The need to start a dialogue in order to have a common electoral descent of the left and progressive forces is emphasized in their new intervention by the executives of SYRIZA, Dionysis Teboneras, Antonis Kotsakas and Haris Tsiokas.

With their text published in the “Newspaper of the Editors”, Mr. Teboneras, Kotsakas and Tsiokas intervene with the aim of creating “a space for dialogue between leftist and progressive forces with the participation of existing parties, social bodies, movements and unaffiliated citizens”.

The three executives of SYRIZA emphasize that “the necessity for the reconstitution of the wider left-progressive space is obvious”, underlining that “this effort should not be extended to ideological-political issues but only to programmatic ones”.

“We as individuals have disengaged from the organizational arm of SYRIZA PS. However, we remain within its ideological framework as it has been shaped through congressional decisions. We want to contribute to this effort. We do not claim that this proposal is the only correct one, and we will be pleased to see other proposals submitted. The urgent thing is to open the dialogue”, conclude Mr. Teboneras, Kotsakas and Tsiokas.

The intervention of the three executives of SYRIZA

“In the context of the proposal we have submitted for the reorganization of the wider left and progressive space and in order to immediately start a consultation with the aim of forming a common recipient, programmatic proposal, we are creating a space for dialogue between left and progressive forces with the participation of existing parties, social organizations, movements and unaffiliated citizens.

The text includes documentation for the processes as they are configured and ends with this.

The necessity to reconstitute the wider left-progressive space is obvious.

Finally, we note that this effort should not be extended to ideological-political issues but only to programmatic ones.

The world is changing.

World capitalism, through the crises and impasses it produces, advances to excesses.

The previous stage was neoliberal globalization, but now we have entered a phase of competition between the protectionism of large markets and globalization.

The explosion of technology and science, biology and genetics now raises many questions, in what we call human self-worth. The big question that arises is who will control this enormous power.

The collective subversive subject of the last century (proletariat) is retreating. A new collective subject is being formed (precariato).

The bipolar world of the last century is rapidly turning into a multipolar one.

The human brain is bombarded by millions of information every day. But he is unable to process them and evaluate them with all that this entails.

The new dividing sections

The global left is in retreat and defense. Embarrassed and unable to submit a comprehensive proposal. The main dividing lines of the past are retreating. We now have new divisions arising from technological and scientific discoveries, but also from geostrategic upheavals, the climate crisis and immigration.

It is obvious that the Marxist method of thinking that has helped us understand the world needs updating based on new evidence.

People, especially in the West, being aware of dystopia, reject collective action. Parties, unions, movements are in retreat and citizens are privatizing.

They seek a way out of the crisis.

The risk of generalized liquidation

The system bombards citizens with negative shocks, passivates them, puts them under repression and makes them easily manageable.

They consider them complementary to the system, which aim at the profitability of the companies. They are looking for anti-systemic solutions and many think they find them in the populist extreme right.

It is therefore obvious that the left is obliged to submit a comprehensive alternative proposal.

Several months ago we submitted to the public debate an opinion that surprised many. We talked regarding the generalized liquidation of society, parties and the political system.

We argued that in addition to the economic crisis, society is permeated horizontally by a crisis of values.

There is a dialectical relationship of mutual influence between citizens and politicians.

Citizens and politicians we are derivatives of the same value structure. The mutual rejection leads nowhere. It simply exacerbates the crisis at the same time that we are facing an acute demographic problem.

The country’s political staff is unable to submit a comprehensive alternative proposal with a workable program.

Proposal with principles, values ​​and vision.

The leadership of the right was and is supported by the financial elites who enjoy the returns.

Democratic, left-wing citizens are looking for political expression and a way out of governability.

Abstinence of 60% rings alarm bells.

Systemic forces as we know plan policy with a decade horizon. Let’s not be surprised if they choose an early appeal to the polls before the deterioration of the ND becomes irreversible.

Let us note here, that the financial elite have a strong interest in having both a Prime Minister and an opposition leader who are influenced by their world view.

Young people today take crisis almost as normal.

They have not lived and are not concerned with the experiences of previous generations.

But we are responsible for this development.

The challenge and responsibility for the left progressive space
Journalists talk a lot regarding the center-left.

We disagree.

We propose the term left and progressive space. The center-left is a nebula without ideological orientation. It is something that cannot or does not want to be left or center and is perhaps a remnant of the country’s political history.

When in Europe even the parties of the right-wing social democracy are registered as left, it is questionable why some people insist on the term center-left.

The danger of the fascist extreme right is just around the corner.

Let us not be forced to hastily make decisions as was done in France.

The cachexia of the left progressive space does not offer an alternative, with a horizon of governability. But it is necessary now to become a field of ideas, positions and proposals and not a place to satisfy personal ambitions.

Let us ensure that the constitutional provision allowing the people to change governments is able to work.

Everyone is responsible. The Greek people need a vision. A vision of values ​​but with realism. It requires a plan with commitments, and without ambiguities. They need proposals with spikes. For example, a clean position for fossil fuels. Closing the gap between high and low incomes. Securing labor rights. Strengthening and not undermining the NHS. Upgrading and consolidating public education.

Specific commitments on the environmental crisis and demographics. Productive plan that will not be oriented only to services and tourism.

The priority cannot be only the fair distribution of wealth but also the increase of the produced value by ensuring fair terms of distribution to the contributors.

The country’s geostrategic position provides opportunities but also entails difficulties. Given our membership in supranational organizations (NATO~EU) we must talk regarding a modern left-wing patriotism. The main issue is the immutability of the borders in the Balkans in the context of multidimensional foreign policy.

Greece, due to its geostrategic position, cannot and should not be the given and obedient unconditional ally.

It cares regarding the national interest and not the aspirations and plans of NATO and the EU.

Our aim is to emerge as a key, reliable and stable pillar for Peace and development in the region.

Our suggestion

Months before the European elections, we submitted a proposal for the need to reconstitute the left and progressive space.

In the pre-election period we supported SYRIZA PS The result of the elections confirmed our opinion.

The day following the elections we submitted a specific proposal. The main element of the proposal concerned the need to set up an informal coordinating body with the aim of starting the consultation seeking coincidences in the program field. The proposal referred to the participation of representatives from all the political bodies of the progressive space in proportion to the electoral records. The representation of all tertiary organizations of productive and social bodies is also necessary.

Let us recall the open political event, at the “ALFA” theater, in which the proposal was discussed with impressive participation and acceptance.

A large part of the executives in the field at the beginning had an awkward to negative attitude. However, over time and based on the election results, this was overturned. Almost everyone now accepts in principle the need for restructuring but predictably attempts to adapt the idea to their trial strategy.

On purpose, they attributed to us an intention to weaken the parties.

But we had made it clear that the parties remain in their current status.

They maintain their independence ideologically, politically and organizationally.

Through the consultation we propose, only the formation of a minimum agreement in the programmatic field of agreement that leads to electoral co-operation is sought.

The issue of bonus seats in case of cooperation of parties was raised. There is the precedent of SYRIZA with the components that were parties submitted to the Supreme Court.

We hear arguments regarding the risk of liquidation of the parties. Those who point it out seem not to understand that the abstention of 60% indicates exactly that.

Also, many of those who point out this danger by their actions and proposals exacerbate it. It is the business of each party with its internal functions and in the context of noble rivalry with other parties in the area to strengthen the terms of its internal cohesion.

There is no question of abolishing or merging parties. Their contribution to the unified electoral scheme lies in principle in their participation in the consultation for the formulation of a programmatic agreement. If and as long as this becomes possible, the Greek men and women together with the members of the local parties, through open social processes, will determine the leadership group and the head of the scheme.

The consultation for the formation of an agreement does not concern only the parties, society itself must become a participant and co-former through the higher level mass and productive bodies.

We as individuals have disengaged from the organizational arm of SYRIZA PS. However, we remain within its ideological framework as it has been shaped through conference decisions. We want to contribute to this effort.

We do not claim that this proposal is the only correct one, and we will be pleased to see other proposals submitted.

The urgent thing is to open the dialogue.

Temboneras Dionysis

Antonis Kotsakas

Tsiokas Haris”