Ο ΛΑΟΣ ΔΕΝ ΞΕΧΝΑ, ΟΚ. ΑΛΛΑ ΤΙ ΣΗΜΑΙΝΕΙ (ΚΕΝΤΡΟ)ΔΕΞΙΑ;

Ο λαός, λέει το σύνθημα, δεν ξεχνά τι σημαίνει δεξιά. Όπως όλα τα συνθήματα, έτσι κι αυτό είναι αστείο. Ο λαός ξεχνά και ξαναθυμάται κατά το συμφέρον του, και τη μανούβρα αυτή μπορεί να την κάνει και σε μετα-γνωσιακό επίπεδο: ξεχνά πως κάποτε ήξερε, ή θυμάται πως κάποτε ξέχασε, τι σημαίνει Δεξιά. Έτσι κάπως η ΝΔ ανακαλύπτει το αντιμνημόνιο που ξέχασε μετά το 2012 και η πρώτη φορά Αριστερά συγκυβερνά με Ανελ και κάνει (προσωρινά) υφυπουργό τον Πόρτα-Πόρτα.

Εντούτοις, ενόψει των εσωκομματικών εκλογών στη ΝΔ, με τον Καμμένο άλλη μια φορά κυβερνητικό εταίρο και την ΧΑ σταθερά τρίτο κόμμα (αν και ευτυχώς σε απόλυτους όρους η ψήφος της πέφτει) το σύνθημα είναι τουλάχιστον επίκαιρο αν εκφραστεί λίγο διαφορετικά. Κυρίως δε γίνεται επίκαιρο το τί σημαίνει κεντροδεξιά: ένα ερώτημα-δείγμα παρακμής από μόνο του, όπως και η συζήτηση περί κεντροαριστεράς που προηγήθηκε της τελικής διάλυσης του ΠαΣοΚ.

Προσωπικά δεν με ενδιαφέρει πώς ορίζουν την (κεντρο)δεξιά οι επίδοξοι ηγέτες της. Τα λόγια είναι τσάμπα εξάλλου, και όλοι έχουν κίνητρο να ανοιχτούν σε ένα πλατύ κοινό. Ούτε με ενδιαφέρει πώς την ορίζουν οι αντίπαλοί της. Με ενδιαφέρει μόνο το πώς καταλήγει κανείς να θεωρεί τον εαυτό του (κεντρο)δεξιό - ποιές αρχές, αξίες, μνήμες, συνθήκες διαβίωσης και παραστάσεις ωθούν κάποιον στο να ταυτιστεί με αυτή τη λέξη. Ευτυχώς υπάρχει τρόπος να το ελέγξουμε.

Τα στοιχεία μου εν προκειμένω προέρχονται από την Ευρωπαϊκή Έρευνα Αξιών του 2008 - την πιο πρόσφατη δυστυχώς. Περιμένω πώς και πώς την επόμενη έρευνα του 2017, στην οποία έμαθα με μεγάλη ανακούφιση ότι θα συμμετάσχει η Ελλάδα. Η σύγκριση των δύο ερευνών θα μας πει πιο πολλά για την κρίση, τα αίτια και τις επιπτώσεις της από δέκα διδακτορικά οικονομολόγων πάνω στο θέμα.

Το δείγμα της Έρευνας Αξιών είναι σταθμισμένο και αντιπροσωπευτικό: 1.208 Έλληνες άνω των 16 (η έρευνα περιλάμβανε γύρω στους 1.500 αλλά τόσοι απήντησαν στις ερωτήσεις που με απασχολούν - δείτε παρακάτω). Το ερωτηματολόγιο μπορείτε να το δείτε εδώ. Η πολιτική τοποθέτηση των ερωτηθέντων μετριέται σε κλίμακα από 1-10, όπου 1 είναι ο πιο αριστερός Έλληνας και 10 ο πιο δεξιός. Σε καμμία φάση της συνέντευξης δεν δίνεται ορισμός σε αυτές τις έννοιες. Πέρα από την ερώτηση περί πολιτικής τοποθέτησης, υπάρχουν και πολλές άλλες που εστιάζουν στις νοοτροπίες, αξίες και ιδανικά του συνεντευξιαζόμενου, αλλά και στην καταγωγή, την οικογενειακή και οικονομική κατάστασή του, και τη θέση του στην κοινωνία γενικότερα.

Η λογική είναι απλή: αν βρούμε τις νοοτροπίες, τις ιδέες και τα ιδανικά που τείνουν να ενστερνίζονται περισσότερο οι αυτοαποκαλούμενοι 'δεξιοί' από τους υπόλοιπους Έλληνες (και τα οποία τείνουν να ενστερνίζονται σε μεγαλύτερο βαθμό όσο πιο 'δεξιοί' θεωρούν ότι είναι), τότε έχουμε στα χέρια μας έναν εμπειρικό ορισμό και της δεξιάς, και της 'κεντροδεξιάς.' Και επειδή αυτό που στην πραγματικότητα αναζητούμε είναι μια σειρά από στερεότυπα, σκέφτηκα να χρησιμοποιήσω μια απλή μέθοδο - decision trees. Ουσιαστικά, η μέθοδος αυτή επιτρέπει να δοκιμάσουμε πολλές τέτοιες νοοτροπίες, ιδέες και ιδανικά, μία-μία, για να βρούμε ποιές χωρίζουν πιο ξεκάθαρα τον Ελληνικό λαό σε 'δεξιούς' και 'αριστερούς'. Μόλις βρεθεί η καλύτερη διαχωριστική γραμμή, η διαδικασία επαναλαμβάνεται για κάθε ένα ξεχωριστά από τα δύο μέρη στα οποία χωρίστηκε ο πληθυσμός με όλες τις μεταβλητές που δοκιμάσαμε και νωρίτερα - και ούτω καθεξής, μέχρι να καταλήξουμε σε υπο-ομάδες που παραείναι μικρές για να διασπαστούν παραπάνω, επειδή τα επιμέρους μέρη δεν θα μπορούσαν να συγκριθούν μεταξύ τους με στατιστικά σημαντικό τρόπο.

Εφαρμόζοντας αυτή τη λογική πάνω στο πλήρες δείγμα της έρευνας, βλέπει κανείς ότι μερικές ερωτήσεις χωρίζουν το δείγμα με ξεκάθαρο τρόπο σε περισσότερο και λιγότερο δεξιούς. Σημειώνω με (+) τους παράγοντες που σχετίζονται με πιο 'δεξιά' άτομα, και με (-) αυτούς που σχετίζονται με πιο 'αριστερά' άτομα. Τα 'επίπεδα' που σημειώνω υποδηλώνουν πόσες φορές έχει υποδιαιρεθεί ο πληθυσμός όταν εμφανίζεται για πρώτη φορά ως σημαντική διαχωριστική γραμμή μια μεταβλητή.

• Επίπεδο πρώτο: πόσο εμπιστεύεται κανείς την Εκκλησία ως θεσμό (+); 
• Επίπεδο δεύτερο: Πόση εμπιστοσύνη έχει στους δημοσίους υπαλλήλους (-) Έχει ποτέ συμματάσχει σε διαδήλωση (-); Πόση εμπιστοσύνη έχει στα εργατικά σωματεία και τους συνδικαλιστές (-); 
• Επίπεδο τρίτο: Θεωρεί αποδεκτή την έκτρωση για μια ανύπαντρη γυναίκα (-); Θεωρεί αποδεκτή συμπεριφορά το περιστασιακό σεξ με αγνώστους (-);  Θεωρεί ανεπιθύμητους ως γείτονες τους Ρομά (+); Θεωρεί επικίνδυνο το να επεμβαίνει ο άνθρωπος στο φυσικό του περιβάλλον (+); θεωρεί σημαντικό η δουλειά του να τον φέρνει σε επαφή με (ενδιαφέροντες) ανθρώπους (-); θεωρεί ότι είναι δουλειά των ιδιωτών ή του κράτους να φροντίζουν τους πιο αδύναμους; (-)

Δοκίμασα, βέβαια πολλές ακόμη ερωτήσεις που δεν αποδείχθηκαν καλές στο να ξεχωρίζουν τον πληθυσμό σε 'δεξιούς' και 'αριστερούς.' Δεν τις παραθέτω εδώ για λόγους συντομίας, αλλά περιλάμβαναν και πολλές δημογραφικού χαρακτήρα μεταβλητές όπως ηλικία, φύλο, οικογενειακό εισόδημα, καταγωγή και λοιπά. Θα προσέξετε ότι η ανάλυσή μου δεν εξετάζει την επίδραση των διαφόρων μεταβλητών ταυτόχρονα - δεν υπάρχουν controls. Οπότε δεν απαντά στο ερώτημα 'ποιές επιρροές κάνουν έναν Έλληνα δεξιό/αριστερό;' - μόνο στο ερώτημα 'τι σημαίνει στο μυαλό του Έλληνα δεξιά/αριστερά;'

Μιλήσαμε λοιπόν για το πλήρες δείγμα. Όμως και η αριστερά έχει τη 'δεξιότερη' μεριά της, και η δεξιά επίσης έχει την, αχέμ, 'δεξιότερη' μεριά της. Τι σημαίνει 'δεξιά' σε αυτό το πλαίσιο; Για να το εξηγήσουμε αυτό επαναλαμβάνουμε την ίδια ακριβώς ανάλυση, ξεχωριστά για 'δεξιούς' (6-10 στην κλίμακα αριστερά-δεξιά) και για 'αριστερούς' (1-5).

Για τους αριστερούς τα πράγματα έχουν ως εξής (τα θετικά πρόσημα υποδεικνύουν παράγοντες που σχετίζονται με την κεντροαριστερά):

• Επίπεδο πρώτο: πόσο εμπιστεύεται κανείς την Εκκλησία ως θεσμό (+); 
• Επίπεδο δεύτερο: πόσο σημαντικό μέρος της ζωής του είναι η πολιτική; (+) πόσο θεμιτό θεωρεί το να παίρνει κανείς επιδόματα πρόνοιας τα οποία τυπικά δεν δικαιούται; (-) πόσο σημαντικό θεωρεί ότι είναι για την υγεία ενός γάμου το να έχει το ζευγάρι ένα καλό σπίτι; (+); πόσο σημαντικό θεωρεί για τη ζωή του το να έχει άφθονο ελεύθερο χρόνο; (+); 
• Επίπεδο τρίτο: Θεωρεί αποδεκτή την έκτρωση για μια ανύπαντρη γυναίκα (-); πόση εμπιστοσύνη έχει στις ένοπλες δυνάμεις (+); θεωρεί σημαντικό για την υγεία ενός γάμου να έχουν οι δύο σύντροφοι ίδιες θρησκευτικές πεποιθήσεις; (+)

Για τους δεξιούς τα πράγματα έχουν ως εξής. Όπως πάντα τα θετικά πρόσημα υποδεικύουν παράγοντες που σχετίζονται με τη δεξιά, εν προκειμένω με τους αυτοχαρακτηριζόμενους ως πολύ δεξιούς ή και ακροδεξιούς. Άρα τα αρνητικά πρόσημα υποδηλώνουν συσχετισμό με την κεντροδεξιά:

• Επίπεδο πρώτο: πόσο σημαντικό θεωρεί ότι είναι για την υγεία ενός γάμου το να ζει το ζευγάρι ξεχωριστά από τους γονείς των δύο συντρόφων; (-)
• Επίπεδο δεύτερο: όταν τον ρωτάς αν η συντήρηση των φτωχότερων είναι καθήκον των ιδιωτών ή του κράτους, και όταν τον ρωτάς αν ο άνθρωπος έχει δικαίωμα να διαχειρίζεται τη φύση όπως νομίζει, απαντά με απόλυτο τρόπο (σίγουρα ναι ή σίγουρα όχι;) (+)
• Επίπεδο τρίτο: θεωρεί με απόλυτη βεβαιότητα ότι οι άντρες πρέπει να κάνουν παιδιά για να ολοκληρωθούν σαν άτομα; (+)

[Το γράφημα μου βγήκε λίγο λάθος - το διορθώνω σύντομα]

Συμπέρασμα - το 2008, οι Έλληνες θεωρούσαν 'δεξιά' μια θρησκευόμενη, κοινωνικά συντηρητική μερίδα του πληθυσμού που έβλεπε ως απειλές προς τον τρόπο ζωής της μια σειρά από επιστημονικές, κοινωνικές και γεωπολιτικές εξελίξεις και προέβαλλε ως αξία την άμυνα ενάντια σε αυτές. Η 'δεξιά' στο μυαλό του μέσου Έλληνα έβλεπε κάποιους συνανθρώπους ως ανεπιθύμητους, έβλεπε με δυσπιστία το συνδικαλισμό, τον ακτιβισμό , και είχε επιφυλάξεις απέναντι στο κοινωνικό κράτος και την πρόοδο της επιστήμης. Έβλεπε δε τη δουλειά πολύ περισσότερο ως μέσο βιοπορισμού και λιγότερο ως χώρο έκφρασης ή αυτοπραγμάτωσης.

Με βάση την ίδια λογική, οι δεξιότεροι Έλληνες θεωρούσαν 'Κεντροδεξιά' το κομμάτι της δεξιάς που φοβόταν τους δογματισμούς σε περίπλοκα ζητήματα, και έδειχνε ανοχή σε όσους αμφισβητούσαν τις δομές και αξίες της παραδοσιακής (εκτεταμένης;) οικογένειας.

Οι αριστερότεροι Έλληνες από την άλλη θεωρούσαν 'κεντροαριστερά' το κομμάτι της αριστεράς που ήταν θρησκευόμενο ή θεωρούσε την εκκλησία σημαντικό θεσμό, δεν εξέφραζε αντιμιλιταριστικές θέσεις, είχε μεσοαστικές αξιώσεις (οικονομική άνεση, πολιτική έκφραση και ελεύθερο χρόνο), και επιπλέον το ενοχλούσε η σπατάλη στις κοινωνικές δαπάνες.

Πού να είναι άραγε τώρα όλοι αυτοί οι κεντροαριστεροί και κεντροδεξιοί; Η πρώτη μου αντίδραση είναι ότι οι κεντροαριστεροί του 2008, με τις μεσοαστικές και (γιατί όχι;) υλιστικές αξίες τους, πρέπει να τσαλακώθηκαν περισσότερο από όλη την υπόλοιπη χώρα την εποχή της κρίσης και να εκφράζονται πλέον εντελώς διαφορετικά - ο χώρος τους δεν υπάρχει. Οι κεντροδεξιοί του 2008, από την άλλη, έχουν ελαφρύ ιδεολογικό στίγμα και θα μπορούσαν πλέον να ψηφίζουν ό,τιδήποτε.

Μια τελευταία σημείωση: Το 2008, από τους ερωτηθέντες που δέχτηκαν να πουν πού τοποθετούνται στην κλίμακα δεξιά-αριστερά, το 61% ήταν από κεντροαριστεροί (5) ως @conclavios (1). Το 20% προτίμησε να μην απαντήσει. Το 'κέντρο' (5-6) συγκέντρωνε το 40% της ψήφου, ανώ τα άκρα (1-2 και 9-10) το 18%.

LIES, DAMN LIES AND INTERVIEWS WITH LEADING ECONOMISTS

Σημείωση: Αν βρεθήκατε σε αυτή τη σελίδα στην προσπάθειά σας να βρείτε τις πηγές της φερόμενης ως συνέντευξης του Mark Weisbrot με τίτλο Η ΑΡΓΕΝΤΙΝΗ ΔΕΝ ΗΤΑΝ ΤΙΠΟΤΑ. ΕΣΑΣ ΘΑ ΣΑΣ ΕΞΑΦΑΝΙΣΟΥΜΕ, δείτε την αποστομωτική απάντηση του ίδιου του καθηγητή παρακάτω. Επίσης ρίξτε μια ματιά και σε αυτή τη σελίδα. Βοηθήστε κι εσείς να εξυγιανθεί η Ελληνική μπλογκόσφαιρα, όχι με λογοκρισία, αλλά με αντίλογο.




An endlessly copy+pasted passage has reappeared in Greece in the last few months, worthy of our blogosphere's great tradition of making stuff up and of LOLGreece’s smaller but proud tradition of calling Orange Blog writers out for the untalented amateurs that they are.


In summary, the piece, entitled ‘Argentina was nothing – you will BE wipeD out!’ cites an interview, supposedly with Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic Policy Research.


“Weisbrot” is quoted as saying that the IMF intervention in Greece will be cataclysmic in its consequences, uprooting the Greek welfare state and abandoning the Greek people to exploitation from all angles through the labour market, asset and resource sell-offs, and the drugs trade – unless, that is, we band together in violent resistance and demand the payment of reparations from Germany.


First things first. The document is a hoax. How do I know? Because Weisbrot himself says so. This is obvious even to a fairly casual Googler.


Clue no. 1 that this is a hoax originated by illiterate idiots:


“Weisbrot” writes:

“Indeed [I hear] simultaneously in many circles in Geneva where I live, that Switzerland will give as a gift to Greece, without [claim of] restitution, 100 billion, not to lead a European country, with such tragic consequences, [into] the mouth of the lion.”

No Greek post-bailout meme is complete without a miraculous 'no-strings money' theory. First we had the Russians and the Chinese, and now an even more incredible candidate. In this one, "Weisbrot" claims that he has heard rumours of a EUR100bn bailout of Greece, no strings as per usual (in fact in this case we would wouldn’t even pay the principal back), which would see Switzerland, a non-EU and non-Eurozone member, hand over 28% of its GDP to us, just to keep the Euro from collapsing. Quite how the Swiss would find this money, let alone justify the transaction to their people, is never made clear but I guess we are to assume that, since Switzerland is where every high-net-worth individual’s savings end up, the Swiss have access to endless amounts of cash. This Underpants Gnome logic would be dismissed out of hand in any rational discourse, but for some in Greece it represents pretty mainstream thinking.


My theory is that the Swiss have been dragged into this ridiculous hoax because of the Swiss Central Bank’s desperate attempts to keep its currency competitive and its lenders from recognising huge losses as the Euro and Eastern European currencies came under pressure and wrath-of-God money started flowing out of the rest of Europe and into Switzerland. The Swiss Central Bank did make purchases that are not orders of magnitude below EUR100bn, so perhaps a desperately confused mind could link their purchases to Greece’s IMF loan.


That a leading economist would ever need to cite Genevan gossip on an issue as big as this one is ridiculous. And the fact that no newspapers or other news outlets, let alone the bond markets, have picked up on this monumental aid offer is beyond belief. But even if one overlooks this, there’s the very small matter of Weisbrot’s residence. Mark Weisbrot doesn't actually live in Geneva. He just doesn't. He lives in the States, where he works, and although he spends a great deal of time in South America he most definitely doesn't do so in Switzerland.


Clue no. 2 that this is a hoax promoted by illiterate idiots:

“[of] the IMF the impression [was] that the Argentines believe[d] [us to be their] saviors.”

“They all [felt] that we [had] saved the country [which] was corrupt and [had] incompetent governments. It was incredible what correspondents broadcast, when we saw the truth with our eyes on every street in every neighborhood. You need to wake up in Greece now before it's too late, must at all costs avoid the IMF.”

Amazingly, the article seems to imply that Weisbrot himself worked for the IMF, and earlier editions say this explicitly. This is of course also not true.


I believe this muppetry arises from a confusion of Weisbrot’s testimony, and his links to Oliver Stone’s South of the Border, with the similarly-themed but much less factual Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins, which was recently broadcast in documentary form in Greece, to a very positive reception by our chattering classes. In fact, it is probably this that reignited the “Weisbrod” interview meme.


Thanks to the excellent work of Diagoras and a public apology from ireporter to its readers, I now know that the hoax started when a real Weisbrot interview was posted in February 2010 here alongside an unattributed set of a comments which Olympia attributes elsewhere to an ex-IMF Vice President. Due to the two men sharing a salutation ("professor"), and the lack of a clarification to the effect that they are two separate sources, third parties including myself have deduced that all of the quotes in this article were attributed to Weisbrot. While I cannot know what the intention was, I note that Olympia also posted this, in which they claim to be the originators of the Weisbrot interview.

Whatever the case, one third party did believe the interview to be Weisbrot's and helped it go viral. Bits of the Olympia post were mixed with bits of another article by a well known Greek journo and then published, in April 2010, by ireporter (who, to their credit, have issued a full correction here). The hoax article then went briefly underground where it mutated around May and then circulated via email, probably until June 2010. I can trace the mutation to May 2010 because a reference to mass layoffs in the definitive version suggests it must be more recent than mid April but the reference to Swiss monetary intervention makes it earlier than June.

The first blog coverage of the 'definitive' version of the hoax was in that very month, and it appears to me to be this one.  But as with all things ill-researched and sensational, this story quickly made it onto Tro-ma-ktiko, our premier ‘Orange’ blog. In fact, it was published twice by the ever-astute Tro-ma-ktiko staff: once in Nov 2010, and once in March 2011, this time with a photo of Weisbrot in mid-press-conference, which would imply to the casual reader that his statements were official and on-the-record. Both instances were in fact published after Weisbrot himself had been interviewed by Epsilon and categorically stated that the ‘interview’ reported by Orange Blogs was a hoax. Even worse, it’s since been taken up by the Greek Union of Chemical, Pharmaceutical, Cosmetic and Related Company Employees (in Greek here and in Google-translated English here) and will no doubt be with us for ever more.
 

It is possible to trace the 2011 resurgence of this meme back to some of its origins, as Tro-ma-ktiko cites e-parembasis, which in turn cites Ramnousia. This only goes back to March 2011, and the trail ends here. But the article resurfaces in Nov. 2010 in sfrang2, and [bingo] in the widely read Athens Indymedia whose anarchist readers will have greatly sympathised with the following exhortations by “Weisbrot”:

“[Believe me,] the only way [for you] to survive is to come out every day for one month, as one and united, 8 million people, adults I mean, onto the streets until all, I mean all, daily operations are suspended. Only in this way will the EU be coerced enough to give money, and interest-free at that, of which they have plenty.”

“In Argentina [in response to the] actions taken by the IMF, the [people] came [out into] the streets with axes, saws and scimitar[s] and burst into banks, media and government buildings and slaughtered, literally [decapitated] bank employees, managers, journalists, who [were] on top of corruption and fraud, and executives and members of industry, members of the Government, government [spokespersons] and certain members of the Government of the [Argentine] Ministry of Finance.”

In fact the meme resurfaced with no major alterations on Newstoday, on 29 May 2011.  
 
In fairness to the man, I should say that the real Weisbrot is indeed a very vocal critic of the IMF, as his Guardian column quickly reveals to even the most casual reader. He has signed a petition for an investigation into the causes of Greek debt, which I would strongly subscribe to, but has never called for Germany to pay reparations, to the best of my Googling ability.  He is particularly critical of the process of ‘internal devaluation’ taking place in Greece and far from arguing for our allies to save the Euro, he in fact argues that we should leave the Eurozone, as should Spain and indeed everyone else. I can agree with him on this as well, although I can’t think that we will agree on much else. He very much resents suggestions, including from the Greek side, that we need Europe’s help in order to manage our affairs. I don’t. I regret that it is true but it is. At any rate, the man’s positions on Europe are strongly at odds with what “Weisbrot” writes in our original hoax article:

“What saddens me most of all is that Europe and the EU generally do[es] not seem interested in saving the euro because if [Greece] fold[s], the Euro will be completely useless in international markets and throughout Europe, the Euro will collapse in an Argentine [type] crisis not only in Greece but [in] all countries [that are] EU members.”

The real Weisbrot has authored, way before the Greek bailout, a very interesting review of how IMF bailouts tend to work out, one which chimes perfectly with the current situation and which I recommend without hesitation. Read it and your minds will be cleansed from the stench of the Orange Blogs.


All of the above makes the fraud committed by the Orange Bloggers even more insidious because a superficial web check would confirm Weisbrot as a critic of the IMF and thus appear to confirm the authenticity of their “story.” Far from acting as researchers, or even bog-standard journos, they are pandering to the worst in the Greek people’s mentality, at a time when social peace is extremely fragile, and call specifically for murder and crippling strikes whilst hijacking the name of a solid academic (with whom I disagree on a lot but who is at least sane and rigorous in his thinking) and using him as their mouthpiece.


Freedom of speech is sacred; I would go further even than the law and justify freedom to slander and incite to violence as long as it is done in public and is open to refutation. These people must not be silenced. But those of us with a single brain cell that is not baying for blood must confront them. I will write to as many of them as I can this week, making it clear how dangerous and irresponsible their reporting is, how deeply it misrepresents our people to the rest of the world, and how deeply ashamed they ought to be of themselves as citizen journalists. I note that, in the endless iterations of this fraudulent story, others have stood up to misinformation way before I did – it is to one of them that I owe the link to the Epsilon interview. I urge you: please do as these good people have.

And now for the full-on, hernia-defying belly-chuckle, which I never saw coming: the Centre for Economic Policy Research, of which Weisbrot is co-director, acknowledges as its generous supporters none other than the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Rockefeller Foundation. If you fail to see the irony, you may want to read back to this post. How will the Orange Bloggers and Indymedia live with themselves now?


UPDATE: Mark Weisbrot's colleagues have come back with a very comprehensive refutation, which you can read here. It appears they are willing to pursue this matter in the appropriate manner, so stay tuned. Their official line is as follows:

Από το Κέντρο Οικονομικών και Πολιτικών Ερευνών:

Ο Mark Weisbrot δεν είπε ούτε έγραψε αυτά που του αποδίδουν σε αυτήν την υποτιθέμενη «συνέντευξη», για την οποία δεν αναφέρεται ούτε συντάκτης ούτε πηγή.

Αυτή η δήθεν συνέντευξη είναι ένα ατυχές συμβάν καθώς δημιουργεί περαιτέρω σύγχυση στην αντιπαράθεση σχετικά με ένα ιδιαίτερα σημαντικό θέμα: τα προτεινόμενα μέτρα λιτότητας και τις εναλλακτικές λύσεις όσον αφορά στην οικονομική ύφεση που αντιμετωπίζει η Ελλάδα.

Οποιοσδήποτε ενδιαφέρεται για αυτά που πραγματικά είπε και έγραψε ο Mark Weisbrot σχετικά με αυτό το θέμα θα πρέπει να διαβάσει εδώ: http://www.skai.gr/news/finance/article/156255/mark-weisbrot-yparhei-kai-allos-dromos

και εδώ: http://www.cepr.net/index.php/op-eds-&-columns/op-eds-&-columns/eurozone-crisis-is-self-inflicted

The list of blogs that have decided to flag reposts of this hoax as debunked continues to grow. If you have done so in your blog, or are aware of a blog that has done so, please send me a link so I can add those blogs to the list:

• i-reporter have issued, as I said before, the best possible correction 
• e-parembasis [e-intervention] 
• Pyli Iasonos [Jason's Gate ]Despite the name of the editor this one has no relation to me at all.
• Alithina Psemmata [True Lies] 
• Arhaia Ithomi [Ancient Ithomi], which also cited much of our Dear Reader page on the matter. Many thanks! 
• Greek Tastes also cites much of this blog post. Many thanks!
• Aetos Halkidikis [Eagle of Chalkidike]
• Top Secret 
• Pentapostagma [Quintuple Distillation] put up a fight over this, initially responding that they couldn't know whether the story was true or not (which they forgot to mention in their post) but would need proof of the contrary. Upon receiving this they responded that they would put 'my view' across to readers for discussion if I sent a suggestion. I could probably have done that but there are no views to be discussed, as though equally valid. Only the truth of Weisbrot's refutation. 
• stopcartel were a particularly nasty case; upon first contact with Weisbrot's associates they questioned the identity of the latter and argued that regardless of its authenticity the core narrative of the forged document was close enough to his views. Both the Centre staff and myself and finally Weisbrot himself wrote to them to explain that this is bullshit and they should not attribute a dangerous, forged statement to anyone regardless of how representative of their views they think it is. Eventually the post was taken down. Weisbrot's associate notes that they should really be ashamed of themselves. I concur.
• the notorious tromaktiko originally made a goodwill gesture by posting one of Weisbrot's real interviews. I remained unsatisfied because any reader who has fallen for the original posts quoting the forged "interview" will only have his/her beliefs reinforced by this new post. I wrote to them again, on email, Facebook and Twitter, and expressed my confidence that they will find an acceptable solution to this. With none of their originally quoted sources still showing the story, they eventually backed down 'for the sake of my health' as they put it over email and have since pulled the story. [Actually a third copy is still up and I've asked for that to be corrected but for now I'm happy].
• But the medal of muppetry goes to sfrang2, the personal blog of one Stelios G. Frangopoulos who I am assured by a trustworthy reader (see below) is normally a proper gent. Frangopoulos acknowledged that the document is a hoax, but posited like stopcartel that it is irrelevant who wrote the document. It is the ideas that matter. I responded with a set of questions he could have put to his readers on the basis of this document if he had really meant to provoke a discussion. His epic response was: 
  "Mano, you have developed an obsession with this blog post, as though I am meant to be some kind of Union of Journalists ethics board. I gave you the answers I needed to, and had I known from the start that the document was a hoax I would not have posted it. But neither am I going to go researching next time [I post something like this] to confirm the validity of the text. I will post whatever I take a shine to. If the blog fails to gush forth the level of rigor that you are looking for, don't read it. I am not going to do any more."

My regards, Stelio. I will put that response down to a bad day at the Uni.


While this is only a very small start, and not a campaign I can afford to repeat, it is a victory of sorts. if enough people sign up to this way of doing things we could start making a difference. One man can do this work in less than a week. What can 100 people do?

FINAL UPDATE: I've just found out there is a word for that kind of unthinking copy+paste syndication: It's called Churnalism. A brilliant piece of terminology courtesy of filmmaker Chris Atkins, which actually manages to sound like LOLspeak as well.

METAKSOURGEIO 16/09/10

Note to our non-Greek readers: the writing is a play on a popular football fans' chant welcoming new players to their teams' colours. It normally scans as "X, you're to die for in the [team colour] shirt".

This version reads: "Panagopoulos, you're to die for in a torn up shirt". The reference is to the recent assault by a group of anarchists on the head of Greece's tertiary private sector union, Giannis Panagopoulos (more graphic photos here). Embarassingly this is a distant relative of mine.

Now normally unionistas and anarchists bashing each other senseless would be great news. Unfortunately the two sides are no longer fighting in order to make a point but for actual power, as they have both grown much more influential over the last year.

To illustrate, this was written on the wall of Emporiki Bank (now the toxic property of Credit Agricole and incidentally my father's employer for decades before he retired some twenty years ago). On the other side the same people had written: "Σπάστε, Κάψτε, Τελειώσατε" which translates to "Break, Burn, Done!", a boasting reference to the burning alive of three Marfin Bank employees, one of them pregnant, during the May riots. 

As I never tire of repeating, these people are not the vanguard of the oppressed. They are bored, privately educated nihilists who holiday in Mykonos. I would not be surprised if it emerged that I've gone to school with some of them. And in Greece they are not universally reviled as scum and murderers - some idiots cherish them.

UNION RESEARCH FAIL

Our private sector Union, GSEE, recently released the findings of its survey of the Greek labour force. I will comment on this very soon but I think you'll find it speaks for itself.

My favourites so far:

• ca. 173,000 employees in Greece claim to have a second job in which they are paid under the table. 
• ca. 60,000 public sector workers have a second job - which they are not actually allowed to have.
• Employees generally think their personal finances have not yet deteriorated as much as those of the country as a whole. 
• Only about 50% of employees are willing to strike over the austerity measures. 

Strike anyone?

NEXT STOP - BONO DEBT RELIEF CONCERT

Good news everyone! We now have our chance to demonstrate our solidarity with Greece by voluntarily helping the nation pay off its massive public debt.

The National Bank of Greece has set up an account for donations and you can make a deposit quite easily.

I think this is, in principle, a good thing and I urge you all to contribute generously. Putting your money in there means it can only be used to pay down debt - not pay civil servants, or quangocrats, or farm subsidies.

It's also way more cost-effective than raising new tax revenue: with the latter, the state would have to pay one person to draft the law stating how much you should pay, 300 to debate it, thousands to collect it, more thousands to manage them, and some additional hundreds in a futile attempt to make this enormously corrupt system 1% more efficient. Then of course you'd pay a notary or an accountant to make sure you're not liable for the extra tax, etc.

This, on the other hand, is a dead easy way and dirt cheap way for my compatriots to do their bit for the public finances. You don't even have to involve the Ministry of Finance or the State Treasurer. Just buy some of the billions in Government bonds that the NBG has been forced to invested in, then basically tear them up.

You may want to hurry up though. As you can see below, we have a very busy debt repayment schedule this spring:

There is just one catch which sours this plan for me - none of this is tax-deductible (unlike here) which of course it should be as it's effectively a charitable donation to the Government itself! Plus, if it were, I bet we could get tax-dodging superstar Bono - or, failing that, Dalaras - to front a little concert on this. We could even get our own Bono/Dalaras joke:

BONO: Every time I clap my hands, a chain-smoking-in-your-face unionised civil servant gets hired in Greece, with extra ASEP points for having three children, coming from a shit-hole border-town and having spent 3 years making coffee as part of a STEP programme.

DALARAS: Κάθε φορά που χτυπώ τα χέρια μου, ένας 40άρης αιώνιος φοιτητής που χαρτοπαίζει στο υπόγειο της ΑΣΟΕΕ παθαίνει θρόμβωση και σωριάζεται δίπλα στην υπο μόνιμη κατάληψη αθλητική λέσχη της σχολής.

AUDIENCE: Then stop f***ing doing it!

WE IZ IN UR UNIONS, NOT GIVING A SH*T

As the new and improved SGP and rumours of bailout talks among our EU partners begin to shine some light on the fiscal hole Greece is in, our unions are girding their loins for war in a poorly-timed attempt to show “the markets” who’s boss.

As some of my compatriots are sympathetic to this cause, why not review the evidence a little?

Currently, union membership in Greece stands at around 30% of employees and has been falling steadily. It is now 12 percentage points lower than it was 15 years ago. Yet on last count (2004) their collective bargaining held power over the earnings of 65% of our workforce.

Worse still, they were effectively funded by 100% of the workforce – and their employers, as noted here:

"The state subsidy paid through the Workers’ Welfare Foundation, a scheme supervised by the Ministry of Employment and Social Protection, which collects funds from all paid employees (both union and non-union members) as well as from employers for the primary purpose of providing social services to employees, is the basic source of funding for the unions since in effect union dues play a part only in the public-sector unions."

In fact, our Unions can by law get up to 25% of the Workers' Welfare Foundation's budget, and no less than 15% per year.  This would suggest a 2008 budget of EUR 35m. (Weird source for me to cite, I know, but they know their stuff.)

What do we get for this? For one, we get the 147th most flexible labour market in the world. And deteriorating. We were 135th just a year ago. We also got a flatlining labour share of GNP, which should be the major benchmark for Union success. We got may one or two extra percentage points immediately after 1981 and that was that. 

But perhaps for all this we buy more security for our workers. Well the evidence is mixed but, according to at least one comprehensive review of industrial relations in individual EU countries (not by neoliberals but by the union-loving Germans),

"Stricter employment protection legislation [and a] higher […] minimum wage are likely to reduce both employment and activity rate[...] On the other hand, collective bargaining over wages and political orientation of the government do not have [a] significant effect on labour markets[’] performance."

So to recap, despite effectively representing less than a third of the workforce, the Greek unions get to earn against its totality and bargain on behalf of its majority. Or do they?

Well, although density of union membership is falling, the absolute number of union members is rising and in fact public sector union membership in Greece is rising much faster than private sector union membership. Note that overall membership is rising faster here than in almost any other OECD country. [Though it must be noted that many of our unions effectively inflate their membership figures by failing to strike off retired members.]

Why is the public/private divide important? Because the shift in Union power from the private to the public sector means that the union movement will increasingly act in favour of greater allocation of funds to the public sector.

Of course, most countries have a pro-union party and an anti-union party and that’s some kind of guarantee against this kind of influence as the two will inevitably alternate in and out of power.

Well, we don’t. Check this list of Presidents and General Secretaries of the private sector tertiary Union, GSEE, of whom there have only been four (!) since 1996. One is an on-and off Conservative MP, one a current Conservative MEP, one a member of the Central Committee and Political Council of our Socialist Party, and one a member of the National Council of our Socialist Party. Our Unions have, to borrow a dirty capitalist term, cornered the market.

All of this of course translates to, you guessed it, more government spending, and debt.

Ironically, the only country in which union membership (private and public) is rising faster than in Greece is the third most indebted EU country after ours and Italy, Belgium. (Comparisons here). In Italy, be it noted, membership has also been rising at a respectable 4.3% per annum. Unsurprisingly, Belgium is also the only other country with rising public sector compensation where the number of civil servants has also been rising in the past decade.

That’s the big picture. But if Union leaders are assured a long life in politics, what do the rank and file get?

The evidence is out there. Tellingly, we’re the only EU country in which people with lower education levels are, ceteris paribus, less likely to be union members. So Union membership in Greece is not about protecting oneself from ruthless competition in a rapidly upskilling world where one’s place in the labour market is increasingly precarious. In fact, according to the same study, we are also the only country, along with Finland, in which people whose parents were educated to a lower level are more likely to be union members. Simply put, union membership in Greece is a means for those who invested in education in a bid to secure an advantage in the labour market to hold on to their status in the face of competition. Sound familiar?

It’s not the best of news. Unfortunately, Greek Union power is not going anywhere soon. The reason is simple demographics. Union membership tends to peak in the mid-to-late 40s, which is predicted to be the dominant age group in Greece in 2020. After that, well, it might be too late.

Time to change the law.

WE CANZ DREAM OF CHEEZBURGERS

The only news that has mattered for some time now is finally out. The Commission has approved our Updated Stability and Growth Programme. They are still suing us for tampering with statistics but that can't be helped.

This took some painful last-minute tweaks following Yorgo's tour of Davos and his consuming bro-mance with Joseph Stiglitz. In order to flesh out the proposed savings in our government consumption, which, as I've blogged before, are quite substantial, we've announced a host of detailed adjustments, including a longer public sector pay freeze. There's going to be a lot of striking over this but, as the following graph (sourced from this study) clearly shows, our civil servants have little to complain about.

I believe that this is the beginning of the end of the Greek fiscal drama. Already the people reviled by our PM as speculators are looking to the next weakest PIIG, most likely Portugal, to Poland as the weakest CEE link, and quite deservedly the UK as the weakest EU link.

Now all we need to do is come up with a good implementation schedule over the next month, meet our targets and keep quiet and this could yet blow over. The Conservatives have pledged cooperation and they better keep their promise. They are as guilty as a puppy next to a pile of poo worth EUR 80bn and their attempts to produce incremental policies are starting to annoy me.

This won't be the end for us Greeks, of course. The SGP still leaves us, if perfectly successful, with a structural deficit of 2% of GDP. This is nothing to celebrate; it simply means that any macro-economic pressures in the near future, especially a double-dip in the US and Western Europe will send us back into the straitjacket.

But for now, let's remember to thank the "evil" speculators. They may not be nice and they may not give a hoot about us, but they've saved us all the same.

The EU couldn't get us to stop robbing our grandchildren in order to pay ourselves lavish pensions or ill-deserved public sector and quango wages. Not even when we broke their rules every year (bar one) for 13 years straight (see table below, source here). Our politicians couldn't stop us. We certainly couldn't control our urges ourselves. These guys made us and the Commission sit up and take notice.

Despite all our brave words about getting governments to rein in the excesses of financial markets, we really ought to thank goodness the financial markets are there to rein in the excesses of governments.

WE IZ IN UR FARMS, LOVIN UR MONEYZ

I couldn’t not write about the farmer uprising currently in progress in Greece.  In a country with the 121^st cheapest agricultural policy in the world, not to mention a fiscal basket-case, perhaps this is a bit rich. But anger runs deep in the North of Greece and seeing one’s personal situation in the context of a decade old problem is a bit too much perspective to be expected from some of our farmers, who are admittedly not too well off. Their leadership, however, should know better.

 (Photo courtesy of Petros Papalianos)

Studies show that subsidies, especially decoupled ones, actually reduce efficiency. We know this is true in the case of olive growers and cotton growers in Greece. We know that subsidies make cattle farmers in Crete less efficient and more vulnerable to market and weather shocks. Same goes for the farming powerhouse of Europe, France.

Despite this, research shows that support has increased since 2002, and made up 45% of farm income in Greece as of 2006, 9 percentage points higher than the EU equivalent.

So what are our farmers asking for? You guessed it: more decoupled subsidies. Here are their demands, in Greek. The non-Greek speakers will have to take my word for it. But it’s not just the fact that farmers want subsidies. It is the nature of the subsidies they want: they want to completely remove downside risk from their operations but still hold on to any profits. When bankers ask for this, we rightly scream bloody murder (although we wrongly give in).

First, there is market risk: simply the risk that people will want to buy less at your preferred price than you think. So farmers are demanding that the state guarantee higher prices for their produce.

Then there is natural risk: maybe it won’t rain one year, or rain too much, or snow, burning the crops. So the farmers are asking for total cover in case of any of the above on all farming capital.

Of course even with that in place there is a chance the Greek consumer will stick two fingers up to them and buy cheaper foreign produce. So they are also demanding protection from foreign imports (which is illegal under EU law)

Even if that works, the consumer could tell them to f off and just not buy farm produce, or buy a lot less. So they demand a guaranteed minimum income.

Then there is the risk that this government-fuelled bonanza will not be sustainable. The farmers have thought of that too. So they demand they be allowed to retire at 60 (55 for women), courtesy of a taxpayer-subsidised fund whose deficits will be topped up by the government.

And they also want farmland to be tax-free so that any future tax hikes will not touch them. Moreover, they want a freezing of their debt for three years, and for all of their overdraft fees to be waived by the banks they owe money to.

This, they add, is only a baseline, on top of which local producers should be able to negotiate further perks.

Let’s be clear. An entrepreneur takes risks with their capital. An employee doesn’t. The farmers – who in my mind signed up to be entrepreneurs – now want to be employees instead, simply without their employer being able to tell them what to do, and with an added bonus on top in case they manage to turn a profit – the privilege of civil servants. And they want this status regardless of whether they have another job or not. Note that civil servants in Greece cannot have additional jobs. So they really want to be super-civil-servants, accountable to no one and on the dole for eternity.

This is madness in the best of times. In these times, it’s self-destruction.

I have to agree, on the basis of evidence, that retiree farmers are very prone to poverty and that getting additional work on the side is invaluable to mitigating poverty among farming households in Greece. In fact, where the household head has a non-agricultural job, the research shows that farm households are reasonably well-off. But any policy that gives farmers an incentive to rely exclusively on heavily subsidised farming income must, by the same token, be very bad news. And although the research finds that poverty is reduced by subsidy income, if this comes at the price of reduced productivity then presumably the level of subsidy needed to achieve this reduction will rise with time, as indeed it has.

Finally, EU subsidies have a lot to answer for. As the chart below shows, since 2004 subsidy money has increasingly been turned into farm wages rather than profits. It's a recipe for long-term disaster.

There is, in all of this, a silver lining. Some of our agricultural products are hugely profitable and competitive. The poster-child for this is asparagus farming, more than three quarters of which is concentrated in the Pella prefecture. Research on this, however, shows that this is heavily dependent on the flexible application of seasonal labour, most of it from immigrants. This is probably what Greece is worst at in the world. Fingers crossed for the asparagus farmers of Pella.