What if we hadn’t suffered from their latest train wreck Pace. What if we didn’t sulk at the unfair loss of so many, especially young people. Media coverage of the event was admittedly exemplary. If we exclude the crocodile tears of some prominent TV presenters, then the darkest sides of this case were generally covered. And the last citizen realized the degree of responsibility of this accident. But also their historical depth.

The necessary marches and demonstrations took place in the streets. Now, in a democracy, it is difficult to understand what place demonstrations and marches have. All those who participated in these mass events, which usually end up in taverns and bars, if instead of shouting they gathered to develop positions and proposals on a specific issue and present them in an institutional manner to the state, this would certainly be more effective. . It makes sense to hold mass demonstrations during periods of the destruction of democracy, when then the institutions do not work. Then I was a small child, but I think that during the period of, for example, a seven-year dictatorship, there will be constant demonstrations. Or was it only done in safe lands abroad?

In any case, in the conditions of manifestations, the necessary destruction will be done by young people, mainly. Certainly not in order to “mourn”, as they say, the missing. But to “mourn” their difficult childhood years, the years of their emotional rejection. Years that some unconscious adults were sure to offer them.

But if we really want these tears not to go to waste, if we want this country to stop erecting monuments to our dead, whether they died from deception or due to the negligent actions and omissions of responsible persons, then we need to get to the bottom of the problem. Over time, determine what is really wrong and offer the right solution. Because even if the issue of railway safety is resolved, with mathematical precision there will be a problem in some other area of ​​our social life.

As in all such cases, so in the case of the recent accident in Tempe, the problem lies mainly in one term: “Rusfeti”. Or more modern “service”.

Corruption, derived from the Turkish word rüşvet, meaning bribery, refers to the practice of unfairly giving benefits to some individuals at the expense of others in order to purchase services. Its classic form is the “selling” of votes to politicians who intend to run in elections for a big or small exchange. Related colloquial terms are middle, fork, edge, or tooth, which refer to a person capable of rendering a service.

However, this practice violates the rules of equality, meritocracy and impartiality contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This is inconsistent and unconstitutional according to the definitions of paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 4 of the Constitution, which impose equality, meritocracy and impartiality: “Greek men are equal before the law”, “Greek men and women have equal rights and duties”.

The only visible and immediately effective way to fight corruption in our country, in which we took first place in all of Europe, is the abolition of the preferential cross in national and European elections.

Over time, it has been proven that the crossover of preference leads to all sorts of dependencies, especially to many and various powerful centers of power. On the agenda – underground financial financing and transactions with “black political money”.

But in the socio-political area, the consequences of preferential crossing are extremely negative. Preference is given to financially strong candidates, as well as candidates funded by strong economic centers. Close russfetological ties are created with the electorate or with those who control small or large sections of the electorate. This significantly reduces their independence of opinion and at the same time discourages important figures in the country from engaging in politics. This, however, lowers the quality of our political cadres and slows down the country’s progress.

In the words of an old prominent Greek politician, the preferential cross “decisively undermines the institution of party power and distorts the functioning of the democratic state.”

Therefore, we need a new generation of politicians. Honest, qualified, knowledgeable and experienced. The preferential cross, in general, cannot provide us with such politicians.

If this important institutional change is not implemented immediately, we may also see fishermen running our trains. And again tears and again monuments.