Could Greece, through democratic elections, become for Turkey what Tunisia became for Egypt in 2011 through mass protests?
As the new government’s statement on Mariupol reveals, Greece will leverage its position along a geopolitical fault-line to maximise its bargaining power.
Mutual recognition between people and cultures moves in mysterious ways, the cartoon its Rorschach test.
The crisis facing Europe could be perceived as a product of conflicting class interests in what Keynes called the capitalism of the casino. All the more important that it should instead be blamed on conveniently stigmatised Others.
In the end though, this will all probably lead mainly to more fragmentation, which will make fundamental change even more unlikely.
The EU is following a bizarre logic, where support is given to autocratic regimes who benefit from the rise of extremist groups, instead of seeking reasons for the rise of radicalization among European youth. Why?
The election is vital because at stake are two broader EU problems: the absence of a right to organise substantive opposition, and the de-democratisation of political decision-making.
Perhaps it is not the Muslim communities of France that must change, so much as the notion of laïcité.
The ‘Greek story’ simply diverts attention from the real task ahead which is the correction of the serious ‘design faults’ of the monetary union in Europe.
Powerful institutional agendas have acted to bolster the ‘ghost ship’ obsession. Such symbolism renders the specificities of Mediterranean migration opaque.
It has been exhausting having to confront the visceral divisions among us about the nature of what happened, the roles of religion, geopolitics, and racism. And the possibility that the west, thinking it ‘is Charlie’, has been spitting on their graves.
