Editorial: The crisis in New Democracy
The major battle fought within New Democracy ahead of the election for a new leader does not honor the party’s history nor…
The major battle fought within New Democracy ahead of the election for a new leader does not honor the party’s history nor does it reflect its institutional role. Instead of a political and ideological clash we are witnessing procedural clashes and scheming which undermine the electoral process and party unity.
It is a fact that after the defeat in the elections and the political attrition suffered from managing the crisis, New Democracy is in dire need of redetermining its role and renewing it political involvement. For better or for worse, in the people – and voter – minds, New Democracy is associated with the management of power, its problems, clientelism and its inter-party political factions.
There is only one way for the conservative party to enter a new political cycle and essentially respond to its role as the main opposition party. It must dare to carry out an ideological and political renewal, to cleanse itself from the sins of the past and dispute the hereditary fiefdoms from within its own ranks.
That is why elections are not enough. A meaningful discussion and clash of ideas with an open debate within the party and society are needed. You cannot have any meaningful discussion with television ads or with clashes in closed offices over splitting the mechanism.
New Democracy has historically and politically represented a significant section of society and its roles is absolutely essential for the political system to balance. Maintaining this role and its influence are inextricably associated to its renewal, both in terms of people, as well as ideas and policies. So long as the candidate leaders and officers focus their efforts in battles for a share of interparty ruins, its influence on society and political clout will wane.