Assessing the Metapolitefsi
As more and more is written about Greece’s return to democracy after the fall of the junta 50 years ago, the period known as the Metapolitefsi is also coming under increasing scrutiny. Opinions vary intensely, showing that we are unable to come to an understanding about what matters most.
Many important political scientists, intellectuals and writers regard the Metapolitefsi as a period of failure for the Greek state. Others have gone as far as labeling Greece a failed state, often ignorant to what this means. Such terms appeared during the financial crisis, and many of those who made these claims had a completely different view before it. In some cases, those who believe that the Metapolitefsi was not vindicated by ensuing developments may even urge those who want to speak of its accomplishments to silence.
Regardless, the question that goes out in all these cases is: By what standards can we assess a state’s performance? Most commentators are usually driven by their own desires, expectations and criteria – by their own political choices, in fact. According to the esteemed Harvard University sociologist and political scientist Theda Skocpol, however, a state is judged by whether it has accomplished the goals it set for itself, not according to our individual wishes.
The democracy established in Greece after 1974 was able to withstand all manner of challenges, including the recent economic crisis
The main goal for post-dictatorship Greece was not to eradicate the Turkish threat. Konstantinos Karamanlis never thought of armed conflict because he knew the dire consequences this would have on the country. All he was interested in was averting another dictatorship and firmly establishing a democracy; all his choices were dictated by this purpose. Even accelerating Greece’s induction into the European Economic Community was only partly driven by financial concerns. When he submitted the country’s accession request, Karamanlis actually said that Greece was seeking membership first and foremost for “political reasons” related to efforts to stabilize democracy in the country.
It is a gross overstatement to say that Karamanlis and his associates failed to accomplish the goal they set. The democracy established in Greece after 1974 was able to withstand all manner of challenges, including the recent economic crisis. This is no small achievement.
As to the economic cost of establishing democracy, I would reiterate that what we’re talking about here is the price of the transition to a democratic status quo. It is not as clean and painless a process as we may wish, but one where all sorts of different groups representing different interests support democracy depending on the clout they amass along the way. Greece’s mounting public debt was the price.
Another criticism leveled against the Metapolitefsi is that while it did indeed establish democracy, this also came with rampant corruption. I’d counter that there are no ideal situations. Every Western democracy grapples with corruption, as a look at any European Union state shows. France is a blatant example, with two presidents and two prime ministers – one of whom took his own life – having been convicted.
In conclusion, as we celebrate 50 years since the Metapolitefsi, I would urge that before we reject its accomplishments, we put our own political preferences aside and take a moment to consider where Greece was and where it is today. We should also bear in mind that what we believe in hindsight does not necessarily represent what happened, so we can also put self-pity aside, and start understanding what the country has been through and how we should deal with its future.
Kostas Kostis is a professor of economic and social history at the University of Athens.
