SYRIZA’s Left Platform Against Greek Deal with Austerity Reforms

syrizaAs the Greek government has made a request to the European Stability Mechanism for a new bailout package, members of SYRIZA’s “left platform” proclaim that they are against a “humiliating” deal that would include austerity measures, and some even ask for a new referendum.

Government spokesperson Gavriil Sakellaridis briefed the party’s political secretariat on the Greek proposal without going into specifics. Key party members expect to see how lenders will react before they call a meeting of SYRIZA’s Central Committee to discuss the progress of negotiations. The committee will also have to approve the text of the agreement.

The left platform asks the prime minister to “respect the people’s mandate” and use it as a negotiating tool. The platform’s website,, posted an article entitled “The people’s request for dignity is dragged from summit to summit” in which it is stated that a deal that would make Greek people suffer will be a catastrophe.

“The government has a duty to respond to the “no” of the referendum and use it against the ferocity of creditors and the corrupt oligarchy… Greece has not only one but several options to follow. They are all difficult and inaccessible. The worst, however, the most predatory, the most humiliating and intolerable, would be the surrender and allegiance to the “institutions” of the EU, the ECB and the IMF. This deplorable allegiance must be avoided at all costs,” says the article.

The article was written by the leader of the left platform, Progressive Reconstruction, Environment and Energy Minister Panagiotis Lafazanis, who has stated publicly that he is against an agreement with recessionary measures. Minister of Social Security Dimitris Stratoulis also said he will not sign an agreement that is against the people. Stratoulis also said that Greece has alternative routes to take.

SYRIZA MP Yiannis Michelogiannakis sent an open letter to Alexis Tsipras saying that if he cannot achieve a viable deal, he should hold a new referendum with the question: “a memorandum of poverty or alternative choices.”


  1. If I may intervene in this unfriendly discussion… I believe what marxists want ultimately is a life without class oppression and division, and yes, ‘whining’ – or rather, protesting – is one of their [less violent] ways to try and ‘get’ that kind of life from the capitalists. But I guess the banks and the elite, for all the assets that they claim to own, can’t afford to allow such ways of life to flourish, as they would have much to lose.

    On a more serious note, please note that marxists understand property relations differently, so don’t presume to impose the usual framework of ‘financial success’ as if it were a law of nature

  2. American soldiers were not in Greece when the Germany army retreated. that is a fact

    “did spilled any Greek blood for the U.S..” read about the Greek Civil War the first battle against Russia and communism post WW2 where 100k Greeks died

    Greece had been fighting Nazi Germany for over a year before America decided to enter the War

    2 faced allies like a country that supports Ergodan’s Turkey over Greece to use airspace for their never ending Wars?

  3. Took me a while to notice (I don’t intend to leave a discussion, no matter how hostile, hanging).

    Let me break down your analogy bit by bit. In the worst-case scenario: Running labor camps and implementing indoctrination campaigns take up a whole lot of labor, and if the cadres were too lazy the regimes wouldn’t even last a year. In a better-case scenario: planning economic production and consumption, and setting up tons of council meetings and study sessions take up a whole lot of labor, and if the cadres were lazy the people won’t be won over for even a moment. Uneducated and ignorant, you say? Marxists wrote tomes and volumes, and they debate each other all the time. And no, Marxists want no free handouts, they want to abolish private property and establish a classless cashless society where each only gets what one needs and gives according to ability.

    As for the capitalists, they sure didn’t succeed without getting others to work for them, or duping others into buying into their products. Sure, you may say that they provide intellectual and technical input (not to mention investment capital) to the business ventures, but they wouldn’t dare to proceed without the state guaranteeing their security, legislating and enforcing property relations, and establishing a monetary system (or just plain buying off mercenaries to do their bidding). Surely spongers and scroungers and welfare queens are even more innovative in their efforts to survive…

    But really, the lesson here is that while people do exert effort differently, the current scheme of appropriation and distribution is arbitrary and unjust. What makes, say, the ‘winner take all’ (spoils of the competition) or ‘finders keepers’ (homesteading) scheme more fair than giving to society your talents and having your needs met to further cultivate those talents to be given back…

    In short, thanks for wasting my time and energy with your apparent ignorance of the issues involved, and your refusal to engage the topic on a deeper and more sophisticated level. I can’t even bring myself to say ‘LOL’ because it’s hardly amusing. Sigh.