Bankrupt practices
It did not take George Papandreou long to see that populism can be a useful rhetorical device when actual politics is not on the cards. Throughout his political career, and after he inherited the mantle of the PASOK party, Papandreou has built up a profile of a mild, modest and soft-spoken politician. About a year ago, the successor of Costas Simitis was giving the impression that he wanted to do away with timeworn ideas and refashion the Socialists as a modern political party. But his image was a smokescreen for his awkward public language and limited dynamism. After a year at the helm of the opposition, during which he spent most of his energy on organizing the pending party congress rather than on genuine political activity, it was to be expected that Papandreou would sooner or later break into populist ground. If Papandreou had a solid, reliable platform from which to challenge government policies – which PASOK seems to disapprove of – then he would not have to unleash verbal vitriol at the conservatives in language that is passe. It was not long before Papandreou succumbed to the whims of Socialist party cadres who want a leader with a more upbeat rhetorical style and that engages in a more dynamic opposition, whether or not he has something substantial to say. PASOK’s leader seems to forget that when his father, the late Andreas Papandreou, a master of populist soundbites for two decades, returned to office in 1993, he shed such practices as obsolete and counterproductive. Likewise, he forgets that Simitis, a modest bookkeeper who only took up populist themes after the hegemony of the reformists seemed to fade, eventually paid the price of this uncharacteristic U-turn. Papandreou will have to play with the hand he dealt himself, cheered on by a group of Socialist cadres.
