People everywhere want a new relationship with power -- more autonomy and more respect. This reflects our current era, in which new knowledge, ideas and possibilities have made our identities richer, more fluid and less subject to fate. At the same time, the information society and globalization have made ours a more insecure world, where we experience risks that politics-as-usual has been unable to address.
As the leader of a political party, the central idea for me nowadays is to empower individuals. A traditional party leader says to his followers, "You can trust me." I think the future for progressive politics lies in leaders trusting citizens. It's a new kind of relationship.
We in the Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK), the party that I lead, have started to think through what we want out of politics in a practical sense and how this can be delivered in a way that respects people's lives. We're making changes at the top in order to open up our party to greater participation. We need to highlight, not hide, different views, and see our parties less as "war headquarters" and more as biodiverse think tanks or workshops.
People can easily become lost in today's ocean of information. They will always be looking for a lighthouse, or faros as we say in Greek. But what are these lighthouses? In an information society they will be those who are trusted to be able to help interpret or analyze what is happening.
So I believe that the future for political parties is to develop a culture of debate, dialogue and critical understanding of issues, where people can help set a nation's priorities and are not simply told by experts or their leaders what is right and wrong for them.
Big issues, such as migration, narcotics and the environment, no longer fall within a traditional Left-Right framework. For example, people may see an inevitable tradeoff between tough environmental standards and jobs. But these same people often want both. It is no longer just one side against the other. The nature of capitalist growth requires us to take a more holistic view and work out how we can achieve sustainable development.
Of course, bringing more democracy into our daily lives cannot mean perpetual debate without actually making decisions. Rather, it should mean that certain principles of respect, consultation and deliberation become part of everyday life.
There is, by contrast, a traditional style of leadership that almost encourages fear and insecurity, so that a savior can come along and say, "I am the one who will solve this."
US President George W. Bush projects this style very openly. I opposed the Bush administration's policy on Iraq because this type of foreign policy is associated with a form of power -- resurgent, I believe, in conservative parties around the world -- that projects leadership as command.
I know this mindset well. When I was first elected as a member of parliament in 1981, people said, "Now George, you've got to bang the table." People would say you look weak if you're not cursing the opposition and driving around in a big black car wearing a tie. Above all, to be "strong," you're supposed to be giving orders.
I said to myself, "I'm going to have to go about things in a more democratic way."
I realized that I would have to fight to communicate what I wanted to achieve. There was a whole political culture that had to change.
Part of my thinking concerns personal style, but also something deeper: the relationship between professional politicians and voters. Obviously, there is a point where a leader must commit to a decision. But one can do this in ways that are not violent and aggressive by defending the principles of that new relationship. Power by itself has no principles.
Our societies and citizens need more freedom if we are to build a more peaceful, prosperous, and secure world. Consider the example of Greek-Turkish relations, which had hardened under the compressed weight of "establishment" views that were long entrenched in both countries. Only a new approach could break the mold of conventional wisdom.
Quite often in confrontational situations, people and politicians create a culture of the zero-sum game, which results in authoritarian and militaristic leadership. We in the former PASOK government instead helped create a more positive framework by declaring our commitment to work for consensus, thereby creating the basis for trust and mutual understanding.
Political parties everywhere must now become an agent for similar change. Nowadays, the framework of power itself -- the old-fashioned party hierarchy that takes command of the state or municipality -- is a kind of abuse. It takes power away from people in their own names, but gives them fear rather than confidence.
Not surprisingly, my party is now seeking to return to power in the next election. But we're also looking deeper and further ahead. We will not be returned to government unless we offer a better kind of democracy in the long term. In this endeavor, we hope to set an example to the world.
George A. Papandreou, a former Greek foreign minister, is president of the Panhellenic Socialist Movement.
Copyright: Project Syndicate/OpenDemocracy
The bird flu outbreak at US dairy farms keeps finding alarming new ways to surprise scientists. Last week, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) confirmed that H5N1 is spreading not just from birds to herds, but among cows. Meanwhile, media reports say that an unknown number of cows are asymptomatic. Although the risk to humans is still low, it is clear that far more work needs to be done to get a handle on the reach of the virus and how it is being transmitted. That would require the USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to get
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
On April 11, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida delivered a speech at a joint meeting of the US Congress in Washington, in which he said that “China’s current external stance and military actions present an unprecedented and the greatest strategic challenge … to the peace and stability of the international community.” Kishida emphasized Japan’s role as “the US’ closest ally.” “The international order that the US worked for generations to build is facing new challenges,” Kishida said. “I understand it is a heavy burden to carry such hopes on your shoulders,” he said. “Japan is already standing shoulder to shoulder
Former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) used to push for reforms to protect Taiwan by adopting the “three noes” policy as well as “Taiwanization.” Later, then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) wished to save the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) by pushing for the party’s “localization,” hoping to compete with homegrown political parties as a pro-Taiwan KMT. However, the present-day members of the KMT do not know what they are talking about, and do not heed the two former presidents’ words, so the party has suffered a third consecutive defeat in the January presidential election. Soon after gaining power with the help of the KMT’s