Greek fire: lost principles, lost control

The violent confrontations between police and protestors in Greece reflects a malaise of ideas as well of governance, says Takis Michas of Eleftherotypia.

When Greece's conservative New Democracy party came to power in March 2004 it promised three things: to "reinvent" the state, to eliminate corruption, and to initiate much-needed educational reform. Almost five years later, the situation remains unchanged: the state is still a tool for bestowing benefits and favours, corruption in the public sector is still rampant, and attempts at educational reform have fizzled out.Takis Michas is a journalist with the Greek daily newspaper Eleftherotypia, and an associate of the Centre for Studies in Classical Liberalism in Athens. He is the author of a study of Greece's links with Slobodan Milosevic's Serbia during the ex-Yugoslav wars of the 1990s, Unholy Alliance: Greece and Milosevic's Serbia in the Nineties (Texas A&M University Press, 2002)

This article, with minor editorial alterations, was first published in the Wall Street Journal on 12 December 2008

This sets the context for the riots that have engulfed Greece since 7 December 2008. The postcard picture of Greece as the land of sunny beaches and friendly people has been shattered, revealing a country torn by social strife and consumed by hatred and senseless violence (see Kostas Gemenis, "Greece in turmoil: riots and politics", 10 December 2008).

The ostensible cause of the rioting was the killing - under circumstances that remain unclear - of a 15-year-old boy by a policeman on 6 December near the Athens district of Exarchia, a popular hangout for leftists and professed anarchists. Two officers have been arrested and charged with the boy's slaying. Poor training, lack of motivation and low salaries make for a notoriously incompetent police force whose members are prone to cause such tragic incidents. In that sense the police share the malaise of the rest of the public sector in Greece. The only difference is that they carry arms.

The death of Alexandros Grigoropoulos quickly led to (mostly peaceful) mass demonstrations all over Greece by students who were understandably unhappy with the killing of their peer. They are also fed up with an over-centralised education system that thrives on rote-learning, and stifles innovation and creativity (see Helena Smith, "In Athens, middle-class rioters are buying rocks...", Observer, 14 December 2008).

But soon the protests turned into ugly riots. Groups of masked anarchists set about an orgy of torching, looting and vandalism in Athens, Thessaloniki and other major cities in Greece.

A political failure

What was unique about these Greek events - as opposed to, say, the riots in the banlieues of Paris in late 2005 - was the total withdrawal of the government and the security forces from the scene. Civil society was left alone and unarmed to fend off the violent attacks on their property by the hordes of predators. On 9 December, one of the worst nights of rioting, more than 400 shops were attacked in Athens: some were torched, others looted and seriously damaged.

All of this took place while the security forces simply stood by and watched the disaster unfold. They were following the explicit orders of their political masters to assume a "defensive posture" - which in effect meant that they did not try to prevent the orgy of destruction.

Anyone watching this absurd scene could be excused for concluding that a secret deal had been struck between the government and the rioters: we let you torch and plunder to your heart's content, and you let us continue pretending that we are in charge.Also in openDemocracy on the Greek confrontations:

Kostas Gemenis, "Greece in turmoil: riots and politics" (10 December 2008)

The government justified its passivity by arguing that any attempt to stop the vandalism might have produced human victims. At the same time, in order to pacify the enraged shop keepers who were seeing their hopes for a profitable holiday shopping season go up in smoke, it promised to use taxpayers' money to compensate them for the damages caused by the rioters.

"What we are witnessing is the total abdication of responsibility by the Greek state", says Antonis Papayanidis, the former editor-in-chief of the conservative daily Eleftheros Tipos. "This happened both in the case of the shooting of the youth by an incompetent policeman as well as in the case of the riots that followed."

The government's passivity amid this dissolution of law and order did not simply reflect bad crisis-management or sheer incompetence. At a deeper level the conservative government's failure to respond decisively signified its defeat in the battle of ideas, especially among the young.

An intellectual collapse

The abdication of responsibility was in part the result ofthe New Democracy party's abandonment of the values of classical liberalism, whose cornerstone is the rule of law and the respect of private property. Under the leadership of prime minister Kostas Karamanlis, the party has over the years purged from its ranks all voices of classical liberalism and has explicitly rejected values-based narratives in favour of an ill-defined pragmatism. This has proved no match for the ideological assault by the left,which ended up monopolising the marketplace of ideas in the universities and the other educational establishments of the country.

Such was the ideological confusion of the government that on the night of the greatest destruction the only criticism that interior minister Prokopis Pavlopoulos could voice against the plundering thugs was that they were following their own self-interests. Adam Smith would surely turn in his grave!

Even worse was the statement by Panagiotis Stathis, spokesman for the national police, explaining the authorities' inaction: "Violence cannot be fought with violence." With this remark, he effectively equated violence exercised by the authorities to defend the social order with the violence of those trying to destroy it.

"The fall of Rome", wrote Seneca, "took place when Rome's pragmatism ceased to be pragmatic." Unfortunately, the conservatives in Greece do not read Seneca - or much else for that matter.

This article is published by Takis Michas, and openDemocracy.net under a Creative Commons licence. You may republish it without needing further permission, with attribution for non-commercial purposes following these guidelines. These rules apply to one-off or infrequent use. For all re-print, syndication and educational use please see read our republishing guidelines or contact us. Some articles on this site are published under different terms. No images on the site or in articles may be re-used without permission unless specifically licensed under Creative Commons.

Comments

ianniscarras
17 December 2008 - 5:26pm

To use force, the Greek police, and by extension the Greek state, needs to enjoy a certain degree of trust from its citizens. And trust - largely due to corruption, patronage and a poorly functioning legal system - is precisely what police and state do not have. The destruction of property is condemnable, but the goverment was right to restrain police reaction. The alternative presupposes the kind of state which unfortunately in the Greek context does not exist, a state judged to be a fair arbitor, not an extension of party and bureaucratic power. The pity of it is that the Greek state should find itself in such a pathetic postion, not that it was forced to react to violence as it did.

I.C., Athens, Greece. 

kk (not verified)
19 December 2008 - 12:04pm

Totally agree with previous comment.
This article is coming from a newspaper quite biased and often contents and work is poorly done in terms of content and analysis. Some things are being commented fairly, such as the gonverment's incapability to make a public effort to apologise, punish and try to convince that demos and efforts are being taken into account and actions will be taken to aleviate social injustice.
A big disagreement is the injust riots and the violence of anarchists. This shows lack of knowledge and a very conservative way of interpreting the phenomena.
Firstly, anarchists backing political ideologies do vandalise but only symbols of capitalim like banks and chain shops which the first few that were destroyed people of all ages applauding this act. The rest of fires and disasters came from the well known hooligans very often belonging to extreme right or neo nazi parties (without even understanding why they do so) along with deliberate incapability of the police to put out these fires. There are plenty of videos proving so.
Finally, there is a big hope that due exactly to the length and support from the majority of the people (inlcuding the ones that do not go on the streets) that things have not happened for fun. Anything less would not have been given any attention and efforts would have been jeopardised as in many other occasions. Still, 11 days ago and the gonvernment is sort of sure that this will pass and be forgotten.
Amazing commitment on behalf of people of all ages, something that has inspired youth accross Europe and has proven wrong perceptions about people being individualistic and fast asleep in front of injustice.

Den (not verified)
5 January 2009 - 2:39pm

Hmm, Violence of 'anarchists' eh? have you ever thought the unthinkable? that these anarchists could have been lead by the police? could this have been yet another 'false flag' operation from it's very concept? and going from a peaceful demo to a 'violence of anarchists', seam the MO of a false flag to me.

Post new comment

  • Allowed HTML tags: <p> <h2> <h3> <div> <span> <blockquote> <!--break--> <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <hr> <table> <td> <tr> <img> <map>
  • You may quote other posts using [quote] tags.

More information about formatting options