and some of his positions, the complaint about organisational manoeuvres and people swamping meetings is one that many on the left will be sadly familiar with. This kind of practice must stop.

The political problem with Respect was not so much its “liberal” program, at the end of the day it was largely old Labour social democratic in much of what it said, the unstable core at the heart of it was the drive for electoral success with people who had no real interests in extra-parliamentary movements and struggles. A temporary alliance with careerists can come back to bite you, as it did for Respect in the east end of London, where Respect councillors jumped ship, first to the Tories and Liberal Democrats and then to Labour.

Again this points up the importance of political movements on the streets and in the workplaces as being paramount, with elections as a subordinate part of that strategy. Moreover, it means a much more democratic and accountable relationship between any elected representatives and the rank and file members, one where they are subordinated to the wider organisation and struggle, and not seen as its “leaders” merely because they have been elected to a position within the capitalist state. This is a point that SYRIZA will also have to debate out in the coming months.

Today the remains of the cycle of left unity initiatives exists in the form of the Trade Union and Socialist Coalition (TUSC), an electoral alliance between the SWP and the Socialist Party (CWI), as well as a handful of independents. But again the TUSC only exists for elections and has no activist base. It seems to be doubtful that the TUSC can be transformed into something better; rather it appears to be a marriage of convenience for the two bigger Trotskyist groups. Its last conference had less than 60 people at it, despite the fact that the combined membership of the constituent groups must be over 1000 – real decisions are of course taken by the SWP and SP party leaderships.

While the past should not be forgotten, it can be forgiven, if people can prove their earnest support for a new initiative. Otherwise we are locked in a vicious circle with no way out.

Differences with SYRIZA

Regardless of the subjective problems of the British left’s sect-building ethos, there are two objective problems if we consider ourselves in relation to what the Greek left has achieved. The first is that SYRIZA’s success is clearly the result of a country in complete meltdown. Wage cuts of 40% and closure of important services is at a qualitatively higher level than anything we have in Britain… so far. We shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that only around 10% of the cuts have gone through, so worse is to come.

Second, Syriza was launched in 2004 and has had the best part of a decade to build up its support in elections before the explosion in 2012. In most elections they received around 5% of the vote, which to the British left would be nothing short of a breakthrough. Patience and a long-term view of politics is essential to make such a project work. But then, maybe the British “explosion” will happen sooner since any new organisation built will be involved in tenacious struggle against austerity from day one.

We also could not limit ourselves to electoral politics as SYRIZA seems to have an inclination to do. While some of the more radical elements within the coalition are organising forums and initiatives outside of the parliamentary process, it is essential as part of our strategy to see elections as a subordinate part of the wider struggle, not the primary focus. If SYRIZA imagines that it can really reverse the austerity measures and revive Greece only through governing the capitalist state they will be in for a rude shock. When it comes to Greece’s political and economic future, the European Central Bank and the leaders of France and Germany, not to mention the Greek capitalist class, are all in a far more powerful position than the parliament in Athens; removing their support and control mechanisms would be a crucial task for any radical government.

Campaigning for a united, radical left formation in Britain should be an essential part of the Anticapitalist Initiative’s (ACI) work in the coming months and years. Even more so, 2013 should be the year that serious steps are made to bring together a re-alignment on the left. We have had our fingers burnt in the past, but we cannot let past failures haunt us. If we fail to rise to the challenge, then we will deserve the defeats inflicted on us by the ruling class.

But the working class and the poor do not deserve them. It is not their fault the left is so weak – it’s ours. Now we have to get our house in order so that we can create a movement that can fight austerity and challenge capitalism.

Simon Hardy is a member of the new Anticapitalist Initiative (ACI), which, according to its website, seeks “to search out avenues for unity and co-operation that presents radical and socialist ideas in a way that is more appealing to new layers of activists. We will promote activity and struggle that aims to overcome division and sectarianism and points the way to a new type of society without exploitation and oppression.”

 

Notes

[1] Read Dan Hind’s article here http://aje.me/U5lUOj. It subsequently drew a critically examination from Socialist Workers Party member Richard Seymour at his Lenin’s Tomb blog http://www.leninology.com/2012/08/the-problem-of-left-unity.html.

[2] See http://www.socialistunity.com/galloway-on-respect/ and also http://www.redpepper.org.uk/Car-crash-on-the-left.

Originally at LINKS: International Journal of Socialist Renewal: http://links.org.au/node/3054

**END**

Posted here by Glenn Rikowski

The Flow of Ideas: http://www.flowideas.co.uk

Volumizer: http://glennrikowski.blogspot.com

MySpace Profile: http://www.myspace.com/glennrikowski

Rikowski Point: http://rikowskipoint.blogspot.com

Volumizer: http://glennrikowski.blogspot.com

Glenn Rikowski on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/glenn.rikowski

Glenn Rikowski’s MySpace Blog: http://www.myspace.com/glennrikowski/blog

Online Publications at: http://www.flowideas.co.uk/?page=pub&sub=Online%20Publications%20Glenn%20Rikowski