Creative destruction or just plain destruction?
The crush of candidates for PASOK’s leadership, the perpetual subdivision of SYRIZA in the Kasselakis vortex, the increasing attacks on the cohesive material in New Democracy (i.e. the promise of remaining in power under Kyriakos Mitsotakis) are all healthy elements of democracy. When the citizens are not enthralled by what the parties offer, the parties are forced to change wrapping, program or even their leadership. Elections (and, sometimes, televised debates) are catalysts for such change in politics. The questioning, the ferment, the proposals, the clashes are all elements of “creative destruction” which lead to renewal, to a new dynamism, new proposals and a new honeymoon with voters. The duration and intensity of this phase reveals much about the quality of the leadership (present, past and future), the health and structures of the political organism, the priorities of its members and all others who have a large or small role in the process (from “passer-by” voters to party “barons”). In other words, we can estimate whether the turbulence is a sign of fruitful synthesis or dissolution.
There will be no elections for the next three years, and this helps the parties develop without external pressure. The prime minister does not need to change the identity of his government to prevent more voters moving further to the right. Ideally, the issue of the election of the president of the republic should be settled soon, before the deadline next year. It would be a mistake for the highest office in the land to become a plaything in ND’s internal politics, something which would alienate more centrist voters, among other negative consequences. (Katerina Sakellaropoulou, the incumbent, expresses with great dignity and exceptional sensitivity the face which I believe most of us want our country to present to all its residents and abroad.) For at least two years, Mitsotakis has the time to deal with his government’s effectiveness and with fixing the country’s course, without having to worry about the political cost. The discussion within his party should allow him to make this clear.
In SYRIZA, things are more serious, and the problems may be unsolvable. Stefanos Kasselakis is talented, clever and dynamic. But he lacks a sense of reality, he does not reinforce his party’s strengths. He seems to be improvising all the time, without presenting a convincing program. This spinning around himself all the time, in a party lacking basic structure, can only cause harm.
PASOK is different, with its great historical and organizational weight in the collective conscience. Despite coming third in the European Parliament elections, it is a more stable structure than SYRIZA (when the latter is not in power). That is why there are so many suitors – five so far – for its leadership. Irrespective of what each proposes, the way that they and the party handle the process will show whether this contest will lead to renewal or a breakup.
