He was one of the only people willing to stand up to the EU bullies & should be respected for that reason.
I think your comment here is a bit of a stretch, and is presented as fact instead of opinion.
The problem of unsustainable debts of EU countries is complex. Debts cannot be fully forgotten as this sets an unsustainable precedent. Full austerity isn't sustainable either. Any reasonable solution will be nuanced.
By the way the same issue will arise soon enough to another EU country or to some US state. Will the US feds be bullies by telling states their debts cannot be forgotten?
That might be true, but if 50% of what he said about his interactions with EU officials is true 'bullies' is kind way of describing reality. Greece was blackmailed, plain and simple.
The EU blackmailed Greece into accepting unfulfillable debt obligations in order to prevent the french and German banks collapsing, it’s that simple.
I have no other word to describe such behaviour.
He refused to sign Greece’s death warrant and the EU crucified him in the media for it.
As of your opinion, seriously? you think his childish antics amount to "stnading up to bullies?". He was gambling with millions of fortunes. But that's easy to forget from afar and it looks good on film. In general, it would be nice if international audiences don't enable this guy -- The Left in greece is having another identiy crisis, and i'd hate to see someone like him taking the reins , cause then the future becomes very deterministic.
Greece has never recovered from the deal they signed after kicking him out.
Your rant on the other hand seem not very much more than an argumentum ad hominem.
Greece was indirectly forced to accept a poor deal by capitalists because of how they would have suffered if Greece refused and the german & french banks collapsed.
The ECB was under pressure from it's largest economies to give Greece a poor deal.
The EU presented a deal that was unsustainable to Greece but that prevented french and German banks from collapsing and refused to negotiate an inch.
I know who was in the wrong in that situation, and it wasn’t him.
Now he's very educated .. but I still can't extract any substance out of what he says. I'm probably to blame but I feel there's a pattern of people inviting him to talk without understanding what he says (just like me) but having a position of intellectual authority and noble goals it keeps going.
Yanis in conversation with Chomsky, long but insightful.
This obviously sounds like an ad hominem, but it's really hard to distinguish the writing from the writer when it comes to his articles (which are everywhere, apparently). In fact this is common in his writings, and his articles consistently attract this kind of criticism.
Which of his specific points are you disagreeing with?
What platitudes?
What are examples of his writings or talks where he is not clear to you?
- i didn't say i disagree. in fact i find no argument (except from the fairytale part that really isnt worth discussing) (PS @ameetgaitonde sums it up pretty nicely, really nothing more to say)
- The supposed recap of recent history, full with affectionate dimunitives like maggie. It's just bad writing
- Again, everything. I ve read a lot. Can you point one article that has an actual point? His articles are the GPT-3 of economics.
And i mean, its not just me, none of the comments here are about the text. Perhaps because theres nothing to talk about there.
In his long rants, there occasionally appears an interesting hypothesis, but this might be due to chance. And it is not followed up upon with any clear reasoning, but mostly with overly self-confident blather.
Fair enough, this article of his in the Guardian is a more polished piece.
Gosh, this thread!
Come on nerds- we can do way better than this.