A risky ambiguity?
The ambiguities of George Papandreou’s «political rhetoric» are dangerous for democracy. The closed circle of associates of the «sole candidate» may have the best intentions, but there is a distinct absence of proposals for reforming our political life. However charming this haze of ideas might appear, it is actually more sinister than this – like a dark cloud heralding a political storm. Whether it be tomorrow’s vote for Papandreou – by PASOK party members but also undetermined «friends» – or a general violation of established democratic procedures, ideas are being thrown onto the table without any preparation or lucid formulation, and without debate. The pre-election period has become an opportunity for political rhetoric that will steer an historic party in an unknown direction. But things needn’t have been this way. Greek politics has a real need for something fresh and innovative. What it does not need is this disparate choice of attractive-sounding proposals. If these are strategies of US or other foreign think tanks, it would be better if they had first passed through our own local think tanks. Just as Simitis laid the groundwork for becoming prime minister by forming his own think tank, so his successor-in-waiting could have prompted discussion of the new ideas which he now wants us to accept without us having understood them or weighed them up.
