This article was published by the American Scholar.
In six
years of nearly continuous protests, this one was the most articulate. Some 400
speech therapists, occupational therapists, and child psychologists stood
outside the Greek parliament in late January, calling on the government not to
cut subsidies they receive from the national health system. The protesters—well-dressed,
middle class, and highly educated, many of them at universities in the United
Kingdom and the United States—were not the sort who generally take to the
streets. And yet, so angry were they with the government that they marched out
into traffic, led by a stray dog that had instinctively placed itself at the
head of the column, and paraded their banners and slogans across the centre of
town to the doors of the Ministry of Health. Given the makeup of the crowd, the
elocution on Syntagma Square was unusually refined that day. “For no reason,
for no cause do we demean speech therapy,” the protesters chanted in rhyming,
scanning Greek. “There is no therapy for austerity,” read one banner. Ever
since the 2010, when the first of 13
austerity packages aimed at reducing the budget deficit was approved, Athenians
have grown accustomed to routine disruptions. At least on this day, the entire
street wasn’t cordoned off, as happens every few days for larger demonstrations.
Motorists simply weaved their way around.
The Greek government pays for less than half of a
child’s therapy costs, but that subsidy still means treatment for thousands of
families. The health budget plummeted by €129 million this year and by 35
percent over the past eight years. The government has already shortened the
list of medicines it subsidises, frozen the hiring of doctors and nurses in
public hospitals, and allowed its debt to medical suppliers to rise to €1.8
billion. That it should now attempt to reduce welfare for children—at a time
when the country’s birthrate has been declining for a decade, having slipped
below the death rate four years ago—shows how desperate it is to find new areas
of economy. Austerity was supposed to make Greece more efficient. In this case,
it seems to be imperilling the country’s future.
I was recently at a farmers’ protest in Korinth, an
hour’s drive from Athens. About two dozen tractors and pickup trucks roared
into the town’s central square with horns blaring. The lead tractor parted
traffic and pedestrians with a two-tone foghorn. “The government needs to
understand that we can’t go on—we’ll demolish everything,” threatened the
farming cooperative’s leader, once the gathering had come to a standstill. He
ceremoniously took a list of demands to the local prefect, astride his tractor like
a centaur, as the other farmers cheered him on.
The demonstration was pure street theatre, and in
years past farmers did use the winter lull between reaping and sowing to extract
a higher European Union farming subsidy out of the government. In the past two
years, however, they have had cause for existential concern. Once fixed at six
percent, their income tax will now rise from 22 to 45 percent. The EU has cut
agricultural subsidies to Greece in order to divert money to the newest members
from Eastern Europe, and the fuel subsidy was eliminated this year. Worst of
all, the Greek government has passed a draconian social security law forcing
all self-employed professionals, including farmers, to pay 27 percent of their income
toward pensions and health coverage. The full force of these measures will hit farmers
this year. Many know they will not survive, unable to set aside enough money to
sow next year’s crop.
Greek agriculture is worth €7 billion—some four
percent of the nation’s economy—but its strategic value is far greater than
that, with agriculture accounting for 23 percent of exports. Greece needs
this vital foreign currency to repay its foreign debt of €330 billion. In addition, an estimated 700,000 people—one fifth of
all Greeks who are employed—work in agriculture. Farmers were once a prized and
pampered constituency: two decades ago they paid no social security. That
they should be brazenly put upon shows how great is the pressure from Greece’s
creditors—the International Monetary Fund and the rest of the Eurozone — to generate an ever-larger budget
surplus. The Eurozone insists that for the next decade at least, 3.5 percent of
GDP—about €6 billion—be set aside to repay debt. This debt repayment bill will
be ruinous to the Greek economy, which has been stuck in recession for eight
years and needs to finance growth and jobs, because it pushes taxes ever-higher.
As it is, Greek tax revenues already represented 39 percent of the economy,
according to Eurostat, the statistical agency of the European Commission. Under
the new social security law, that figure could well soar beyond the EU average
of 40 percent.
As governments, both at home and abroad, continue to
squeeze the Greeks for more money, the ability to demonstrate publicly is
becoming increasingly important to the preservation of democracy. More
conservative Greeks disdain these displays as political licentiousness,
outgrowths of an overgrown sense of entitlement—the Great Recession that
started in 2008 has reopened the geological fault line between right and left. That
the democratic polity has survived at all is an extraordinary achievement
The Greece I grew up in during the early 1970s was an
American protégé surrounded by a thousand kilometres of Iron Curtain, and that
precariousness very much defined the terms of its existence. There were no
official visits to or from Warsaw Pact countries until the late 1970s. Although
Greece joined the European Union in 1981, radio remained state-controlled until
1987, television until 1989. The
communist party had been outlawed in 1949, when it lost its bid to seize power
in a bloody civil war. Greeks abided by the political zoning laws of East and
West, even if many disagreed with them. When Colonel Yiorgos Papadopoulos and a
small group of officers suspended parliamentary democracy in 1967 to pre-empt
what they saw as the surreptitious advance of communism, most Greeks
acquiesced.
With the fall of European communism in August 1990,
Greece found itself in a world of bewildering opportunity. Cheap labor from
Albania and Bulgaria poured across the border, willingly constituting an underclass
of construction workers, fruit pickers, and domestic labourers. Banking
deregulation liberated credit, enabling Greek investments to flow north. By the
turn of the millennium, Greek banking, telecommunications, and supermarket
subsidiaries could be found as far away as Poland. Rapid extensions of credit
had taken place before in developed Western economies, but never in Greece. For
the first time, the Greeks, who had learned to scrimp and save to build their
homes, were able to borrow against ancestral farms to go on holiday.
Many people were uncomfortable in a world where money
had replaced ideology. I covered Papadopoulos' funeral in 1999. (His
dictatorship had collapsed in July 1974,
almost simultaneously with that of the Nixon administration—and possibly partly
because of it—and he had spent his remaining years in jail.) As Papadopoulos’s
coffin processed into church at Athens’ First Cemetery, I heard an old man
address a teenager beside me. “Remember, the colonels wanted the glory, but
these people,” he said, jabbing a
finger in the direction of parliament, “they want the money, too.”
Dictatorship nostalgia was then a parochial
phenomenon. That changed with the entry into parliament of the nationalist,
far-right Golden Dawn party in 2012, which now commands a good seven percent of
the vote. Whereas many Greeks saw the dictatorship as a Cold War tolerance—and the
result of an excessive U.S. foreign
policy—during the Great Recession they have often blamed democracy for the
financial mismanagement that led to the country’s collapse. Some conservatives
have hankered for the command economy of the dictatorship, which invested
massively in construction and network industries, extending roads and copper
wire to much of the country.
Under the colonels, Greece did experience annual
growth of between five and 10 percent, a 16-fold rise in exports, and
unemployment as low as two percent, but it also saw widening income inequality,
rapid growth of government spending, and high overseas borrowing. In other
words, the economy grew without necessarily becoming more competitive—trends
that democratic governments would later accelerate rather than correct.
Nostalgia always invents its object on the basis of a
truth. The inaccurate conflation of dictatorship and economic soundness in the
minds of many Greeks suggested its own false antipode—a conflation of democracy
and economic irresponsibility. After populist leftism stormed to power in 1981
in the form of the socialist party Pasok, this spendthrift view of the left
would be reinforced.
Pasok prided itself on bringing a social revolution,
and some of its changes were indeed revolutionary. It completed the process of
equalising the legal status of men and women, begun under the conservatives.
Civil marriage and divorce took legal precedence over religious ceremony. The
construction of a new wave of European Union–funded university hospitals,
freeways, and infrastructure commenced across Greece. With their police files
incinerated, communists ceased to be afraid of surveillance and discrimination
for the first time since the civil war. Even more important, the communist National
Liberation Army, which fought against the Nazis, was officially reinstated
after years of being omitted from an annual remembrance of the resistance,
helping to heal the divisions of the Civil War of 1946-49.
However, Pasok also became known for corruption and
client politics. It nationalised faltering or stagnant companies to prevent
mass layoffs, but instead of turning them around, it bloated their payrolls
with political supporters and sank them deeper into debt. (Olympic Airways was
a classic example. By the time the airline was finally privatised in 2009, it
was costing taxpayers €1 million a day.) Just before the financial crisis of
2008, Greece’s leading labor think tank estimated the public payroll at more
than a million people: almost one in four employed Greeks, that is, worked for
the government.
Not only did Pasok increase public spending from 38
percent of GDP to 48 percent during its eight years in power, it also did so in
a vindictively partisan manner, tirelessly politicising public bodies and
eradicating neutrality. Agricultural cooperatives abandoned their duty to sell
produce as competitively as possible, instead funnelling EU subsidies to the
party faithful. Pasok unionists lobbied for ever-more benefits and earlier
retirement from public service. Greek communists who had gone into exile in the
Soviet Union were invited back with free retirement benefits at the expense of
the merchant marine fund. Shipping is an age-old enterprise in this maritime
nation, but now, its retirement fund promptly went from financial health to
dependence on state support. By the time conservatives came to power in 1990,
the tradition of partisan favouritism was entrenched.
The result is that even after six years of unsparing
austerity, almost 70 percent of tax revenue is still spent on the public
payroll and topping up bankrupt pension funds. Despite the political cost of
the financial crisis, which has reduced the life expectancy of governments to
an average of 17 months, Greek parties still haven’t replaced the cynical
calculation that bankrupted the country: it is easier to win elections by
promising handouts to 2.7 million pensioners and 650,000 public employees than
by promising competitiveness to the three million workers left in the private
sector. Governments are able to get away with this because, by and large,
Greeks don’t trust capitalism to deliver social benefits.
Does this mean the Greeks have had more democracy than
they can responsibly wield? Do they need a new period of oligarchy to set
things right? The short answer is that the colonels who imposed a military
junta on the country in 1967 can hardly be said to have instilled political
maturity, so it is difficult to justify the medicine a second time.
The longer answer is that Greek democratic sovereignty
has dwindled throughout the crisis as Greece’s creditors—the International
Monetary Fund and the rest of the Eurozone—have held a power of veto over
budgetary decisions. The resulting policy mix extinguished an enormous deficit and
balanced the budget, but it did so on the back of a social disaster: Greece
lost a quarter of its economy—five times more than it lost in the Great
Depression of 1929–39. The IMF at least had the decency to admit, in 2013, that
it had misjudged the effect of abruptly cutting public spending without a
growth program and social safety net. The Eurozone, led by Germany, has been
unrepentant.
Greece’s treatment by its European partners, in
particular, has been shocking, partly because relations within the European
family were supposed to be collegial, not adversarial, and partly because Eurozone
leaders took the view that the Greeks could not afford democracy until they
paid their debts. Austerity bills hundreds and sometimes thousands of pages
long would be sent to parliament with only a few days for ingestion and debate.
Two moments, in particular, demonstrate the contempt
in which other Europeans held Greek democracy. In 2011, after he announced he
would hold a referendum on Eurozone membership, Prime Minister George
Papandreou was browbeaten by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German
Chancellor Angela Merkel into resigning. Papandreou appointed in his place
Loukas Papademos, a former central banker, who had Germany’s backing. It was
Papademos who passed the most controversial measure of the recession—lowering
monthly minimum wages from €731 to €586—leading to the most destructive
anti-austerity riots Athens has seen before or since.
The second—and darker—moment came in 2015. In January
of that year, the Coalition of the Radical Left, known as Syriza, became the
largest part in parliament, with its chairman, Alexis Tsipras, taking over as
the country’s prime minister. Six months into its mandate, the Syriza
government failed to convince the rest of the Eurozone to reschedule Greece’s
debt. Syriza not only spent every penny in the treasury, it also defaulted on
the IMF at the end of June. This was the credit event that the bailouts had
sought to prevent since 2010, yet the markets barely took notice: to the rest
of the Eurozone, Greece was barely even a nuisance anymore.
Germany could now press the Greeks into accepting a third
bailout loan on its terms: thus the deal to hand over a primary fiscal surplus
of 3.5 percent of GDP to Greece’s creditors every year until at least 2025. No
matter that a referendum had passed in which almost 62 percent of Greeks had
voted against more austerity, and parliament had already passed an austerity
package that Greece’s creditors had put together. Syriza had been squeezed and
Greece humiliated, reduced to a second-class country within the EU. Yannis
Schizas, head of the Radical Ecologists, one of the groups that make up Syriza,
called the deal “a new colonialism under the leadership of Germany.”
To say that the Greek experience accelerated Brexit
and a return to nationalism within the European Union in such places as Hungary
and Poland, is not an exaggeration. If sovereigns are to be treated no
differently than any other debtor (and possibly worse), if the Eurozone
provides no protection from markets, if the EU has decided to rip up its Social
Charter and cannot augment democracy or the feeling of security, then what
point the EU? Greece’s treatment, far more than Ireland’s, Portugal’s or
Spain’s, has demonstrated the impotence and internal asymmetry of the Union.
Cementing the democratic polity as the best guarantor
of stability, irrespective of whether the government has right or left
leanings, is Greece’s great intangible benefit of the last four decades. It is
better to be disappointed by your choice of leadership than to feel you had no
choice. But democracy is not always lost in one fell swoop. It can be eroded,
and when this happens, people begin to realise what is at stake. In Greece’s
case, the response has at least been to preserve the parliamentary process, and
hope it will one day better represent what people actually want. But the
political class is unmistakably walking in the wilderness. Many members of
parliament are wary of meeting with constituents. They still have a chance to
redeem themselves. If the present were to be viewed as the distant past, the
Great Recession might yet be a period in which Europe committed shameful errors,
but Greece overcame its own.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.