His UKIP party, though it may have originated as single-issue Eurosceptic, is now mainly a refuge for right-wing ex-Tories who consider the current Conservatives too moderate. And they are in fact not so much Eurosceptic as Europaranoid, so I wouldn't trust anything they say on issues relating to anywhere in Europe. Or on anything, if it comes to that.

The Greek people are expected to suffer huge hardship, 50% youth unemployment. a depression (7% cuts in GDP), cuts in basic services like hospital supplies and books for school kids - just to bailout some greedy banks and other bondholders? Or that foreign powers or states should be able to tell you to cancel your elections or basically tell you that however the people vote it doesn't matter.

Because that is all Farage is arguing against - the effective ending of democracy in Greece and the socialising of bankers losses . That's an issue we should all be worried about - left wing or right. Because if our vote doesn't matter anymore then democracy is effectively dead!

Come ON. The DUer said what the DUer said, and nowhere was there any hint about his or her feelings about freedom, self determination, democracy, or slaughtering puppies. What you did is intellectually dishonest. You put a whole other set of words in his mouth.

Sure, I hate freedom, self determination, puppies, whatever.

But that is not 'all that Farage is arguing against'. He is cynically using the Greek people's problems as an excuse for attacking the EU for entirely the wrong reasons. It is possible to be Eurosceptic for left-wing and right-wing reasons; and they are different. One could be against the EU because they are too ready to force countries to adopt austerity measures and cuts, but UKIP's platform demands that we in the UK 'introduce a flat tax', 'recognise the dangerous levels of national debt and accept there is no alternative to major cuts in government spending', and 'aim to reduce the public sector to the size it was in 1997, cutting many unnecessary and non-jobs over five years'. They claim that 'profligate government spending is killing off the productive activity that provides tax funds, and that easing the burden will be the route to revitalising the economy'.

What's the good of his talking about revolution against cuts in another country, when he seeks harsher cuts in his own?

Thing is, he's right, Greece is heading for a revolution.

They are just the leading edge on global chaos imho. Attacking Farage for THIS (obvious) pronouncement, is ridiculous. It's apparent to virtually anyone paying attention that it's only a matter of time before Greece convulses into revolution....

Greece may have elections but their tax system is from another planet.

Here are the classes that the Greeks have proudly exempted from taxation

ALL TAXES ON SHIPPING INCOME TO SHIPPING BILLIONAIRES

ALL CAPITAL GAINS ON THE ATHENS STOCK EXCHANGE

DIVIDEND INCOME

CAPITAL GAINS ON FAMILY OWNED BUSINESSES.



This is what the Greek people have chosen. The exemption on shipping profits IS PART OF THE GREEK CONSTITUTION.

Beyond that there is widespread cheating by the Greek public on the rest that owe taxes. This has been meticulously documented and proven as discussed below.

Meanwhile Greek debt bonds include large sums that are invested by pensions from Germany and France. This means many public and private union pension plans are going to suffer.

So do I have much sympathy for a country that willingly takes money from hard working folks in another country in order to let their shipping billionaires live tax free?

No.

NPR interviewed the Greek computer specialist who figured out exactly how extensive Tax fraud in Greece is and how to fix it.

He quit in frustration when he realized that the Greek people didn't want to change. Hundreds of local tax offices in Greece have never found a single tax cheat while the local tax collector gets rich.




There are hundreds of local tax offices in Greece that have not been able to find a single tax cheat. And the people running those offices have become very wealthy individuals

A Greek computer science expert, Diomidis Spinellis, proved exactly how much was being stolen by tax cheats and how to catch them

You can listen to that fascinating story here: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/01/05/144747663/how-a-computer-scientist-tried-to-save-greece

so he worked and worked and worked and solved the problem.

And nothing happened.

And then Dr. Spinellis realized the problem




The man that had the answer to Greece's fundamental problem tried to work from within to solve the problem, and that solution wasn't further right off's of Greek debt.

they knew that Greeces finances were screwed up and still chose to look the other way just to get them in as a member.

There is plenty of blame to spread around.

I blame the people less than I do the Greek government. They willfully cooked the books and sold the people a bill of goods.

what would the colonels do?

See: USSR.

I must have missed the memo.

It perfectly obvious which news they broadcast is news and which is a skewed article in effect as was the case with Press too.

We are moving to a internationalist world. A world with one culture enriched by all nations. UKIP is a bunch of fuggin nuts.

EOS.

and it ain't going to be "enriched" by other cultures, either.

America's name comes from a rich "midwest" guy, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amerigo_Vespucci

is going to end up in unicorns and rainbows, you best start reading up fast on world history, Pollyanna.

Your entire line of thought smacks of western imperialism and tyranny. How is that little thing called the UN working out?

Many of the EU's aims are laudable, but there is a heck of a lot about the European Union that is not at all laudable.

UKIP are a bunch of loonies, but they have a point regarding the risk of revolution in Greece given what is being imposed on that country in an attempt to prop up the Euro.

Americans or anyone else.

Countries that have fought many wars with each other now have open borders to trade and immigration (and, not coincidentally, an unrivaled level of peace and prosperity for the continent). Europeans from one country can live, work and study in any other European country.

That doesn't sound like a continent that is obsessed with "nationalistic sentiments".

http://www.publicserviceeurope.com/article/1514/nato-chief-greek-crisis-opportunity-for-defence-reform

If they hadn't spent so much on "defense" against Turkey, there would be much less of a crisis.

*Looks sternly towards Washington DC*

....who's ruling the world?....sovereign governments or private corporations?

The EU is, in a lot of ways, playing out the history of the United States in very.... slow... motion.... First, a bunch of semi-sovereign states, then, a common currency, common defense, small co-ordination body, power starts moving towards the "co-ordination body", now they all get to squabble about "state's rights" ...and hopefully don't get into a civil war about it.

It was supposed to be 600 euros, but has gone to about (I think) 430 euros/month.

Who can live on that?

Sharecroppers.
Migrant labor.
"Under the table" household servants

Provided the bosses do the bookkeeping, of course

https://www.google.com/search?q=USD+to+EUR

Not bad if you're a teenager working part-time. Lousy, however, if you're the only breadwinner for a family.

they'll have to live on even less. If no one lends them the money, where is it going to come from?

just because he may have an agenda it does not mean you turn your back on what is accurate. I predict that if the technocrats try to expand their shroud over Greece that the military junta is very likely to re-emerge in Greece. As of right now, the technocrats are keeping the Greek military at bay with promises. But the bottom line is that the military budget is the biggest hurdle Greece faces.

the Greeks had already suggested that substantial savings be made by defense cuts but the EU rejected that insisting the cuts refer to pensions etc. instead. I can only assume that's due to short term v. long term issues.

The overall problem in Greece , notwithstanding the issue of tax receipts , seems to revolve around the size of their government and public sector in relation to their GDP. Both are at levels which cannot be sustained without continuous borrowing with the prospect of satisfaction of the debt being dubious.

You get *their* pension after they die.

Until you die.

Totally culturally normal to them to pension children, because, you know, an unmarried woman can't be expected to work.

where did you find that information ? Not for me to agree or disagree with that policy but must confess it sounds a bit costly.

http://single-woman.tv/2010/04/greek-daughters-collect-deceased-parents-pensions/

I notice it says "civil servants.

Sounds like a case of "gravy for some" to me.

Thus the EU does NOT want any cuts in Defense spending. for most of that money already goes to them in the form of new equipment, new tanks, new ships, new planes AND SPARE PARTS. Thus the EU does NOT want Greece to cut back on defense, for a cut in defense spending means more money for Greeks and less money for the EU.

Here is a list of Greek Army Equipment and weapons, notice most of them are made in EU countries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Hellenic_Army

Please note even the ex-Warsaw Pact/Soviet Equipment Greece has is from old East German Stocks, Greece received from Germany after German re-unification and are presently in storeage do to a lack of spare parts (Greece's supply source was Germany NOT Russia, once Germany ran out of spare parts it retained when East Germany merged with West Germany, the Greeks had no other way to get spare parts for Russia wants cash for spare parts).

The Greek Fleet has many Greek made ships, but the equipment used by those ships tend to be EU made:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenic_Navy

As to a Colonel's coup, possible but I do NOT think so, Greece still has the draft and the side affect of the draft is the enlisted ranks thinks like the people, not as a group independent of the nation as a whole (which is the chief problems with "All Volunteer" military services). Thus it is easier to use elite forces (which tend to be volunteer even if draftee armies) to do coups, but by they very nature such elite forces are quite small and if the regular formations oppose what the elite forces did, the regular formation will enter the fray and which ever side it supports will win. This is what happened in 1789 in Paris, the People of Paris marched on the Bastille, the Swiss mercenaries (Volunteers) held the Bastille against them UNTIL THE REGULAR FRENCH ARMY ENTER THE FRAY AND DESTROYED THE BASTILLE.

When the Soviet Union pulled out of Eastern Europe just before its own dissolution, the people of the former Warsaw pact nations overthrew their governments. The Governments could NOT rely on the Army to support them for being made up of draftees the troops supported the people, thus the Army could NOT be used to keep the former leaders in power and no one even tried to use the Army to stop the revolutions in those countries.

The exception to this was Romania, where the Communist Rulers tried to hold onto power using its much expanded, even for a Communist Dictatorship, Police forces. The reason for this was such Police Forces were "Volunteers" and thus reliable when used against the people. The Romanian Army entered the fray on the side of the People, quickly moving the Police out of the way (and when the Leader of Romania was captured, the Army had a problem, to many people wanted to participate in the Firing squad, the Leader of Romania was that hated, even by card carrying communist who lead the Romanian Army at that time).

In the Soviet Union, during the coup attempt that would end the Soviet Union, the coup leaders ordered the army to suppress not only Yeltsin but the Government of Gorbachev. The Army refused to move in, one Tank Company even joined Yeltsin while he held the Russian "White House" (The Russian Parliament). One story I read, never confirmed, was that while the equivalent of the American CIA and NSA supported the coup, they could NOT get any of the Spetsnaz (Soviet Special Forces) units to actually storm Yeltsin's position, thus the Coup failed.

The reason for this was simple, the Regular Army Forces were pro reform for the people of Russia were pro reform. Since every male in the Soviet Union served in the Soviet Army, the army reflected what the people wanted for the Army and the people were the same. This affected even the Special Forces, first those special forces knew if the Regular Army intervened they would lose, and Second, many of the member of the Spetsnaz units, joined those units do to the fact they had to serve and if they had to serve they preferred to serve in a Spetsnaz unit as oppose to a regular line unit (This was noted in the US Army during WWII, men who would NOT have normally never enlisted in the US Army, would opt for a elite unit if drafted and they had a choice between serving in a regular unit or an elite unit). Thus even elite units tend to be more like the people as a whole in a draftee army as oppose to a volunteer army,

When another attempt to do a Coup, this time against Yeltsin, the Army intervene on the side of Yeltsin, for Yeltsin still had popular support at that time among the people and thus the Army could rely on its enlisted ranks and jounior officers (Another group that tends to be loaded with people who would NEVER have even thought of joining the Army, but given that they HAD TO SERVE, preferred to serve as a Junior Officer then as an enlisted rank).

Please note as you go up in rank, this affect diminishes, thus most Colonels and Generals tend to have always wanted to serve even in draftee armies. But even at that level you do run across some people who would never have thought of joining the military. This was noted by a study about 10 years ago, that study noted that since Reagan the army has gone further to the right then the country as a whole. This is the same time period when the last of the draftees would have left the military, even if they re-enlisted. The draft ended in 1972, and any draftee that remained in the Military after about 1975 would have had to re-enlist sometime after 1972. Some draftees did that, re-enlist. My chief drill Sargent in 1982 was such a draftee who stayed in the Army.

From 1980s onward most of these former draftees left the Military and the US Military went way to the right (1972 plus 20 is 1992, thus most draftees were out by the early 1990s), much more then the United States as a whole. My position is this is the result of the lack of left wing draftees who after serving their mandatory service, stayed in the military till they had they 20 years in. During the 1940s to the 1970s these former draftees would have brought into the Military a more balance view even among the higher ranks (Please note, most of the real bad cold war generals you hear of, Curtiss LeMay for one, were products of the inner war period, 1920-1940 when the US had an All Volunteer army, most were out of the service by the late 1960s replaced by Generals who first joined the Military during the period of the Draft, 1941-1972).

Thus the Greek Military, while it did lead a coup against the Government, it did NOT last long, six years. At least one ship of the Greek Navy actually revolted against the military junta. It was NOT popular and without the support of the US would NOT have lasted that long. Furthermore it was due to the long left -right conflict in Greece, going back to 1947. Right wing Colonels decided the Right wing Government of Greece was NOT right wing enough so over threw it (all on the fear the left would win an election and turn Greece over to Russia).

The coup was so complete that almost every politician and anyone who could lead opposition was arrested and imprisoned. Thus no one for any group to rally around. Thus the Coup leaders did not have to rely on its troops to suppress anyone, just on its more elite units, which at that time period included Greek Tank forces. . By 1973 this was no longer the case and given the revolt of the Greek Navy Destroyer Velos in 1973 it was clear the enlisted ranks could NOT be relied on to suppress any popular revolt.

Furthermore the Greek Colonels held themselves out as saviors of Greece and thus had extensive support from the people, until it was clear that was NOT the case. With time, people not in jail came to the front of the opposition, thus the affect of the mass arrest in 1967 was undone. With the increase possibility of a Student revolt lead by such leaders, and the knowledge that the Army as a whole would NOT put down such a revolt, the Junta decided to call for elections and end their rule.

The situation in Greece is different today, leaders of the opposition in Greece knows what the Colonels did in 1967, so are more dispersed, i.e. move around so the Police can not arrest all of them at once. Furthermore the situation already calls for direct military action, not the police work of arresting any and all possible opposition. Thus it is less likely for a Coup, or suppression of the people demonstrating. I can NOT rule it out, but given the nature of Greece today unlikely. Through with the draft period only nine months today, and a trend to a much smaller "Volunteer" army, to replace the Draftee army are trends that can lead to increase isolation of the Army from the people and thus leading to the Army being a better instrument of suppression (Armor units were used in the 1967 Coup, for these units needed more training then leg infantry units and thus tended to be made of more right wing "volunteers" then regular leg infantry units). Thus elements are different from 1967, but the change is both good and bad, good is the sense it would be almost impossible to arrest almost all of the leaders of the opposition, and bad in that you have a higher percentage of "Volunteers" in the Greek Army, and such "Volunteers" tend to be more loyal to their paymasters then the people.

Greek Miltiary:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Greece

The Colonel Coup:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_military_junta_of_1967%E2%80%931974

Most Greeks want to work this out reasonably.

11.55am: Last Sunday's riots continue to cause chaos in Athens, Helena Smith reports:

It turns out that practically every single traffic light in central Athens was destroyed in the orgy of violence that erupted during parliament's dramatic vote on the loan deal.

Some 200 traffic wardens have been rushed down town to bring order to the roads . But four days later traffic chaos still reigns supreme. Apparently, the cash-strapped transport ministry doesn't have the funds to replace the lights.

Constant updates on this link : http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/feb/16/greece-bailout-eurozone-crisis-live

edit spellin'

Far-right nationalistic parties got 3% of the vote in the last election, and RT is raising fears of a fascist takeover? That's all?

LePen got almost 17% in France in 2002.

http://www.johndclare.net/Weimar6_Geary.htm

Between 1928 and 1932, the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP) became the most popular of Germany's many political organisations. It had won no more than 2.6 per cent of votes cast in the Reichstag election of 1928 but just two years later registered massive gains, winning 18.3 per cent of the popular vote. The Reichstag election of July 1932 saw even more spectacular success: 13.7 million German electors, some 37.3 per cent of all votes cast, opted for the NSDAP, making it the largest party in the Reich.

This story of electoral success certainly forms the background to Hitler's appointment as Chancellor in 1933. However, even at the peak of the NSDAP's popularity before this moment, almost 63 per cent of the German electorate did not vote for the Nazis. What is more, in November 1932, the Nazi Party actually lost 2 million votes. This means that Hitler was not directly voted in to power; for in the Weimar system of absolute proportional representation, 37 per cent of the vote in July 1932 gave the Nazis nothing like a majority in the Reichstag.

Although Hitler's political career began in Munich, in the elections of 1928 to November 1932 the NSDAP won a higher share of the vote in Protestant than in Catholic Germany. In the Catholic Rhineland and Bavaria (apart from Protestant Franconia) it polled disproportionately badly. In fact in July 1932 the Nazi share of the vote was almost twice as high in Protestant as in Catholic areas. The inability, of Nazis to attract the Catholic vote was demonstrated by the stable support for the Catholic Centre Party, which regularly gained between 11.8 and 12.5 per cent between 1928, and November 1932; and by that of its sister confessional party, the Bavarian People's Party (BVP), which stayed firm at around 3 per cent in those same elections.

In some places, of course, the NSDAP mobilised Catholic voters on a significant scale, as happened in Breslau and Liegnitz (towns in Silesia where conflicts between Germans and Poles coloured political identity), in the Catholic rural areas of the Palatinate, and among some Catholics in the Black Forest; but these cases were atypical.

snip

-------------------------------------------------

http://www.axishistory.com/index.php?id=3782

NSDAP results in the Elections to the Reichstag


Number of votes for the NSDAP
1924, Dec 907.242 (1) 3,00% (1)
1928 810.127 2,63%
1930 6.379.672 18,25%
1932, July 13.779.017 37,36%
1932, Nov 11.737.021 33,09%
1933 17.277.180 43,91%


(1) Together with the Deutschnationale Volkspartei (DNVP)



Number of seats in the Reichstag for the NSDAP
1924, Dec 14 (1)
1928 12
1930 107
1932, July 230
1932, Nov 196
1933 288
(1) Together with the Deutschnationale Volkspartei (DNVP)

"I think we're heading for a revolution of some kind in Greece." The chief support is a group of three parties that together had about 3% of the vote (meaning each one averaged 1%).

If anything, that is evidence that revolution is nowhere near on the horizon, at least through the ballot box. If they want to discuss the riots, that's a different matter.

It's Farage, and RT. Neither are known for accurate analysis. Possibly more significant is the strong support for left wing parties.

Note that Farage's UKIP is part of the "Europe of Freedom and Democracy" grouping in the EU parliament (Farage is the leader), and LAOS ('Christian Orthodox hard-right') is in that grouping too. It's possible Farage is just saying this to do his ally a favour - as this Marxist site says says:



That 43.5% is:

16% Democratic Left
14% KKE (communist)
13.5% SYRIZA (Coalition of the Radical Left)

http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.star.gr%2Fpolitics%2F130991&sl=el&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8