“The center will give an advantage and, ultimately, victory in the elections,” sociologists insist, political scientists agree and plan parties. This conclusion follows from our history.

The center joined with the right after the war to ensure the country’s Western orientation, joined with the left in the 1960s to support democracy. In our evolutionary progress within the EU. as in other countries, management has moved towards the center. An osmosis has been achieved between the liberal economy and the welfare state, and we have defeated a democracy that has endured even during the critical period of crisis and referendum.

So we slowly but surely moved from the dilemma of “Left or Right” to the political reality of “Both Left and Right.” In other words, the assimilation of elements of both major political currents, which social democracy has carried out with great success in previous eras.

In politics, we know that “or” is a useful tool because it poses dilemmas that cause controversy, draws dividing lines, names enemies and absolute truths. “Us or them”, “patriots or traitors”, “democrats or fascists”. However, a creative and effective choice is “KAI”, which, however, requires synthesis, reflection and conflict with the audience of white and black.

The dialectical and creative “KAI” defines the people of the Center. In our very recent history of the last 15 years, it was the people from the Center who self-organized in the Movement “We remain Europe”, fighting for the European orientation of the country, they rallied into the so-called. a front against SYRIZA based on correct speech and realistic patriotism. However, we would be unfair to these citizens if we explained their political choice only by the fear of repeating what was done in the country during the period of SYRIZA.

It is also erroneous to believe that the Center consists of nondescript people who do not want fuss and usually settle for the golden mean. On the contrary, we have seen that these citizens are the very ones who support great decisions and policies against the dogmatic public and guilds, support historical reforms, recognize and respect political opponents.

It is clear that today the Center has expanded enormously and is a space that cannot be taken for granted and that does not exchange or deposit its votes. It casts its vote and evaluates, approves, judges and makes decisions based on the big stakes of the country. The modern Center of 2023 turned out to be a living and developing social majority and is far from the Center of the distant past of anti-right ideology or fear of the left. So it is extremely important how the “political tribe” of the Center will behave in these elections.

It is the townspeople close to the Center who support important decisions against the dogmatic public and guilds.

Today, after many crises and continued economic and national instability, the political system is moving away from the majority’s demand for progress and security. The government has offended and disappointed a significant portion of the centrist voters with the latest crisis of institutions, as well as meritocracy. But the biggest problem is that the political deficit of the official opposition is presented as a huge gap in the proposal for alternative governance of the country.

Our society cannot continue to live with protest movements. We need applied solutions to complex problems. As long as the opposition’s only tool is the deterioration of power and the complete absence of restraint and persuasiveness of speech, it can only rally the exhausted part of the anti-right center. There are three rates, depending on which the Center’s vote will move:

Firstly, this is a national issue: Turkey operates with its imaginary claims, as if international law, treaties and agreements do not exist. Threats are growing every day, and the neighboring country is aggressively trying to balance between West and East. In a period of major external threats, domestic policy should act primarily in the interests of national security. Extreme polarization, leaving the parliament as an extreme anti-parliamentary position risk again in our history becoming the causes of economic and political collapse in a geopolitical environment of great risks. The position and policy of the parties on the national question as a condition for the country’s survival is decisive.

The second big question concerns development, the production of national wealth, its fair redistribution. In an extremely generous or wasteful horizontal state benefit policy, the position of the opposition is “give more”. As for 21st century options, namely digital transformation and climate change, her position is controversial: from wind turbines and lignite to electronic elections and digital tools.

The third stake is political stability. The citizens of the Center are well aware of what is meant by anarchy, the weakening of the economy from election to election, internal anarchy and external obsolescence.

In the face of national, economic and democratic deficits and democratically bankrupt official opposition, this will be an opportunity for a third party, PASOK-KINAL, to emphasize its national identity, speak about development in a completely new language, identify with priorities. new era, and above all to ensure the governance of the country.

The stakes are clear, the side that answers them will be in the center of events, attracting the Center to itself.

Ms. Anna Diamantopoulou is President of the Network, President of the EU Commission. on the future of the welfare state, pr. Commissioner of the EU, etc. Minister.