Church, State, and Hellenism

The chapter examines the formation of a Greek national Church and its role in the political life of the country. The emergence of an independent (autocephalous) Orthodox Church in the kingdom of Greece is considered in connection with the issue of autocephaly in canon law and the debates it provoked. It is pointed out that Greek autocephaly set a precedent for the subsequent emergence of other autocephalous churches in the Orthodox communion as part of the nation- and state-building projects of the respective national societies. The multiplicity of ecclesiastical jurisdictions in the Greek state are discussed as a record bearing the traces of the unification and national integration of Greece. Penultimately, the role of the Orthodox Church of Greece as national Church and the interplay of ecclesiastical and secular politics is examined. The close connection of Church and politics in Greek society is illustrated by pointing out that periods of political instability and subversion of constitutional government in twentieth-century Greece have provoked ‘archiepiscopal questions’ in ecclesiastical life. Lastly, the main issues in Church–State relations in post-1974 Greece are surveyed and appraised.

Constantine Karamanlis

This chapter discusses the impact of Constantinos Karamanlis on Greek politics. Karamanlis, leader of the Greek Right, served as prime minister for fourteen years (1955–63 and 1974–80), and as president of the republic for ten (1980–5 and 1990–5). A major (and, at times, dominant) figure from the mid-1950s until the mid-1990s, he was pivotal in the attainment of economic development and the founding of an established democracy in 1974–75, as well as Greece’s association with the EEC (1961) and its eventual succession (1979–81). The chapter discusses his long political career, his popular support base and the evolution of the Greek Right from the early 1950s until the late 1970s. It also evaluates Karamanlis’ political methodology: it disputes the assumptions of older bibliography which focused on his personal impact only, and puts forward the more contemporary thesis that Karamanlis was the leader of a team that expressed a wider ideological trend and the need to adjust to Western governance in the post-war era. Last but not least, Karamanlis’ legacies are discussed, mostly on the European identity of the country; arguably, this legacy allowed the Greek Right to survive the grave economic and social crisis of the 2010s.

Pensions in the Greek Political Economy

This chapter examines pensions as a factor fuelling Greece’s crisis, as a consideration shaping its bailouts, and as a locus for future unease. The problem was not the absence of reform—there were repeated ineffectual changes before 2010. Nor was it due to structural faults—the system’s building blocks are familiar. A toxic mixture of narratives, between social insurance, government, and social pensions, encouraged fragmentation, transforming sectional privileges into future liabilities; pensions became a key instrument of clientelistic politics. During the crisis a new player, the Troika, reversed ‘Words without Action’ into ‘Action without Words’. The pension landscape after 2018 is characterized by a new system and a recalibration of pensions to restrain their level. Two-tier pensions are provided by a single entity, financed by uniform contributions, with high retirement ages for new retirees. The attempt to protect those close to retirement backfired and necessitated deep cuts in pensions-in-payment. When these were ruled unconstitutional, their place was taken by retroactive application of new system rules to all pensioners in 2016. Despite deep parametric changes, Greece chose institutional continuity over systemic change—opting for a monolithic state-run pay-as-you-go defined benefit pension system, reminiscent of the 1960s. The evolving system is called to overcome the legacy of broken promises, must prove politically durable but also conducive to growth. The last word on pensions may not have been written.

The Developmental Trajectory of the Greek State

Greece’s historical development gives credence to two competing narratives. The first identifies Greece as a small and vulnerable nation, one marked by crises and failure. The second narrative acknowledges the success of nation-building—indeed, the metamorphosis of Greece—having come through exceptional challenges. To reconcile these two narratives, I draw upon neo-Marxist political economy—which stresses its ‘semi-peripheral’ position in the global economy—and build on recent studies that focus more on the domestic institutional constraints on development. I disaggregate Modern Greek history into seven, intertwined, political and economic ‘boom, bust, and bailout’ cycles. Greece is an ‘early late modernizer’, to borrow Seymour Martin Lipset’s formulation. As one of the early ‘new nations’ on the European stage, Greece attempted a number of highly visible and risky modernization leaps intended to reduce the gap that separated it from the more advanced states of the continent. Predictably, these leaps and their failures attracted considerable global attention, way out of proportion to the country’s size, resources, or strategic importance. They did so due to the perception that its modernization effort was deeply intertwined with processes of much broader historical and global significance; the stakes were high, hence the need for some sort of intervention. That these foreign interventions ultimately turned out to be favourable to Greece should not detract from the fact that they were often perceived negatively in Greece. The recent debt crisis is part of a similar pattern and a Greek recovery would validate this interpretation.

The Socialists

This chapter deals with the political trajectory of the Greek socialist party PASOK, from its foundation in 1974 until its electoral demise during and after the sovereign debt economic crisis of the 2009–15 period. The analysis of the Greek socialists starts with a brief discussion of the manner in which PASOK was founded, its organizational and ideological features, its electoral base and the new elements it brought into Greek politics. It continues with the presentation of the party’s performance in power during the 1980s and the 1990s. Next, follows a discussion of the period 2004–09 when PASOK was in opposition, and the management of the economic crisis during the period 2009–12 when the party was again in power. Finally, the role of populism in Greek politics is discussed in relation to the current problems PASOK is facing in an era of economic crisis.

The Conservatives

The chapter provides a presentation of the creation and development of the New Democracy party (ND, Νέα Δημοκρατία) in Greece, after the restoration of democracy, in 1974. Smooth transition and the establishment of a truly democratic regime with all political parties able to contest on equal grounds, the drafting and adoption of a genuinely democratic Constitution in 1975, the disentanglement of the Conservatives, under Karamanlis guidance from the monarchy, as well as the accession of Greece into the European Union in 1981, should be considered as some of the party’s most important achievements. On the other hand, the party’s failure to dissociate itself from the state and the spoils system, persisting personalistic antagonisms, its limited progress as regards its organizational development, its vagueness concerning its ideological identity, and the lack of a concrete plan concerning the country’s future course are some of its most serious and enduring weaknesses.

The Parliament

The chapter focuses on the Greek parliamentary system in a comparative perspective from a constitutional and political viewpoint. Main concerns are the constitutional doctrine of checks and balances, the level of parliamentary accountability and scrutiny, and the quality of the legislative process. The first section examines the Hellenic parliament within the constitutional architecture. Two key features are identified: the wide privilege and immunities enjoyed by the parliament, both as a constitutional agency and individually by parliamentarians; and the interpolarity of the parliament vis-à-vis the executive, the president of the republic, the judiciary, and international organizations. The second section examines parliament within political practice. Three key characteristics are identified thereof: majoritarian and divisive parliamentarism, clientelism and nepotism, and imbalanced parliamentarism. The chapter concludes that parliamentarism in Greece deteriorated, especially during the financial crisis, thus producing legal confusion and polynomy, a high level of party discipline and extreme accumulation of power to the executive, a very limited level of accountability and meritocracy, and the rise of extremist and populist parties in parliament.

Greek Constitutionalism and Patterns of Government

The holding of general elections at regular intervals, universal suffrage, and parliamentary government were fundamental characteristics of modern Greek constitutionalism as early as the last third of the nineteenth century. These characteristics are so deeply ingrained in the country’s cultural traditions that they form an integral part of its identity. In that sense, Greek constitutionalism lies behind the failure of the extreme political forces to attract mass support throughout the twentieth century, as was and continues to be the case in many other European countries. At the same time, though, by being deeply divisive and conflictual, Greek constitutionalism has been obstructing real reforms in state organization and action, in crucial fields which include, among other sectors, public administration, education, social security, and health care. Moreover, through disastrous government spending, with the sole aim of winning the next election, extreme party polarization led to an unprecedented debt crisis that brought the country to the verge of bankruptcy in 2010. That being said, the fundamental difficulty in carrying out long-awaited reforms lies in overcoming conflictual partisanship, without, however, killing the zest that still attracts large portions of the electorate to mainstream politics.

The Politics of Europeanization

‘Europe’, ‘Europeans’, and ‘Europeanness’ have been crucial themes in the history of modern Greece, from the creation of the new state in 1832 to the sovereign debt crisis of 2010. As elsewhere, these notions have served as référentiels in questions of national identity, progress, capability, legitimation and strategic interest. In the Greek case, the European dimension to these questions has been felt acutely. This chapter considers Greece’s political development in the context of its membership of the European Union, assessing the extent to which the latter has prompted domestic reform. A general theme that emerges from the scholarly literature in this area is of Greece’s uneven adaptation across different sectors, a feature that provokes interesting research contrasts, but also challenges of interpretation. To understand how EU pressures for adaptation have been received domestically, the chapter opens with a discussion of the changing images and meanings of ‘Europe’ in Greece. This is followed by an assessment of the range and significance of the domestic adaptation of policies and regulations to EU legislation, as established by existing academic studies and policy papers. We note the current state of knowledge of Europeanization impacts on Greece, the implications of the findings, and pointers for future research. The unevenness of adaptation is an essential lens for analysis.

Costas Simitis

The chapter seeks to analyse and assess Costas Simitis’s leadership and management style, which it conceptualizes as the product of three structural parameters. First, Simitis’s status, throughout his career in Greek politics, as a minority within PASOK, the party he helped co-found, and his clear refusal to identify with the values of the ‘underdog’ cultural tradition, to which the majority of the party and, indeed, Greek society adhered. Second, his steadfast adherence to the principles of the minoritarian reformist cultural tradition, which identifies deeply with the values of the European Enlightenment and of European liberalism, and his privileging a positive sum conceptualization of politics, a decided preference for the search for dialogue, rational argument, consensus, and compromise, as well as a strong commitment to the primacy of the rule of law and for institution-building. Third, the search for a paradigm shift in the modus operandi of the Greek political system, such that would make these values guiding principles of the logic informing Greek democracy and enable it to align itself more firmly with the traditions of European social democracy. The chapter concludes by identifying five major legacies linked to Simitis’s leadership and management style as prime minister: (a) first and foremost, securing Greece’s entry into the eurozone, (b) introducing an alternative approach to Greek politics; (c) emphasizing institution building; (d) privileging civility and fairness in interacting with colleagues and opponents alike; and (e) demonstrating the importance of human agency in the conduct of politics.