Greece 'far right' rejects austerity after 'socialists' capitulate!

[Gustaf]

Germany is the real villain here.

I wouldn't say villain... but certainly shameless hypocrites.  I remember all those BBC articles 7-10 years ago when Germany laid the precedent for budget deficits that exceeded the cap allowed under the Euro agreement.

Of course they whined and moaned and used their weight to get what they wanted... like Germans will do like the best of us... and now they're on the other side and acting quite smug.

What's missing from that story is that Germany is not on the other side by accident. They're there because they undertook painful reforms to restore competitiveness. Thus, while it's true that they broke the rules and refused the fines they did actually deal the issues in a responsible manner. So they some legitimacy in being smug.

And I agree with Ag, that the politicians who set up the euro against economic knowledge are to blame. And I'm not sure they miscalculated either. If you ask Prodi he seems to think this was a clever way of bringing about fiscal union. The cynicism of the European project has no limits for some people.

[Gustaf]

I'll miss Makis Voridis.

THE HAMMER

[Gustaf]

At this point, if I were in Greece, I would be voting KKE. They might be unreformed Stalinists, but the cult of Marx is better than that of Market.

That's wrong.

[Gustaf]

This is why I am supporting Melenchon this year. The European 'left' has been a disaster and more neo-liberal than the neo-liberals.

this is only because elements of the right in Europe have to at least pay lip service to xenophobic/anti-European sentiment that is crucial to their base of popular support; meanwhile the bourgeois left has been entirely bought and sold and markets the prevailing version of firm-driven faux-internationalism without reserve.  if the right is right, it's for the wrong reasons --

agreed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

All right in certain ways (except maybe Gaddafi), but not enough to actually support them. E.g., Saddam was right about not having WMD, but I wouldn't personally go so far as too actively root for the Iraqi military under Saddam against the US-led coalition. Just because LAOS is right about austerity, doesn't mean I support them to win elections.

How the hell was the Iranian theocracy in 2009 right about anything? Nor do I see how Gaddafi would be.

Don't be silly, Opebo is always spot on.

[Gustaf]

What reason would any Greek have to accept this system? They're being reduced to destitution for the sins of their rulers to appease a distant owning class. How does Greece benefit at all?

I don't get this notion that the Greek people have done nothing wrong. This isn't about one leader, it's about an entire system that has been thoroughly corrupt.

I appreciate that plenty of Greeks are innocent in some sense, but in a democratic country the people are ultimately responsible for the acts of their leaders.

[Gustaf]

I do feel a bit sick of the moralist talk of "punishing" the Greek populace. The real problem is that euro system has been built in a manner, in which such "punishment" is the only enforcement mechanism, its only defense against disintegration. This is not a desirable feature of the eurozone architecture, but, rather, its main flaw.

Well, to be fair, for some people (not the ones getting hurt though of course) this outcome is considered one of the benefits.

[Gustaf]

I do feel a bit sick of the moralist talk of "punishing" the Greek populace. The real problem is that euro system has been built in a manner, in which such "punishment" is the only enforcement mechanism, its only defense against disintegration. This is not a desirable feature of the eurozone architecture, but, rather, its main flaw.

Well, to be fair, for some people (not the ones getting hurt though of course) this outcome is considered one of the benefits.

And you know what I think of the morals of those people.

Yes, and I'd agree. Just thought it was worth pointing out.

[Gustaf]

The belief of the Germans (and apparently from above posts ag as well) in 'inflation' as a threat, in the middle of an enormous worldwide deflation is.. well.. I suppose faith is always just that.

Your Lordship must be living in a charmed world, in which prices have been dropping. I live in the real world, in which they are still growing.

Please dispense with the personal attack, ag.  I have no recourse here as you are the moderator, so I'd like to appeal to you openly.  My posts here are respectful and to the point, I think it is reasonable to expect the same in return.

The prices of housing are plummeting, as well as many cheap consumables still cheapening.  The only things I've noticed going upward are food, fuel, and cars.  And ultimately, the most important falling price is that of wages - wages are falling hard.

Ag has acted like a moderator should when his posts are reported on his own board - he asked other moderators to step in and judge it in his place. Since the above is not a personal attack it was not infracted.

Anyway, you seem confused as to what inflation is. The price of one commodity rising/falling does not constitute inflation/deflation. It refers to the general price level, of which there are measures available.

[Gustaf]

Here are some yearly inflation figures from a number of countries: as you can see only Japan and Switzerland have negative inflation (=deflation) on a yearly basis.

http://www.global-rates.com/economic-indicators/inflation/inflation.aspx

[Gustaf]

Obviously it is a personal attack since it is an attack on the character of his interlocutor rather than statement of an argument about the issue,

Believe me there was no attempt on my part to attack you character I would fess up, though, there was some irony involved. I am not sure, if it is against the rules - I would ask my fellow moderators (none of whom I know in person) to decide on that.

Ironical attack is attack, ag.  Please stop abusing your position.

I'm afraid you don't really get the concept of what a personal attack is...

[Gustaf]

Markets pretty much appear as soon as society grows beyond some very small number of people and have thus been around for a very long time. There's quite a bit of interesting research on them, for example on the Mahgrib traders of Northern Africa.

But maybe capitalism refers to something beyond markets.

[Gustaf]

Markets pretty much appear as soon as society grows beyond some very small number of people and have thus been around for a very long time. There's quite a bit of interesting research on them, for example on the Mahgrib traders of Northern Africa.

But maybe capitalism refers to something beyond markets.

'beyond markets' could be defined in Marxian terms as something like 'mass commodity production for the purpose of exchange', including a specialized division and labor, and so on.  Weber identified six conditions for 'rational capitalism': modern firm, free market, rational state, rational law, rational technology (technological development unified with the process of production), rational attitude to life and economy (ie commodity fetishism).

while we can always argue what is capitalism? around the margins, playing ironically-dumb like economics professor ag just did is pure obfuscation.

Well, that definition seems to prove opebo wrong quite conclusively.

[Gustaf]

if that's the case I redact it unconditionally.

I suspect Ag's point might have been that he can't see a definition of capitalism that doesn't make anti-capitalist rhetoric like Opebo's patently absurd. This is just me guessing, of course, but still.