The far-right and SYRIZA’s contradictions
The first virtue of a good novel is internal coherence. It may be built upon outrageous assumptions, such as the existence of extraterrestrials on Mars, but contradictions within the plot are not permitted. Fantastic stories, be they scientific, horror, or otherwise, are akin to non-Euclidean geometry. They begin with unfamiliar axioms but are subsequently structured with absolute logic.
The issue with the narratives propagated by the SYRIZA party is that, in addition to illogical assumptions, such as labeling a government that distributed approximately 50 billion euros in benefits as “neoliberal,” they lack logical consistency. Let us analyze the leftists’ explanation for the rise of the far-right, as observed in Sunday’s parliamentary election.
If New Democracy were indeed a far-right party, the parties positioned to its right would not be gaining strength but losing support
The first assumption posits that the entry of three far-right parties into Parliament is a result of the right-wing rhetoric of New Democracy, which in turn led to the ascendance of populist forces to its right. The second assumption is that New Democracy is a far-right party. The contradiction is clear: If New Democracy were indeed a far-right party, the parties positioned to its right would not be gaining strength but losing support. Unless 55% of the voters are far-right, which means that we should migrate as many Jews did during the interwar period. These assumptions cannot simultaneously hold true. Therefore, the members of SYRIZA must make up their minds.
The truth is that there are far-right elements within New Democracy. If SYRIZA has accommodated such elements and even seen them elected to Parliament (like for example Rachel Makri and others), why wouldn’t they exist within New Democracy? Furthermore, it is true that the party’s official rhetoric has, on occasion, veered toward the far-right. A recent example was the unfortunate incident involving minority MPs in the northern Thrace region when, without substantial evidence (beyond a fictional tale by the new justice minister, Giorgos Floridis, who claimed that the organized transportation of Muslim immigrants, primarily from Germany, was orchestrated to influence voting), they were accused of being agents of a foreign power. The talk of “evidence” from the National Intelligence Service (EYP), classified as it may be, holds no significance unless it is presented to the prosecutor. Additionally, according to EYP, a right-wing candidate was “involved in the plans of Ankara and the Turkish consulate.” As the Americans say, when all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.
The emergence of the far-right, particularly in its most abhorrent form, is a multifaceted phenomenon that SYRIZA complicates further with its baseless theories. Can they do no better than that? Perhaps, unless it is because they are unwilling to discuss their own contribution to the rise of anti-political and anti-democratic forces during their anti-bailout struggle.
