Kyriakos Mitsotakis may desire a New Democracy controlled entirely by the Maximos Mansion, with executives who applaud, MPs who remain silent, and voters who are simply called upon to ratify government decisions. The reality, however, is that this culture is foreign to the base of the party. What bothers traditional ND voters most is that it was not founded to become the personal political fiefdom of any prime minister, and no leader can treat the historical faction as his property. With visits either to Kalamata or to Serres, where K. Ax. Karamanlis was absent, this feeling does not change, despite the communication tricks set up by Maximos Mansion.
Identity crisis
This is why the conflict with Antonis Samaras is not an ordinary intraparty disagreement. It is the expression of a deeper identity crisis, which reveals how far the current government has drifted from the political and social roots of New Democracy. The former prime minister does not simply question individual government choices. He challenges overall the direction imposed by Kyriakos Mitsotakis on a party that risks losing, as he points out, its soul. It is no coincidence that the former prime minister, in yet another intervention, this time regarding energy, hits Mitsotakis in his soft underbelly, identifying his policy with neoliberalism and with serving the few rather than the many. Something that comes into conflict with the founding declaration of Karamanlism.
Maximos on the rocks
The Maximos Mansion attempts to portray Samaras as a politician who has been cut off from current reality. However, the question returns with even greater intensity to the prime minister himself: Who ultimately drifted away from New Democracy? The one who defends its political references or the one who turned the faction into a heterogeneous power scheme, where traditional right-wing voters often no longer recognize the positions that brought them to the ballot box nor the figures in the government's window, including Chrischoidis, Floridis, Loverdos, Livanios, and Theocharis. Samaras' phrase "This is not this faction, Mr. Mitsotakis. This is the Mitsotakis party" is not a simple jab. It is a political accusation with heavy content for the space of ND. And the more the Maximos Mansion tries to bypass it, the more the problem stands out. Because a faction cannot change its ideological physiognomy with the exclusive criterion of the personal political ambitions of its current leader.
Neoliberal economy
In the economy, the picture is equally problematic. The government celebrates indices and numbers while thousands of households are choking under the weight of high prices. Citizens see their salary evaporate before the end of the month, prices remaining unbearable, and daily life becoming increasingly difficult. The communication storefront of development cannot hide the social reality. And the neoliberal obsession with an economic policy that does not adequately relieve households does not constitute success, but a political choice with a specific social cost. Antonis Samaras pointed this out yesterday as well when referring to energy issues. Even more concerning is the picture regarding national issues. Turkey continues to project its revisionist claims, the Turkey-Libya memorandum remains a serious challenge to Greek interests, and the country needs determination, strategy, and clear answers. It does not need a foreign policy that risks being perceived as a continuous pursuit of a good climate with Ankara. National dignity is neither a communication tool nor a negotiating card for photos and diplomatic handshakes.
Karamanlis interventions
The worst part for Kyriakos Mitsotakis is that the questioning does not come exclusively from Samaras. The interventions of Costas Karamanlis, even if with a different style, also record serious concerns about the course of the country and the faction. When two former prime ministers feel the need to constantly point out problems, the issue cannot simply be their personal dispositions. It is government policy itself. The possibility of the creation of a new party by Samaras causes nervousness in Maximos precisely because there is a political audience that feels it is no longer represented by the current New Democracy. And this dissatisfaction cannot be addressed with attacks, derogatory comments, or communication games. The real political question is not whether Samaras will form a party. It is whether Mitsotakis has already led New Democracy so far from its roots that a part of its traditional base is now looking elsewhere for a political home. And this is not Samaras' problem. It is the mirror of the Mitsotakis governance itself.
O Peiraiarchis
www.bankingnews.gr
Readers’ Comments