The Master Slave Dialectic; Democracy from Greece to the EU

To have occupation there is a certain level of consent, notwithstanding the asymmetric relationship behind it. The master imposes himself onto the slave, who prefers the loss of independence to savehis life.The master-slave dialectic is a mutually constituting relationship. Given the undeniable historical conditions of power and dependence, it must be recognized that the ‘subject’ (Greece in this case), is still an agent acting out oftheoptionss/he has, i.e. given the asymmetry of the conditions.

 

 

THE MASTER EXISTS ONLY WITH A SLAVE 

Structural and historical circumstances (e.g. financial crisis, liberal austerity dogma, etc.), internal failures of Greece (e.g. weak institutions, corruption, tax evasion, clientelism, etc.), together with the ‘strategies’ of Greek politicians, all matched very well together, creating aperfect ‘colonial drama’.

 

Power relations are never one-sided; they are dialectal in nature. You need someone to torture to become a torturer, and you need a slave to become a master. From Hegel and Marx to Sartre this dynamic has been unveiled, although highlighting different aspects of it. Despite historical, political and economic circumstances determine asymmetric power relations between actors, there is a level of responsibility and consent of the weak actor in the relationship. The slave dynamic works until the latteraccepts the relationship of domination. There is a cultural hegemony behind the material dependency in the master-slave dialectic.To cut this dynamic, the subject (slave) must actas an agent, emancipating him/herself from the dialectic s/he has been accepting and perpetuating.Chancellor Merkel and Prime Minister Tsipras’relationship seems to be the perfect example of a master-slave dialectic, but it won’t last too long since the master is now acting irrationally as we shall see.

 

THE BLUFF OF THE SLAVE 

 

Last year Mr Tsipras called a referendum asking Greek people whether they would allow him to accept the conditions Greece was asked in order to receive the loans from the Troika. Greek people told him not to accept the conditions, and yet he did. The referendum was abused as a way to press European creditors, not as an instrument of direct democracy. With the referendum MrTsipras made two crucial mistakes. First, he betrayed Greek people and exploited democratic procedures for short term negotiation tactics. Second, Mr Tsipras showed he was not able to understand the basics of negotiations. 

 

When entering a negotiation, it is essential to know what the other part is looking for, what the fallback position is (if any), and so on. In EU-Greece negotiations most EU countries did not want to lend money, and actually aimed at kicking Greece out of the Euro, if not the EU as such. As soon as the Greek crisis erupted, most countries were caught off guard and feared that Grexit could make all the EU collapse. Time passed, economists started playing with data, and soon the understanding became that Grexit would not make the EU implode, so… Mr Tsipras last year entered the negotiations with the EU creditors using the arm of the Greek referendum to raise the bar with the ‘threat’ of leaving the Euro. Most EU countries wanted that scenario, it was not a threat! Mr Tsipras showed naivety in the negotiations, on top of irresponsibility in handling democratic processes and procedures. Even acknowledging the asymmetric dependency relationship with its European partners, Mr Tsipras’ responsibilities are clear. Today Mr Tsipras became the disciple of Chancellor Merkel, almost doing what it needs to be done before being asked. Tsipras is playing its role in the dialectic. Greek people might be wondering whether Mr Tsipras is enjoying at least, as they seem not to be.

 

 

THE MASTER’S RECIPE 

 

According to neoliberal theory, privatization, liberalization and stabilization bring benefits promoting more efficient and cheaper services to the citizens.Liberalization, privatization, and stabilization measures, i.e. the Washington Consensus recipes (Williamson, 1989), have been criticized for years as being the ‘ideal’ recipes that were not working in reality. The critiques regarding the Washington Consensus measures are now widely accepted even by the same Bretton Woods institutions where they were produced (i.e. the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund).The effects of the measures show something was not working,the reasons are many. To cut a long story short, the Washington Consensus was giving unique recipes for standard reform packages to help developing countries which fell into crisis. The liberalization-privatization-stabilization reforms were a one-size-fit-all set, independently of thecountry considered (e.g. history, culture, etc.), and the problems it had at the origin of the crisis.

 

In Greecethe problems are the ones mentioned before: corruption, clientelism, tax evasion, the control of the economy by few families of oligarchs, etc.In 2016 Greece was ranked by Reporters Without Borders as being number89in the world for freedom of information– after countries such as: Burkina Faso;Niger; Serbia; Hungary;Moldova; and Togo. What happens when privatization and liberalization are implemented in such a context? It is not a mystery: public resources go cheaply in the pockets of few private actors.

 

Acemoglu and Robinson (Why Nations Fail 2013) show how Carlos Slim and Bill Gates, two of the most powerful and rich individuals in the world, managed to create their fortunes in differentways,having an opposite impact on the economies of their respective countries. Carlos Slim took a good part of Mexico’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), while Bill Gates has been able to multiply the GDP of the United States also thanks to the institutions the US has, and Mexico has not. Slim’s fortunes were acquired taking control of Mexico’s telecom sector and becoming the (private) monopolist. Bill Gates’s attempt to become the monopolist has been weakened since 1998, when the US department of Justice filed a civil action against Microsoft, for abuse of monopoly power, imposing a fine to the company.

 

Without recurring to Marxist or anti-liberal theories, the Washington Consensus measures (i.e. liberalization-privatization-stabilization) have proven to cause different results, if not bad, depending on the country considered. Economic coercion will not fix Greek economy. In order to fix Greek economy a long term program is needed to change the culture of the institutions and the citizens’ attitude vis-à-vis these institutions. There are no short cuts.

 

In the master-slave dialectic also the master has its role. Or, if you prefer, if the EU-Greece is the representation of a ‘colonial drama’, the colonizers are actively imposing their domination.There are indeed structural and external conditions that explain the reasons why Greece is where it is today. Since the explosion of the Greek crisis (after the 2007 financial crisis, which became an economic crisis), Greece has been asked to implement austerity measures that made the country almost a failed state. In the last 5 years Greece has lost 25% of its GDP, the equivalent of a civil war.Unemployment rate has skyrocketed, poverty has increased, together with crimes and suicide rates. The austerity measures,meant to help Greek economy to lift itself up, seem designed to put Greece down for eternity. The master is abusing its power to impose itself via economic coercion actually trying to destroy the slave. Rational masters (actors are always rational according to the liberal mantra) should instead aim to keep alive their slaves, as the work of the slave is necessary to the master.

 

Believe it or not, the most rationale actor today is the International Monetary Fund. The IMF is pressing Eurozone members to acknowledge that current austerity measures will bring Greek debt to almost 300% of its GDP by 2060. Accordingly, the Chief of the IMF, Mrs Lagarde, is asking her counterparts (i.e. Germany), to defer the payment of Greek loans (until 2080), and make sure that the interests on loans will not be more than 1.5% until 2045. 

 

Eurozone members and the IMF might be coming to terms with the irrationality of an extreme economic coercion that will destroy Greece completely. The Greek government, instead,is asking the Parliament to vote new austerity measures – i.e. raising taxes; cutting expenses;promoting more privatization in exchange for more bailout funds.Tsipras: you are the best!

 

 

DEMOCRACY FROM GREECE TO THE EU 

 

From ancient Greek city states where democracy was first introduced, to the construction of the EU, and back to contemporary Greece, democracy has never been the same. Democracy is not a timeless concept, it is applied differently across space and time. Currently the EU and Greece share a common understanding of democracy being made of procedures rather than outputs. The procedures, in theory, are respected – except for the case of the Greek referendum.The output is at least controversial. 

 

For democracy to be truly so, both at the national and supranational level, there needs to be a shift in European people, from consumers to citizensactively engaged to give meaning to democracy and the institutions meant to promote such system. The prime minister of Greece abused democratic procedures, and yet Greek failures run much deeper. The European project has been created as an elite process and Europeans have never filled it with participation. European citizens don’t even bother to go and vote for the elections of the European Parliament. No surprise that the European Parliament is not involved in the design and approval of the measures to be applied to Greece. The deficit of democracy comes, also, from the deficit of citizens.