Barocul comunisto-fascist: Syriza, Putin, Dughin si adevaratele probleme ale Europei

Stangistii uber-excitati de victoria coalitiei Syriza au primit cu celeritate nu unul, ci mai multe dusuri reci. Alianta lui Tsipras cu un partid de extrema dreapta, avand in frunte un lider eurofob, xenofob si homofob, ar trebui sa-i puna teribil pe ganduri pe cei care jubilau acum doua saptamani. Putinofilia manifesta a Syrizei vine din rusofilia traditionala a stangii elene, la care se aduga occidentofobia nu mai putin traditionala. In timpul razboaielor de secesiune care au dus la disolutia Iugoslaviei, ultra-stangistii greci l-au sprijinit pe Slobodan Milosevic in compania exponentilor Bisericii Ortodoxe si chiar a unor fosti membri ai regimului coloneilor (1967-1974). Se cerea chiar internationalizarea conflictului prin infiintarea de Brigazi similare celor initiate de Comintern in timpul Razboiului Civil din Spania (1936-1939). Am recenzat, in 2002, in TLS, o carte despre Grecia si regimul Milosevic scrisa de jurnalistul Takis Michas (“”Unholy Alliance”, Texas A&M).  Tendintele surprinse in acel remarcabil studiu s-au agravat in anii din urma pe fondul crizei, al cvasi-felimentului economic si al exacerbarii nevrozelor identitare grecesti. Retorica Syrizei nu este nici de stanga, nici de dreapta, ci radical populista.

Ideologul care ii inspira pe liderii Syrizei, se dovedeste, nu este altu decat demagogul Aleksandr Dughin, ale carui idei fascistoide se combina cu un imperialism velicorus neo-stalinist catusi de putin deghizat. Intr-un excelent articol din “Washington Post”, Anne Applebaum, una dintre cele mai fine interprete a dilemelor europene, lumineaza care sunt de fapt marile probleme continentale, dincolo de tot mai inselatorul binom “stanga-dreapta”. Europa se confrunta cu ascensiunea unor miscari sincretice, in care se combina toxic fundamentalisme religioase, ideologice si politice doar aparent ireconciliabile. Dinamul lor este adversitatea ireductibila in raport cu ceea ce tine de pluralismul modernitatii liberale.

“For those who want a happy ending or an easy moral to the story, the election of a new Greek government last month poses some interesting quandaries. Progressives of various kinds at first hailed what appeared to be a victory for the radical left-wing party Syriza, but they were caught off guard when Syriza instantly struck a coalition deal with the Independent Greeks, a radical right-wing party that Daniel Cohn-Bendit, a legendary European leftist, bluntly described as “ultranationalist” with a “homophobic, anti-Semitic, racist” leader.

Many of those who rooted for Syriza because of its campaign against the budget-cutting “austerity” program imposed on Greece by its creditors were also taken aback when other, more urgent priorities appeared on the new leaders’ agenda. Both parties turn out to have close connections to the authoritarian Russian government, and both have curious links to a notorious Russian fascist ideologue, Alexander Dugin, who among other things has called for a “genocide” of the “race of Ukrainian bastards.” Accordingly, the new Greek government’s first foreign policy act was not a protest against European economic policy but a protest against sanctions on Russia. Only then did it launch negotiations with its European creditors by announcing that it would refuse to negotiate with its European creditors.

In truth, Greece makes nonsense out of all of the political categories we normally use in Europe. Our notions of “left” and “right” are ancient, dating to the French revolution: In 1789, the nobility sat on the right side of the Assemblée Nationale, and the revolutionaries sat on the left. Since then, “people who want change” are supposedly leftist, and “conservatives” are rightist. This typology hasn’t really worked for a long time — there have been plenty of revolutionary right-wing movements, and an equal number of conservative leftists. But this language now obscures what is happening in Europe altogether.”

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: