Ann an co-theacsa de mhì-chinnt agus sruthadh, bidh e na chuideachadh gus tòiseachadh bhon t-sònrachadh. Is e mo thoiseach tòiseachaidh àrdachadh Syriza, an co-bhanntachd radaigeach clì a tha freumhaichte anns na gluasadan a tha an aghaidh cruadal a thàinig gu bhith na phrìomh phàrtaidh dùbhlannach ann am pàrlamaid na Grèige. Tha comas Syriza air guth poilitigeach cuimsichte a thoirt do fhearg agus eu-dòchas nam milleanan air adhartas mòr a dhèanamh às an ionnsaich sinn.
This is a matter not only of its soaring electoral support, which rose from 4 per cent of the national vote in 2009 to 27 per cent in June 2012 on the basis of a refusal of the policies imposed by the IMF, the European Commission (EC) and the European Central Bank (ECB), but also of the fact that this electoral mandate is reinforced by organised movements and networks of solidarity that Syriza has been part of building.
This is not to imply that Syriza’s success is stable or that its momentum will necessarily be maintained. One of its 71 MPs, the ex-Pasok member and trade union leader, Dimtris Tsoukalas, warns that ‘votes can be like sand’. Threatening winds will blow persistently from a hostile media determined to exploit any sign of division; from national and European elites creating an atmosphere of fear towards the left and from an aggressive fascist party exploiting xenophobic tendencies in Greek society with some success, having won 7 per cent in the polls.
Syriza does not provide a template to apply elsewhere; it is a new kind of political organisation in the making. Reflection on its rise, however, which has taken place alongside the collapse of support for Pasok (from around 40 per cent of the vote in 2009 to no more than 13 per cent in 2012), throws the present quandary of the left, especially in Europe, into relief. Such reflection also stimulates fresh thoughts on forms of political organisation that could help us find ways out.
Fàilligeadh nam pàrtaidhean sòisealta deamocratach
Is e seo an duilgheadas. Air an aon làimh, tha neo-chomas aig pàrtaidhean deamocratach sòisealta seasamh ri, no eadhon gu mòr a bhith a’ barganachadh thairis air, cruadal dha na daoine mòra mar fhuasgladh air an èiginn ionmhais. Gu diofar ìrean tha na pàrtaidhean sin a’ nochdadh nach urrainn dhaibh dèiligeadh ri dùbhlan pròiseact neoliberal a tha follaiseach. Tha an crìonadh ann an deamocrasaidh agus cultar nam pàrtaidhean, a bharrachd air an sin, còmhla ri inntinnean stèidhichte air a’ mhargaidh, air ciallachadh gu bheil feachdan ath-nuadhachaidh glè bheag no glè lag ann am pàrtaidhean sòisealta deamocratach.
On the other hand, most political organisations of the radical left, with the notable exception of Syriza, are in weaker positions than they were before the financial crisis of 2008. In addition, the traditional forms of labour movement organisation have been seriously weakened. There has been an impressive growth of resistance and alternatives of many kinds, many of them interconnected and many, like Occupy, besmirching the brand of an already dodgy-looking system. But through what strategic visions, forms of organisation and means of political activism they can produce lasting forces of transformation is an open question under active and widespread discussion.
Ann am faclan eile, fhad ‘s a bha an taobh cheart, ann an cruth neoliberalism, deiseil airson tuiteam a’ bhloc Sòbhieteach ann an 1989, an taobh chlì anns a ’cheann a tuath, nuair a bha e mu choinneimh calpachas a’ tighinn cho faisg air tuiteam às a chèile - leis gu bheil e comasach dha call a dhèanamh. ann am barrantasan stàite – air a bhith comasach air dòighean iomchaidh a lorg gus fiùghantach atharrachaidh a thogail air a stiùireadh leis na luachan agus na stiùiridhean eile a th’ aige don chomann-shòisealta.
Syriza in its current form has been forged in the intense heat of the most ruthless turning of the screw of austerity. Syriza is going to face many problems, both within its own organisation as it changes from a coalition of parties and groups to becoming a party with its own direct membership, as well as in the face of new pressures that will come from its opponents both inside and outside Greece. However, after interviewing a wide range of activists and reading interviews and reports by others, I have a grounded belief that the long and difficult process of developing a framework of rethinking political organisation beyond both Leninism and parliamentarism is producing qualitatively new results.
Tha mòran de na goireasan poilitigeach a thug cumadh air freagairt Syriza do na h-iomallaidhean a th’ ann an-dràsta agus a stiùir e gu suidheachadh anns a bheil earbsa gun samhail - ach fhathast le cumhachan - le uimhir de dhaoine ann an comann-sòisealta na Grèige mar thoradh air ionnsachadh mòr bho dheuchainn agus mearachd dhaoine eile. pàrtaidhean radaigeach air feadh na Roinn Eòrpa agus eòlas Fòram Sòisealta na h-Eòrpa.
This essay seeks to contribute towards continuing this dialectic of transnational political learning on the left. By generalising from the distinctive features of Syriza, and also bearing in mind lessons from other experiences where parties with similar ambitions have been unable to sustain their transformative dynamic, I will suggest approaches to problems of political organisation, further consideration of which might help to overcome the quandary of the left.
Ag atharrachadh na stàite
Bidh an deasbad agam air na cuspairean sin a’ cuimseachadh air an duilgheadas a thaobh cruth-atharrachadh na stàite. Tha seo na chùis mhòr dha Syriza agus e ag iomairt agus ag ullachadh airson dreuchd ann an agus an-aghaidh stàite a tha gu math coirbte agus an-aghaidh deamocratach. Is e aon de cheithir earrannan den phrògram a chaidh a dhealbhadh ann an 2009 le buill de Synaspismos, am pàrtaidh as motha ann an co-bhanntachd Syriza, an tiotal ‘Ath-structaradh na stàite’.
Tha am frèam-obrach agam airson dèiligeadh ris a’ chùis bhunaiteach seo a’ faicinn tobraichean de chumhachd cruth-atharrachail deamocratach a tha neo-eisimeileach bhon stàit mar a bhith cinnteach mu chomasan atharrachaidh.
The economic dimension here is crucial. Political change is seriously hindered if it lacks a base in non-capitalist relations of production, including the production of services and culture, however partial and incomplete. At the same time, it must be said that a conflictual engagement in as well as against the state is a necessary condition for systemic change. Such an engagement has to be rooted in, and accountable to, forces for democratic change in society. Without a strategy of this kind to transform and, where necessary, break state power, transformative struggles will recurrently lapse into containable counter-cultures and their potential for the majority of people will be unrealised.
A’ tarraing leasanan bho dheamocrasaidh ionadail
To develop my argument, I draw particularly on the experience of the radical left of the Labour Party in governing London in 1982-86; and that of the Brazilian Workers’ Party (PT) in opening up decisions about new municipal investment to a citywide process of popular participation in Porto Alegre from 1989 until 2004. Despite these cases being well known, their lessons for political organisation have yet to be fully distilled.
For my argument, what is significant is that their achievements – each of the city experiments involved a redistribution of resources and, for a period, power and capacity, from the rich and powerful to the poor and marginalised – depended on opening up to and sharing resources with autonomous sources of democratic power in the cities concerned. In other words, they combined initiatives for change from within government structures with support for developing wider, more radical sources of power outside.
Ach bha e gu math cudromach nach e a-mhàin gun do dh’ fhàilnich a leithid de stiùireadh ro-innleachdail air a’ Phàrtaidh Làbarach san RA atharrachadh, ach thionndaidh e a-mach cuideachd nach do ghabh am PT ann am Brasil ri ro-innleachd cho dùbailte aon uair ‘s gu robh e air a thaghadh aig ìre nàiseanta, a bha gu ìre. a’ mìneachadh crìochan riaghaltas Lula ann a bhith a’ coileanadh mòran dhùilean a bha e air èirigh airson atharrachadh sòisealta radaigeach.
In the Greater London Council (GLC) and Porto Alegre experiments political parties used their electoral mandates to move beyond the constraints imposed by the existing system and instead to strengthen and spread challenges to that system. The spirit they embodied can also be seen in widespread campaigns by public service workers and users against privatisation that involve effective strategies to change the way that public services are managed and public money administered, dragging political parties after them.
All these experiences have underlined the importance of struggling to create non-capitalist social relations in the present rather than defer them to ‘after winning power’. Lessons from these local experiences, however, can help the rethinking that is necessary of what political organisation needs to be like in a context of plural sources of transformative power.
In drawing these lessons, we need also to bear in mind that there are further distinct problems in changing state and quasi-state institutions on national and international levels. To understand the wider significance of the way these local political experiences combine a struggle as representatives within the local state with support for democratic movements and initiatives outside, we need to distinguish between two radically distinct meanings of power.
Tha iad sin air an aon làimh cumhachd mar chomas cruth-atharrachail agus air an làimh eile cumhachd mar smachd - mar a bhith a’ toirt a-steach neo-chunbhalachd eadar an fheadhainn aig a bheil cumhachd agus an fheadhainn air a bheil cumhachd air a chleachdadh. Dh’ fhaodadh sinn a ràdh gu h-eachdraidheil, gu bheil mòr-phàrtaidhean deamocratach sòisealta air an togail timcheall air dreach math den dàrna tuigse. Tha na ro-innleachdan aca air a bhith stèidhichte air a bhith a’ buannachadh cumhachd airson riaghladh agus ga chleachdadh gu athaireil gus coinneachadh ri na tha iad a’ comharrachadh mar fheumalachdan nan daoine.
Both the experiences of the GLC in the early 1980s and the PT in municipal government in the 1990s were attempts to change the state from being a means of domination and exclusion to becoming a resource for transformation by campaigning for electoral office in order then to decentralise and redistribute power. I would argue that in practice Syriza is attempting the same project at a national level.
Syriza agus daineamaigs atharrachadh sòisealta
Is e am feart as sònraichte de Syriza, an taca ri pàrtaidhean traidiseanta air an taobh chlì, gu bheil e ga fhaicinn fhèin mar barrachd air dìreach mar dhòigh air riochdachadh poilitigeach airson gluasadan, ach mar a bhith an sàs gu practaigeach ann a bhith a’ togail nan gluasadan. Tha na h-instincts poilitigeach aige a’ toirt prìomhachas àrd do uallach airson cur ri sgaoileadh agus neartachadh ghluasadan airson ceartas sòisealta.
In the weeks following the election of 71 Syriza MPs in June 2012, its leaders stressed the importance of this as central to ‘changing people’s idea of what they can do, developing with them a sense of their capacity for power’, as Andreas Karitzis, one of its key political coordinators, put it. While the party believes state power is necessary, it is clear that, in Karitzis’s terms, ‘what is also decisive is what you are doing in movements and society before seizing power. Eighty per cent of social change cannot come through government.’ This is not just talk.
Tha an sealladh seo de ro-innleachdan airson atharrachadh sòisealta a’ toirt buaidh air mar a tha Syriza a’ riarachadh na stòrasan mòra stàite a tha e a’ faighinn mar thoradh air an ìre àrd de riochdachadh pàrlamaid aige. Gheibh am pàrtaidh € 8 millean (cha mhòr trì uiread a bhuidseit làithreach) agus bidh còignear luchd-obrach aig a’ phàrlamaid air gach BP.
The idea at the time of writing is that a high proportion of the new funds should go to solidarity networks in the neighbourhoods – for example, to employ people to extend initiatives such as social medical centres, to spread what approaches have succeeded, to link, online and face to face, people in the cities with producers of agricultural goods. Funds will also go to strengthening the capacity of the party in parliament, but a greater proportion will be directed towards Syriza’s work in building the extra-parliamentary organisations for social change.
A-mach às na còignear luchd-obrach a chaidh a shònrachadh do BhP, bidh dithis ag obair dha na BP gu dìreach. Bidh aon dhiubh ag obair airson comataidhean poileasaidh a bheir còmhla BP agus eòlaichean catharra agus bidh dithis air am fastadh leis a’ phàrtaidh gus obair anns na gluasadan agus na nàbachdan.
Air cùlaibh nam prìomhachasan sin tha pròiseas ionnsachaidh ag èirigh bhon so-leòntachd a tha pàrtaidhean clì ann an dùthchannan Eòrpach eile a’ leigeil le institiudan pàrlamaideach, leis na goireasan agus na sochairean aca, an tarraing air falbh bho na gluasadan a bha iad an dùil a bhith.
Dealasach a thaobh togail gluasad cho math ri togail pàrtaidh
From its origins in 2004 at the height of the alter-globalisation movements (which had a particularly strong impact in Greece), Syriza was at least as concerned with helping to build movements for change in society as with electoral success. There was also a learning process through the European Social Forum and then the Greek Social Forum.
This contributed to not only Syriza’s clear strategic view of the limits of state power for social transformation, but also a self-conscious insistence o
Tha ZNetwork air a mhaoineachadh a-mhàin tro fhialaidheachd an luchd-leughaidh.
Tabhartasan