A.Tsipras: Me or Papariga for Prime Minister. Why not?

Uploaded by Ekloges12 on 03.05.2012

A new authority alliance? Yourself, Papariga and Kouvelis?
We talked about the possibility of a greater alliance.
That could start from the left of PASOK, I mean those who left the party unhappy, and could reach the left of the political left.
I am talking about a great range of anti-memorandum but also liberal, progressive and democratic forces
that would agree on a minimum basis.
We cannot agree on everything but we can at least agree on how we can stop this disaster.
How we can prevent any further reduction of the salaries and pensions or the departure of the younger abroad.
We are one week before the elections.
We are actually referring to SYRIZA, KKE and DHMAR. Right?
The authority alliance has a wider persective.
To get rid of PASOK in the future?
Authority is not only gained through the elections. It is a constant fight.
Even if we get a left government after the elections the way we imagine it.
Authority is not only exercised by the prime minister. It is also exercised by the banks, TV channels,
the great businessmen and the big capital.
When, for example, Aliante took over Chile,
multinationals and capitalists went on an investment strike and eventually defeated him.
How can this be done? The majority of people are
against the memorandum and the current policy.
The two great parties, that are strongly connected to local and foreign interests,
represent 1/3 of the Greek people in the polls.
The rest 2/3 say no to this policy. The elections result will prove that too.
Of course it is quite complicated. What people exactly want.
Some of those who don’t want the memorandum don’t want Europe either.
They are not a minority.
The majority says that we don’t want to get out of the European context.
But they don’t want to live in extreme poverty either.
We want to become equal members.
To be treated as equal and not be downgraded.
We want to move on with dignity. Not to become a colony.
All these sound nice and we will talk about it later. Let’s stick to what you said about a left government.
I am talking about a left orientated government. It could also include forces originating from PASOK.
Please be more specific.
Which political parties could form a left orientated government?
SYRIZA, KKE, DHMAR and all those who wish to support a target-specific effort.
Our minimum target is to denounce the loan agreement and reverse the criminal adjustments of the memorandum.
Who will be Prime Minister?
We set no conditions for that.
We don’t. We will all sit down and decide. It will obviously be a member of the political left.
We are not that interested who the Prime Minister will be. It is not that important for us to gain seats.
We don’t want to save our career. We want to save people from their misery. This is our main target.
It has to be obvious to the people that you are considering a specific governmental structure.
With a Prime Minister, certain ministers, certain parties. If Prime Minister is the problem, let Aleka Papariga be.
This is not our problem. But we believe that there are numerous political figures capable to take over this difficult task.
If PASOK and N.D. were capable of cooperating and finally agreed to Papadimos after examining 32 different options.
Let’s not forget that Papadimos was brought from abroad. The issue is not who the Prime Minister will be.
I understand that even i could be Prime Minister.
You? No. You, Mr. Tsipras.
Yes, it could be me. Why not? Or Mr. Kouvelis?
I have never raised such an issue. I have never claimed to be Prime Minister.
But the polls place Tsipras at the same level with Venizelos and Samaras, who dream of becoming Prime Ministers.
People spontaneously give this answer.
So why would I say no? Still, I repeat, this is not the issue.
If someone could be more effective than Tsipras, then let him be. What is essential is the policy imposed.
What were you good at in school? At maths or writing essays?
I was better at essays. I was good at maths too, but not as good.
Your skills at writing are already proven. I have some doubts about your skills in maths.
Based on the existing electoral law, no government can be created by the 2nd, the 3rd and the 4th party.
The best scenario is SYRIZA, KKE and DHMAR reaching 40%.
But they still can’t form a government. The 50 seats bonus to the first party limits the options for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th party.
This is true. But in politics, one plus one doesn’t always equal two. It could equal more or less.
Imagine if the two memorandum parties got 1/3 in the elections
and the rest 70% belonged to parties that say no to the memorandum one way or the other.
If the first party, with the bonus of the 50 seats, forms a government with 151 deputies, will it be able to govern?
Could they impose this policy? But the problem is that all the other forces can’t govern either.
What we have here is an electoral law of fraud.
But this is the law we will proceed with. The elections will be conducted based on that law.
This is the greatest difficulty. That is why we have said that we
need to create a left alliance in order to gain the 50 seats bonus.
I know that it sounds very arrogant.
But why isn’t it arrogant when Venizelos is placed at the same place with Tsipras, claiming for the first position?
Why is it arrogant for the left to do so?
People will vote. Why should it be surprising if... If you are the winning party?
If you are the winning party?
It could be us because we have gained capital by all the other anti-memorandum forces.
This time we have the right to use an argument that made us suffer in the past.
The argument of the useful vote.
If the indecisive realize that the punishment vote should go to the forces that can reverse the result,
then they have to vote for SYRIZA no matter if they don’t agree on everything.
But you are a reasonable person. It is most likely that SYRIZA won’t be the winning party. Right?
We should leave the people decide. But let’s suppose that it is not.
Then we have the math problem. If you are not the winning party, then the three left parties can’t form a government.
Do you hope gaining a part of PASOK in order to form a government?
Do you hope gaining the votes of the anti-memorandum right forces?
If we are not the winning party, .
which would be a solution to the chaotic political scene and the social anarchy,
then we will try to find a way to form a government with the support of other forces
If we get a 16-17% and Samaras is the winning party with a 19%.
If we gather only 140 deputies together with KKE and DHMAR,
then we be ordered by the President to form a government.
By appealing to ten more deputies?
We will announce our immediate program, all the targets we have set for the next three months.
We will also ask the people to support us with their vote of confidence.
If 200,000 people go to Syntagma square and 200,000 demonstrate in the rest of the country,
which makes us a total of 500,000 people in the streets, we will manage to get their vote of confidence.
It is clear enough. Is there only one anti-memorandum party?
You have previously said that you will ask for more anti-memorandum forces,
some coming from the right or even the extreme right.
So the only distinction is between the memorandum and the anti-memorandum forces?
Should we leave aside the distinction between left and right parties?
Kamenos or Karatzaferis are centrist forces? Undoubtedly, no.
As for Karatzaferis, I am not sure that he is an anti-memorandum force.
Right now he is.
How about Kamenos? There are some limitations.
The dominating limitation today is our country’s future.
We have strong ideological and political differences with Mr. Kamenos. That is why we are not together.
I don’t believe that we are dealing with a war of nations.
I believe that we are dealing with a class war. We don't believe that we are occupied by foreigners. We are under a
financial occupation from both Greeks and foreigners. Local interests benefit from the memorandum.
He cannot claim that everybody wins in this society.
Some win and others lose.
He can’t get the country out of the crisis and make everyone happy at the same time. He can’t reduce the taxes for
both the low and the high social levels at once. Who will pay?
This is why we disagree.
But if we are looking for extra seats and Kamenos provides his support with five deputies, then we won’t say no.
According to the VPRC, half of SYRIZA’s voters like Kamenos. Doesn’t that annoy you?
No, it doesn’t. Because Kamenos has made some interesting suggestions in the Parliament.
And maybe they accuse him of leaving his party when they were about to claim authority.
Let’s move on with your proposals.
Your first proposal is the disconnection from the loan agreement.
It’s denouncement.
But immediately. Not with a small delay like Kouvelis says?
Kouvelis is talking about a gradual disconnection.
Kouvelis says that it is an international agreement which cannot be changed. And that we should find similar solutions.
He is talking about a gradual disconnection.
I am wondering if it makes any sense to try and find similar ways to hurt ourselves.
In a society that has already suffered so much. It’s like cutting a smaller finger instead of the thumb.
The memorandum can’t be renegotiated because it is hell. And hell cannot be renegotiated.
The greatest crime was that Papadimos, Papandreou and Venizelos
treated unimportant unelected workers who are only accountable to their bosses as their equals.
Is this a negotiation?
Instead of having this discussion on political negotiation with Merkel, Soible e.tc
and telling them that Greek people have reached their limits. But they offered their consent to that mistake.
Never before in history have people consented to their suicide.
A suicide presented as a way out.
They were having discussions with Thomsen, Rachenbach e.tc. This has to end.
If we denounce the loan agreement, would they have a reason to keep us in the E.U.?
This would have been a good question before Merkel deconstructed it. She deconstructed it loudly in her BBC interview.
She said something very simple; something I keep saying the last two years. We never thought of driving Greece out of the
euro currency because then the markets would be waiting for the next victim.
This would cost us far more than keeping it inside the E.U.
Let me rephrase that. Greece’s exit from Europe, would likely drive Germany out too.
So what you are saying is that if we tell them that the agreement is no longer valid they will accept it.
What I am saying is that they will have to negotiate
and discuss the possibility of a more reasonable program that would improve the severe tax policy.
If you read the current IMF report you will realise that we are outside the context.
That in June, they will no longer be talking about the implementation of measures
but the creation of a third package. Because the second one will have failed too.
They will then realise that it wasn’t the cook’s fault but that the recipe was wrong.
This wrong recipe has to be changed both in Greece and Europe as well.
It sounds like blackmailing Europe.
It is not blackmail.
Every European country should have a democracy.
It is an essential cultural element in the European synthesis. We can’t ignore that.
If Europe was consisted of colonies,
then the countries of the South would be colonies of Germany and other northern countries.
But then we are talking about a whole different Europe.
A Europe that may have no reason of existence.
But why do you say that about them?
It is our politicians who signed. Our Parliament.
You are right. Samaras, Venizelos and the Parliament were forced to sign. I remind you that I sent a letter to those
sixteen leaders, Merkel, Lagarde, Barroso e.tc, on behalf of SYRIZA. I was telling them that Samaras and Venizelos
who had signed the agreement didn’t represent the majority of the Greek people. That maybe after the recovery of
democracy in Greece, people would decide that they represent a minority.
That they shouldn’t trust them. Everybody opposed to this action and called me an alarmist.
I notice that you exaggerate in what you say. You can’t interpret the public feelings.
Until the elections, the Parliament is responsible for taking decisions. We accept that.
But you live in Greece. You communicate with people.
You shouldn’t doubt the impact the parliament’s decisions had on people these last two last years. I believe that
there was an unprecedented disharmony
between the parliament and the people. In every case, it is the parliament that takes the decisions.
But they take binding decisions for the next 20 years.
It doesn't work like that.
The parliament has to ask for the public opinion in critical issues through referendums
or it should be dissolved and reconstructed. This parliament was created based on dilemmas such as socialism or
barbarity and perceptions that we had about money. Do you remember?
Yes, but the constitution doesn’t have any footnotes. Even if people are deceived.
Still there is one article saying that its application depends on the Greeks’ patriotism.
This means that sometimes we have to find ways to protect ourselves from the people protecting us.
In order to save the constitution and its application from those who apply it.
Because not all the memorandum laws were constitutional.
But those who appealed to the people that would have the authority to consider them unconstitutional have failed.
These laws are constitutional based on the decision in Greece.
If you have both the knife and the fruit, it is easy to cut it.
But that is the way democracy functions.
There is the Parliament and the Court of Justice. You are right about that.
Laws and constitutions reflect the social and political correlations.
We had a different system under Otto’s reign
and a different one during the Dictatorship. Right?
One of the critical issues now
is whether we want to have a more democratic constitution.
One that will expand its social rights and reflect the needs of the society.
This is critical because the next Parliament could possibly achieve that.
Before changing the constitution let’s move on to some more crucial questions.
You are talking about taxing the wealth.
What do you consider as wealth? Can you define it?
Of course. The accumulated wealth.
This is a very crucial question. I will answer with specific examples.
We say that the first thing to impose in Greece is the creation of a property record.
Every Greek citizen will be obliged to declare how much they own and where they got it from. Not only for politicians.
For everyone. This will include deposits, bonds, stocks, houses in Greece and abroad.
During recession, the prices of houses in London didn’t fall
because people took the money abroad and bought houses in London. These houses are not taxed.
And if you have a small apartment in Sepolia,
you have to pay a property tax. But if you have a huge apartment in London then you don’t pay anything.
There have to be agreements between the countries.
As for those who file fake tax returns, they should be punished with the confiscation of their property.
In how many years do you think that the Greek state will have created this mechanism?
Very soon. I believe it is an issue of political will.
They are not willing to do this. Our corrupted political system owes its existence to
the financing of businessmen and capitalists. Who would you consider a wealthy man?
Someone with a 10,000 monthly salary?
Or someone whose property exceeds 1,000,000 Euros? Those with accumulated wealth.
Give me a range. For example, during the ‘50s the German’s that made more than
150,000 marks were considered wealthy. 120,000 marks.
You remind me of a law voted by a conservative government in Germany. In order to get out of the crisis, they taxed
and obliged those people to give half of their declared property
in 20 years time. Those who gained more than 120-130 thousand marks a year.
Holland in France, who is no extremist but a social-democratic politician,
has suggested to impose a tax of 75% to those with an income over 1 million.
If I said that in Greece,
Bakoyanni, Karatzaferis and Venizelos would accuse me of sending businesses abroad and draining the country.
I don’t know, maybe the world has changed so much that even Holland sounds like SYRIZA.
I will return to the issue of taxing the wealth.
We own the biggest commercial fleet of the world.
And not only they don’t pay anything
thanks to their 58 different tax evasion laws,
they also want the state to finance the guards on their ships.
It is absurd. So you suggest to get the ship owners.
I don’t want to get them. I mean to tax them.
I’d like to ask them whether they are really Greek
or they have just put a Greek flag on their ships. But Greece is a destructed country.
They have to be taxed. Like the ship owners in Norway and other countries.
In case they threaten us in the middle of such a crisis that they will replace the Greek flag with a Liberian one,
then they should also move their property and political rights to Liberia as well.
How would you do that? In a very simple way. We would tax them and those who
wouldn’t conform to the tax laws
would lose their political rights.
But it’s not a matter of conforming to the law. They would take their ships to Liberia.
They would change their flags.
They will change their flags and leave only one ship in Greece? It would be fine by us.
Still, they will be taxed for the rest of their property in Greece. The problem with offshore companies must be solved.
What about a public control of banking?
This is a great scandal.
Banks have received 200 billion of cash and guarantees since the beginning of the recession.
Including these last 50 for re-capitalization.
And they will just return 16 billion.
The rest 34 billion will be an additional burden on the shoulders of the Greek citizens.
Still, it is a wise thing to support the banks because if they collapse, people will lose their deposits.
But tell me, why should banks be run by people who led the country to bankruptcy? This is absurd.
If you start a business that goes bankrupt, you will be dismissed from its leadership if not go to jail. Right?
So a minimum change would be not to give bank profits to stakeholders but use them in a socially retributive way.
How can we succeed that? Through tate control of banks? Or should we have a political leader as banker?
This is correct. Slogans don’t always fit the entire suggestion? We are talking about a socialization, a social control.
I think we can find similar models. Anyway, we cannot accept this abrsurd phenomenon that currently exists.
We are not in favor of the state. We are in favor of society.
When the social needs are not covered by the state’s intervention, we don’t support the state.
Give us an example.
The public sector created by the two great parties.
Haven't you suggested the employment of 150,000 workers in the public sector?
Yes, in hospitals where the health system is collapsing.
You should take a walk around Evangelismos or Erythros Stavros hospital. One nurse for every forty patients.
Is there a part of the public sector that has to be reduced?
Of course.
Name one. The personnel of deputies and ministers that do nothing at all.
Why should a minister have 15 consultants?
You are talking about 100-200 people.
In order to persuade people about your intentions not to support the state or the growth of the public sector,
you have to name a few sectors that have to be banned or limited.
I am not going to talk about firing people tonight, Mr. Theodorakis.
Not because I don’t know that many of them have gained their positions through suspicious means.
And they serve to nothing nowadays. I believe that before reaching a decision about
sending a person in unemployment,
we should exhaust all efforts to rationalize the public sector and make it function more effectively.
Even with transitions.
Of course there are some sectors that need to shrink or some others that are not necessary.
But this is not the case now.
What is actually happening is a horizontal knife that destroys everything.
I insist on that because when I listen to you sometimes, I wonder whether you liked the state of the past.
Is it a solution to go back to 2009?
You admit that there is a pathogenesis.
Undoubtedly. You admit that we need reforms.
We need a re-establishment of the state.
You see that some great words have been greatly misjudged. You are right.
Modernization, re-establishment. Even reform.
We are not going to defend this state that has been created by the two parties of authority.
Those who wanted to make the younger people hostages
of employment contracts in order to gain votes. Creating a client state, customer relationships
and soft corruption to keep everyone happy.
That is why we are talking about new forms of financial organization for the public and private sector. It is possible.
But I am asking you about reforms.
Your suggestions will be judged based on our problems.
Will you proceed to reforms?
Or do you support the glories of the past? We are the first to say that
we don’t want to go back to 2008.
How will you prevent that?
You have supported almost every strike that took place.
Is there a necessary reform for the existing state? Do we need to change it?
Of course, we need to change it.
But first we have to stop the economic collapse.
Or else, nothing will stand. Why didn't you support the opening of the professions?
Is it something that has to happen?
But this is not an opening. This means limiting it in just a few working hands.
They use nice words and expressions, but if we review the modifications in each social category,
they result in the accumulation of wealth in just a limited number of people. This is the memorandum.
One other option would be limiting the expenses in the health system.
Doctors have reacted to the control medicine expenses.
Which part do you support? Either you support the control of the medicine expenses or not.
The control of medicine expenses is necessary.
But public hospitals can’t have a balanced budget.
They just can’t.
Public health is a gift that must be offered to everyone. It is not possible to save only those who have money.
But we cannot have the orthopedic equipment of a country of 70 million.
We don’t approve any of these.
IKA has tons of unused materials in its storehouses.
We had 700 blind people in Zante.
The biggest percentage of blind people in the world.
We won’t be defending such a state that reflects its creators.
But I see no conflicts. Supporting the murderer is not a conflict.
I am asking for Tsipras’ suggestion of reform.
The left parties’ suggestion of reform. Regardless the mistakes of your political enemies that make your percentage rise,
only a suggestion of reform can keep you at the top.
You are right.
I must admit that I don’t have a magic way to change all bad things.
Because many of what you say have to do with the mentalities that have been developed for years.
For example, if there was a healthy cooperative movement in the agricultural production sector,
then the farmer wouldn’t be suffering from the cartels.
But the cooperative movement itself was corrupted and farmers are not protected by anyone.
All the funds were made limos. Many of them.
Working or not, they asked for the same money. They had the mentality of
not working but still demanded to be financed.
They were in the coffee shop all day long; they voted for PASOK and received the financing.
This has to change.
Will you confront the unions? Or all the unions are right?
Only law protects the workers’ rights. This is another party’s slogan.
Only law protects the workers’ rights. And not only the workers.
Other professions too. What do you mean by unions?
Many people believe that a corrupted political system creates corrupted syndicalists or journalists.
We have to dig a little further.
Ι agree, but we mainly confront the union of bankers
or the Greek industrialists association that mainly consists of inactive members.
Tell me how many people work for the president of SEV. This is where we have to be severe.
The next question is asked by Kostas.
Many others have also visited our platform and have addressed several questions to you.
It is about the GENOP/PPC issue. Have you stated your opinion on that?
What do you think about the results of the control?
We have expressed our position on the matter at an early stage.
As a matter of fact we deleted a member of SYRIZA
who had participated in this team of syndicalists before the scandal was disclosed.
The trips. The trips and all that.
All these issues have greatly affected the movement of syndicalists in a period
when working people needed to feel their support.
Of course, when one group is corrupted it doesn’t mean that everyone else in the same sector is.
All generalizations are wrong.
The political left in France is no longer in a dilemma.
After the first round, people have decided to vote for Francois, isn’t that right?
Yes If you supported the political left in France…
We are talking about a different culture and tradition.
If you supported the political left in France, you would vote for the socialists’ party nominee.
With no illusions.
In Greece, you would never accept such a thing.
You can’t compare these two. Why?
Because the political system in France is completely different.
Let’s take for example the two rounds procedure in the elections.
They have a different culture. Don’t tempt me. If we had a second round here too
and if Samaras and Venizelos were your only options for the second round, would you go for Venizelos?
No, I wouldn’t choose Venizelos. Because Holland has nothing to do with Venizelos.
What would you choose? White dog or black dog? Holland has nothing to do with Venizelos.
His suggestions have nothing to do with what Venizelos has mentioned.
Before the elections all socialists are good. Noone can guarantee that he will implement all these
measures. That’s why I said with no illusions.
I gave an interview together with my friend Jean-Luc Melenchon when I visited France before the elections.
I said that the French people have to support Jean-Luc because
Holland sounds nice but our own Papandreou did so too. And after the elections he acted differently.
Jean-Luc said that after the elections they we also have a “Hollandreou” instead of Holland.
I have 10 questions for you. These are the most popular questions
asked by our platform’s visitors.
I need brief answers. One word?
One sentence.
This is the game.
Ritsa from Petralona asks, “You have said that people who govern our country are not that Greek.
Whom were you referring to?”
I said that when all Europeans used the slogan
“We are all Greeks” in their demonstrations. They didn’t all demonstrate.
Thousands of them did. And don’t interrupt me because I won’t be able to answer in one sentence.
That slogan didn’t refer to the greek identity but the class identity.
So what I said was that while Europe realizes there is a class interest,
the people who govern us, and are Greek, don’t realize that.
It wasn’t an opening towards Kamenos. Was it? No, we don’t share the same opinions.
Should we open the borders to let the immigrants go? How many immigrants can a society take? asks Kostas.
There is no such measure.
Isn’t there? No, there isn’t.
How many can a society integrate? Can a village of 100 inhabitants take another 100?
Only with a development plan, a quality of life or an income. How many immigrants has the USA accepted?
In quite some time. In quite some time.
That is why I am saying that there is no quantitative measure. Only a qualitative one.
It is obvious that in a Greek society where unemployment, abandonment and poverty
prevail any additional misery creates an explosive atmosphere.
So a realistic solution would be the following.
When people enter the country and have no intention of staying here,
in a poor and problematic country, people who wish to go to France, Germany e.tc,
we have to make a different agreement with these countries and provide them with their travel documents.
This would not solve the entire problem but at least decompress this dramatic situation.
Do you think that those who voted for the memorandum have penal responsibilities?
And if they do, would you convict them as Prime Minister? asks Thodoris.
I believe that there are many political responsibilities that need to be addressed.
Assessing criminal responsibilities is the job of the Justice Department.
You are not answering the question. Does Papandreou have penal responsibilities?
I cannot say that with certainty. And it is not my job to do so.
I believe that Papandreou has huge historic and political responsibilities for his actions.
People have already addressed these responsibilities to him and PASOK will bear the consequences
in the upcoming elections.The assessment of criminal responsibilities
is not the job of politicians.
I don’t agree with the majority of the parliament making decisions about fellow deputies.
If we trust justice, then we should let it act. If we don’t, we should abolish it.
Dimitris asks,
in 2010 we had a primary deficit of 24 billion, apart from the loan’s interests.
Where can we save money from to pay this huge amount without taking a loan?
We have never said that we have to stop borrowing.
What we said was that we need to look for alternative sources of borrowing when the existing is not profitable.
Maybe we should make alliances with the countries of the south. Change our geopolitical orientation.
Reestablish the relationship with Russia that was frozen by Papandreou.
When Christofias borrowed 2 billion Euros, it didn’t even cross our minds to look for alternative sources of borrowing.
But we needed 20 billion Euros.
In January 2010, Giorgos Papakonstantinou asked for five, they offered him twenty-five and he finally settled at seven.
If he had taken 20 out of the 25, we would have stayed for a long time outside the IMF, outside TROIKA.
Greece had a considerable debt crisis which was manageable.
The choices that Papakonstantinou and Papandreou have made transformed a considerable but manageable debt to
a national tragedy. When Stross Kan revealed that Papandreou had appealed to the IMF before the elections,
he accused the corrupted Greeks or used expressions like “we are a Titanic and we are collapsing”.
I don’t want to judge their intentions. Maybe stupidity is the excuse for these choices.
I am no judge. But the choices were destructive. But for what other reasons would he do it?
Isn’t glory and votes what a politician wants to gain from his country?
Maybe he thought that this was our only way out. I won’t judge his intentions.
I am the last person to accuse him. As a matter of fact, I have never said and will never say anything about
Goudi and other staff. But responsibilities have to be addressed.
Stupidity should not be an excuse for political leaders and prime ministers.
Stamatis wants to ask a less friendly question. Do you have any professionnal experience or you are a professional in politics?
Not a long one. I have a decade of professional experience.
Since my graduation. A decade?
Yes, I am not 20 years old.
I am 38. I am the president of SYRIZA for the last 4 years. Weren’t you a professional member before that?
No, I always worked. You were not a professional member?
When I graduated from the university in 2000,
I was working and doing at the same time my master in the NTUA.
I was a freelance engineer for 8 years. From 2000 until 2008, when I became the president of SYRIZA.
Because the two occupations couldn’t be combined.
Until Alavanos discovered you? Alavanos already knew me for many years.
Is the violence a part of history, asks Klearchos from Zografou.
Do you think that violence can be a part of a political protest?
It depends on what we mean by violence.
We need to define the limits in a civilized society. We have to realize that violence is not only the expression of disapproval.
You mean throwing yogurts. Yelling in sports fields. This is violence.
But firing someone is even greater violence.
When 2,000 employees are left unemployed after a company is closed down.
What about throwing yoghurts? asks Kostas from Keratsini.
I don’t agree but it has been a form of activism in Europe for decades.
Both right and left politicians have been victims of such behaviors. Cakes, yoghurts.
I don’t agree because you are risking of making the abuser a victim. You make him more sympathetic.
Did you sympathise with Dalaras?
Dalaras faced the incident with dignity. Regardless of people’s feelings towards him.
He wasn’t affected by this incident.
People should have found a smarter way to express their disapproval to his action.
Therefore you accept disapproval in public.
When a politician passes by and people are yelling at him.
I just don't understand the limits of that.
People are suffering from reductions in their salaries and pensions. This is a lie.
They have been kept hostages to their deputies’ offices. They need to find a way to express their anger.
Especially when we live in a country of total impunity. All these people know that no politician will ever be persecuted.
One cannot demand this society to be a protected zone. It is not possible.
But which is the limit? I repeat that the limit is violence.
This is a hypocrisy of the political system. And it is the journalists’ fault as well.
For two years you had driven us crazy with your big newspaper titles. Violence and SYRIZA.
The political system that was endangered by the violent left.
Accusing us of cooperating with the unions and blocking the streets of Athens.
There was not one article about the Golden Dawn.
And we will have them inside the parliament.The fans of svastica.
All this time, SYRIZA was the problem.
Some other journalists said that it was the fault of Tsipras and Michaloliakos. As if we were the same thing.
Did you pay for the extra property tax? asks Sophia from Petralona.
No, I didn’t. Of course, I rent a house.
But I didn’t pay for it in a small property I have inherited.
Αs I have already said, I didn’t pay it because it would be a hypocrisy to support those who couldn't pay for it
and let them go to prison alone.
Tell them that I would get away with since I had the money to pay. For symbolic reasons.
Do you pay at the toll stations? asks Jacob from Kapandriti.
Yes, I do.
I couldn’t do otherwise since penalties were imposed after the expansion of the movement.
Tolls is an issue that has to be reviewed in different terms.
The movement did his part. The movement “I don’t pay”?
It was a very important movement.
It has indicated a great problem. The contractors get a very small payment for some public works
that cost 3 or 4 times more than similar ones in Europe.
They haven’t completed them yet but demand a fee.
And there are no alternative roads to use in case one doesn’t want to pay.
Is it true that you will become a father for the second time?
The first time is difficult. The second is much easier.
The hardest part for me and the economy comes after the elections.
How long after? In the summer? At the end of June.
Boy or girl? Another boy.
You haven’t told me what the secret is. To have a girl.
You are going to make a small basketball team of Panathinaikos. Right?
I hope so. If I don’t succeed in politics, then football is my only other option. Or else I will be a total failure as a father.