Dialogue is the lifeblood of democracy. In this respect, the televised debate between the two political leaders was a victory for democracy, which contributed towards the prevalence of a climate of civilized political debate. It may not have offered an opportunity to the fans of each of the two contenders for power to celebrate for dominating over each other, but it allowed for a meaningful discussion, for the people to hear out their arguments and make up their mind.
The two leaders articulated their arguments, their disagreements, in an effort to convince all those who remain undecided, as well as to protect themselves from any possible mistake that may cost them. It is a fact that we did not hear anything new, we did not become any wiser as to what will happen when the new government is faced with a series of important issues.
Te new bailout, despite the slight variations in their positions, remained the central pillar of the policy to be observed from the next day. Perhaps that is why beyond the promises of better implementation and more efficient negotiations on the open subjects, the two leaders avoided committing to any promises towards certain social group that are affected.
Beyond the opinion one may have as to how convincing the opinions and arguments we heard actually were, the only significant difference, beyond the abilities in management claimed by both leaders, was the ability to come to a consensus and post-election alliances. That was perhaps the only clear point of difference between Mr. Tsipras and Mr. Meimarakis.
However the binding framework set out by the new bailout agreement, the clear statements of the two leaders that they will implement it, as well as the climate of confrontation that prevailed in the debate, suggests that a bare minimum national consensus is not impossible anymore. Irrespective of the form or not the government cooperation may take, Monday evening’s debate illustrated that this is nit impossible.
The Monday evening televised debate may not have determined the final outcome of such an ambivalent electoral battle such as the current one, but it at least helped overcome the extreme divisive clashes which dominate in election campaign rallies. It also allowed the leaders and the people to realize that when they want they can have a discussion and disagree, without shouting and slogans, but with arguments and ideas.
TO VIMA
