On Sunday, February 5, in Kathimerini, journalist Stavros Papantoniou published an extremely interesting article based on qualitative data from surveys conducted in recent days and reaching the employees of Maximos Palace. As he notes in great detail, more than two million voters do not accept the ideological and political intersections of “Right-Center-Left” and therefore, if they go to the ballot box, they will not choose on their basis. What are the criteria according to which this electoral body will be placed in the existing party system?

The truth is that in public debate, the historical end of post-colonialism, and thus the need to reinterpret the political agenda, was discussed many times long before April 2010. But the country’s entry into the era of memorandums caused a violent reflection of our political system, considering it necessary to revise our political ideals. On this basis, a new political dividing line was created, which permeated all citizens in order to finally form new beliefs and identities, new collective patterns of behavior. The ideological-political split “right-left”, the development of the dichotomous axis “ethnists-non-ethnists” of the post-war period, made up the entire image of the party apparatus and even adopted a polarizing two-party system. measurement in the 90s, now clearly did not fit into the new reality.

Therefore, the signing of the first Memorandum in May 2010 was a turning point in the history of the country. For the first time, a key ideological and partisan division occurred in both the realm of the right and the left, with their position in the Memorandum as a starting point. A new dividing section “Memorandum-anti-memorandum” was created. This reflected the multifaceted crisis of the country’s political system, changed the dichotomous logic that had been in effect until then, and rearranged the party axes. From now on, political and social cleansing will be a vital stake for the electoral choice of voters. However, after the 2015 election campaign, it became clear that the new bipolar scheme was doomed. Angry and indignant, who gathered in the squares to create a broad front of resistance to the neoliberal world establishment, they very quickly faced decisions and signatures that certainly did not correspond to the unenslaved mentality of a historically proud people. That’s how quickly and ingloriously ended this bipolar schismatic scheme.

Since all governments have signed the demands of the memorandum, it has naturally become necessary to change the position of citizens in the new political environment, which will be filled with new axes in accordance with the requirements of the modern era. Thus, the reluctance of the two million voters identified by the polls to join the ideological divisions of ancient times is quite understandable. The departure of a large electorate from a political concept that has ceased to shape party identity for more than a decade should not come as a surprise. The past has been scrutinized, interpreted, left behind by progressivism on the left and the meager right, as well as the duplicitous confrontation between anti-memorandist patriots and corrupt Germanocholii. Now there is a need for a new narrative. It is the construction of this narrative and its corresponding investment that will determine the choice of voters in the near future.

Kyriakos Mitsotakis has already proven that he is not limited to stereotypical formations of the right or left of the political spectrum, especially since he does not rule in historically outdated terms. The election call for the next government is important in order to exude a new sense of historicity and forge a new collective identity, social and political. This story, this program, composed and sustained, will shed light on the signifier of the new era. He will not need to move or stimulate emotionally, but only to confirm that he has politically accepted the modern historical stake.

*Konstantina D. Karakosta, PhD in New Greek History, APTh. – Member of the New Democracy Political Committee