Political
history, modern and older, is full of mistakes committed by political leaders
who were not distinguished for their foolishness.
The
mistakes of Konstantinos Karamanlis, for example, compete with those of Andreas
Papandreou, who openly admitted his mistakes and gaffes. Karamanlis, on the
contrary, opted to remain silent.
Two
characteristic examples from Andreas Papandreou’s chain of mistakes are
relevant as history repeats itself.
As soon as
the founder of PASOK assumed parliamentary majority (after the elections in
October 1981), he ordered his associates who had “occupied” the Ministry of
Interior (with G. Gennimatas as head) to change vote of preference in the
election law.
The change
was implemented in the next elections, only to be silently abolished straight
after, via a simple statement that A. Papandreou made during a work lunch, one
afternoon in Kastri.
Nowadays
the vote of preference has been reinstated, suddenly, for the European
elections. The political consequences of this change will be evaluated straight
after the elections.
The
predictions some have made about upcoming radical changes, which often hints
towards the unwillingness to cooperated with other political groups, will be
judged after the parliamentary elections. The political isolationism obviously
stems from a theorem that A. Papandreou developed on the eve of his great
victory in 1982. He claimed then that the absence of experienced politicians
from PASOK’s ranks would not result in a bad government due to the inexperience
of party members in assuming government posts. The lack of experience,
according to A. Papandreou, was a godsend so that the new governors do not
stray down twisted paths.
We all saw
what happened.
And we can
imagine what will happen in this land if the “peacocks”, “crows” and “possums”
if the political scene assume power.
Stavros P.
Psycharis
–
Originally published in the Sunday print edition
