Saturday, April 25, 2020
Insects: Largest study to date finds declines on land, but recoveries in freshwater
Global insect populations show highly variable local trends
April 23, 2020
A worldwide compilation of insect abundance studies shows the number of land-dwelling insects is in decline. On average, there is a global decrease of 0.92 percent per year, which translates to approximately 24 percent over 30 years. At the same time, the number of insects living in freshwater has increased on average by 1.08 percent each year. Local trends are highly variable.
German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/04/200423143031.htm
A worldwide compilation of long-term insect abundance studies shows that the number of land-dwelling insects is in decline. On average, there is a global decrease of 0.92% per year, which translates to approximately 24% over 30 years. At the same time, the number of insects living in freshwater, such as midges and mayflies, has increased on average by 1.08% each year. This is possibly due to effective water protection policies. Despite these overall averages, local trends are highly variable, and areas that have been less impacted by humans appear to have weaker trends. These are the results from the largest study of insect change to date, including 1676 sites across the world, now published in the journal Science.
The study was led by researchers from the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv), Leipzig University (UL) and Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (MLU). It fills key knowledge gaps in the context of the much-discussed issue of "insect declines."
Over the past few years, a number of studies have been published that show dramatic declines in insect numbers through time. The most prominent, from nature reserves in Western Germany, suggested remarkable declines of flying insect biomass (>75% decrease over 27 years). This was published in 2017 and sparked a media storm suggesting a widespread "insect apocalypse." Since then, there have been several follow-up publications from different places across the world, most showing strong declines, others less so, and some even showing increases. But so far, no one has combined the available data on insect abundance trends across the globe to investigate just how widespread and severe insect declines are. Until now.
Largest data compilation to date
An international team of scientists collaborated to compile data from 166 long-term surveys performed at 1676 sites worldwide, between 1925 and 2018, to investigate trends in insect abundances (number of individuals, not species). The complex analysis revealed a high variation in trends, even among nearby sites. For example, in countries where many insect surveys have taken place, such as Germany, the UK and the US, some places experienced declines while others quite close by indicated no changes, or even increases. However, when all of the trends across the world were combined, the researchers were able to estimate how total insect abundances were changing on average across time. They found that for terrestrial insects (insects that spend their whole lives on land, like butterflies, grasshoppers and ants), there was an average decrease of 0.92% per year.
Insects disappear quietly
First author Dr Roel van Klink, a scientist at iDiv and UL, said: "0.92% may not sound like much, but in fact it means 24% fewer insects in 30 years' time and 50% fewer over 75 years. Insect declines happen in a quiet way and we don't take notice from one year to the next. It's like going back to the place where you grew up. It's only because you haven't been there for years that you suddenly realise how much has changed, and all too often not for the better."
Insect declines were strongest in some parts of the US (West and Midwest) and in Europe, particularly in Germany. For Europe in general, trends became on average more negative over time, with the strongest declines since 2005.
Fewer insects in the air
When reporting about "insect decline," the mass media have often referred to the "windscreen phenomenon": people's perception that there are fewer insects being splattered on the windscreens of their cars now compared to some decades ago. The new study confirms this observation, at least on average. Last author Jonathan Chase, professor at iDiv and MLU, said: "Many insects can fly, and it's those that get smashed by car windshields. Our analysis shows that flying insects have indeed decreased on average. However, the majority of insects are less conspicuous and live out of sight -- in the soil, in tree canopies or in the water."
For the new study, the researchers also analysed data from many of these hidden habitats. This showed that on average, there are fewer insects living in the grass and on the ground today than in the past -- similar to the flying insects. By contrast, the number of insects living in tree canopies has, on average, remained largely unchanged.
Freshwater insects have recovered
At the same time, studies of insects that live (part of) their lives under water, like midges and mayflies, showed an average annual increase of 1.08%. This corresponds to a 38% increase over 30 years. This positive trend was particularly strong in Northern Europe, in the Western US, and since the early 1990s, in Russia. For Jonathan Chase this is a good sign. He said: "These numbers show that we can reverse these negative trends. Over the past 50 years, several measures have been taken to clean up our polluted rivers and lakes in many places across the world. This may have allowed the recovery of many freshwater insect populations. It makes us hopeful that we can reverse the trend for populations that are currently declining."
Roel van Klink added: "Insect populations are like logs of wood that are pushed under water. They want to come up, while we keep pushing them further down. But we can reduce the pressure so they can rise again. The freshwater insects have shown us this is possible. It's just not always easy to identify the causes of declines, and thus the most effective measures to reverse them. And these may also differ between locations."
No simple solutions
Ann Swengel, co-author of the study, has spent the last 34 years studying butterfly populations across hundreds of sites in Wisconsin and nearby states in the US. She stresses how complex the observed abundance trends are and what they mean for effective conservation management: "We've seen so much decline, including on many protected sites. But we've also observed some sites where butterflies are continuing to do well. It takes lots of years and lots of data to understand both the failures and the successes, species by species and site by site. A lot is beyond the control of any one person, but the choices we each make in each individual site really do matter."
Habitat destruction most likely causes insect declines
Although the scientists were unable to say for certain exactly why such trends -- both negative and positive -- emerged, they were able to point to a few possibilities. Most importantly, they found that destruction of natural habitats -- particularly through urbanisation -- is associated with the declines of terrestrial insects. Other reports, such as the IPBES Global Assessment, also noted that land-use change and habitat destruction are a main cause of global biodiversity change.
This new study was made possible by iDiv's synthesis centre sDiv. It is currently the most comprehensive analysis of its kind. It depicts the global status of insects and shows where insect protection is most urgently needed.
Story Source:
Materials provided by German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.
Journal Reference:
Roel van Klink, Diana E. Bowler, Konstantin B. Gongalsky, Ann B. Swengel, Alessandro Gentile, Jonathan M. Chase. Meta-analysis reveals declines in terrestrial but increases in freshwater insect abundances. Science, 2020; 368 (6489): 417-420 DOI: 10.1126/science.aax9931
A Ray of Hope? (Asia Times, links to articles)
It feels like months since there’s been any positive news. But amid a backdrop of continuing economic decimation at the hand of coronavirus, an infection rate that’s nearing two million and productivity-sapping global lockdowns, some green shots of hope emerged this week.
While it’s well known that there is an unprecedented number of vaccine candidates being tested, Gordon Watts reports that China may be closer than anyone thought to winning the race to immunize the world.
Watts writes that a team led by Qin Chuan at China’s National Institutes for Food and Drug Control in Beijing had started human testing in Xuzhou, a major city in Jiangsu province.
“Preclinical tests on non-human primates found that when given at a sufficient dose, the vaccine could provide protection against Sars-CoV-2, [which causes Covid-19],” a preliminary paper said after being released by the research group.
“Safety checks on the first day after the vaccinations have been completed and preliminary results show the vaccine is safe,” Gong Xuejie, from project partners Sinovac Biotech, was reported as saying.
If an Israeli scientist is proven correct, there may not even be a need for a vaccine.
Professor Yitzhak Ben-Israel, who is also a retired Air Force Major General does not believe the global approach of enforcing a lockdown to contain the coronavirus is the right solution, based on virus infection data he has analyzed.
His finding suggest that the coronavirus spread peaks after about 40 days and declines to almost zero after 70 days, a result that is at variance with health professionals in many countries, including the United States. Stephen Bryen reports.
That would be especially good news for two cities that had been earlier praised for managing to restrict the virus’ spread but are now experiencing new infections.
Thorny Crown: Deciphering fact from fiction about the coronavirus crisis is quickly becoming as complex as the race to find a Covid-19 vaccine.
Singapore’s low-wage foreign laborers are falling ill with the coronavirus in their thousands after being quarantined en masse, a development that experts say could put unprecedented strain on the wealthy city-state’s healthcare services as its Covid-19 case numbers surge.
Nile Bowie writes that the island-nation of 5.7 million this week became the state with the highest number of officially confirmed Covid-19 cases in Southeast Asia.
Further east, Hong Kong’s most expensive shopping precinct is losing its bling factor as luxury brands shut their glitzy boutiques after seeing business plummet due to social unrest and the pandemic, reports Frank Chen.
Meanwhile, the search for a coronavirus scapegoat that’s drawn in everyone from President Trump to the world’s conspiracy theorists, now has a new participant – a Nobel-prize winning professor.
Luc Montagnier — a co-discoverer of the AIDS virus who is also mocked by some colleagues for some outrageous theories — said coronavirus is the result of an attempt to manufacture a vaccine against AIDS. Dave Makichuk reports.
As Gordon Watts reports in a piece that shines a light on China’s reporting of its own infection numbers, deciphering fact from fiction about the coronavirus crisis is quickly becoming as complex as the race to find a Covid-19 vaccine.
In an opinion piece by Allen Yu argues, however, that one measure would do much to filter out disinformation: stop listening to Donald Trump.
The US president is making the fight against the virus harder by launching personal vendettas against China, the World Health Organization and anyone on the media who disagrees with him. It’s time America changes, Yu argues, for everyone’s sake.
Read the full stories in Asia Times
Breakthrough hopes rise in virus vaccine trials
Israeli professor offers alternate coronavirus prediction
Covid-19 exposes Singapore’s vulnerabilities
How Singapore lost its grip on Covid-19
Big brands shutting shops in Hong Kong
French prof sparks furor with lab leak claim
How China hid ‘tens of thousands’ of virus deaths
Americans need to wake up on Trump’s Covid-19 response
In These Times, links to articles
25 April 2020
TOP STORIES
Would We Have Already Had a COVID-19 Vaccine Under Socialism?
Debunking the myth that capitalism drives innovation.
BY VANESSA A. BEE
Koch-Funded Think Tanks Are Lobbying to Send Workers to Their Deaths
The same think tanks that have been undermining workers' rights for decades now want workers to die for Trump's "reopening."
BY SARAH LAZARE
Capitalism Is Failing Its Coronavirus Stress Test—Only Workers Can Turn Things Around
Corporations will only do the right thing if we make them.
BY LABOR LEADERS
As Oil Plummets, Climate Activists Say Now Is the Time to Mobilize for a Green New Deal
Earth Day is more important now than ever. Here’s how the climate movement is getting organized.
BY CHRISTINE MACDONALD
Tired of Fighting About Third Parties? Just Enact Ranked Choice Voting.
Rather than scolding voters for wanting more options, we should put in place a more representative system.
BY ROB RICHIE AND DAVID DALEY
Fake Meat Is All the Rage—And It Can Help Us Fight Climate Change
A case for the Impossible: the greatest thing since sliced bread.
BY DAYTON MARTINDALE
Impossible Burgers Won’t Save the Environment—They’re Just a Greenwashing Trend
High-tech fake meat giants are more interested in making a quick buck than mitigating climate change.
ALICIA KENNEDY
Is the Present Too Much? It’s a Good Time To Take Up Afrofuturism.
Marvel’s ‘Black Panther,’ Octavia Butler’s science fiction and Beyoncé’s ‘Lemonade’ are all prime examples of this movement celebrating the Black experience.
BY IN THESE TIMES EDITORS
WORKING IN THESE TIMES
VA Workers Say Southern States Reopening Too Soon Puts Veterans’ Lives At Risk
Already understaffed and short on PPE, medical workers dread a new outbreak if Southern governors reopen businesses.
BY HAMILTON NOLAN
RURAL AMERICA IN THESE TIMES
Ten Years After the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, We’re on Course to Repeat One of Our Worst Mistakes
A decade after the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history, Gulf ecosystems haven't recovered. And we're on course for another catastrophic spill.
BY TARA LOHAN
Brazil gripped by major political crisis in midst of Covid-19 pandemic
Jorge Martin
25 April 2020
http://www.marxist.com/brazil-gripped-by-major-political-crisis-in-midst-of-covid-19-pandemic.htm
A major political crisis has broken out in Brazil. The Minister of Justice Moro resigned yesterday after president Bolsonaro removed the head of the Federal Police (FP) Valeixo, who had been nominated by Moro. The now former minister of justice has accused Bolsonaro of wanting to appoint a new FP head from whom he could get information in relation to cases involving Bolsonaro's sons, including the assassination of PSOL councillor Marielle Franco.
Bolsonaro and his family circle are being investigated by the police regarding a whole series of different affairs, from the fabrication of fake news to the recent demonstration demanding a military coup. The allegation is one of political interference in the work of the police.
Bolsonaro responded yesterday afternoon with a press conference of his own in which he attacked Moro and said that he didn't want to interfere with the work of the police, but that he merely wanted a Chief of Police that he "could interact with"...
The allegations made by Moro are quite serious and even within the framework of bourgeois law they could carry consequences. There is also the detail that the dismissal of the head of police Valeixo has been published with Moro's digital signature while he says he has never seen it.
Furthermore, Moro had played a key role in bringing Bolsonaro to power. He was the main judge in the Lava Jato corruption scandal investigation which brought Lula to jail. No one should be under any illusion that somehow Moro is more progressive than Bolsonaro or even that he has more respect for the rule of law than him. In June 2019 it was later revealed that he had been complicit in fabricating evidence and that the case against Lula had been clearly politically motivated. As a result Lula was released from jail.
Bolsonaro rode on the popularity of Moro as an anti-corruption figure during his election campaign and then appointed him as Minister of Justice. However, the two men soon clashed. Moro had ambitions to become president himself (a bit like the cartoon character Iznogoud who wants to become Caliph in place of the Caliph) and thus Bolsonaro regarded him as a potential rival. He tried to get rid of him by appointing him to the Supreme Court, but that never came to fruition.
The resignation of Moro comes barely a week after Bolsonaro sacked his Health Minister Mandetta with whom he had clashed over the Covid19 strategy.
The crisis of bourgeois democratic institutions in Brazil is deepening in the current conditions of the Covid19 pandemic and the economic recession, which has hit Brazil particularly hard. There is a section of the ruling class which would like to get rid of Bolsonaro and put a safer pair of hands in charge. As they now sense Bolsonaro's weakness they are going onto the offensive.
We said from the very beginning that far from representing the coming to power of fascism, the election of Bolsonaro reflected the crisis of all parties of the ruling class on the one hand, and the crisis of leadership of the working class on the other. Only in these conditions could a reactionary demagogue of this kind come to power.
We said that far from being a strong and able to crush the working class movement, it was a very weak government riddled with all sorts of internal contradictions and faction fights, from Moro to Guedes, from the generals to the Olavo de Carvalho gang, each faction with its own agenda and fighting all the others.
The powerful students' movement and the general strike a year ago revealed the potential for a massive movement to bring down Bolsonaro. The comrades of the Esquerda Marxista raised the slogan of Fora Bolsonaro (Bolsonaro OUT!). Unfortunately all the left organisations refused to take it up, on the grounds that either "Bolsonaro is strong, we are in the grip of fascism, the slogan is ultraleft/premature", or that "Bolsonaro was elected and therefore has legitimacy, he should complete his term of office", the latter being the position of the leaders of the PT.
Lula continued demanding respect for the legitimacy of Bolsonaro's presidency after he had been released from jail / Image: LSE Library, Flickr
Lula even maintained this position of demanding respect for the legitimacy of Bolsonaro's presidency after he had been released from jail. In the last few hours the PT leadership has changed its tune and is now calling for "Fora Bolsonaro". But what is the real content of this slogan for the PT? According to Veja:
"The PT will convene a meeting of its executive in the next few days to evaluate the implications of the campaign ‘Fora, Bolsonaro!’. Until then, emissaries of the party will try to build bridges with the most diverse sectors, reaching out to political parties and businessmen. Senator Jaques Wagner and ex-chancellor Celso Amorim, former defense ministers of PT governments, have been tasked with resuming talks with the military."
Instead of organising a campaign of mass mobilisations and strikes to bring down the government, the PT leaders want a broad coalition of "all democratic politicians". They want to appeal to "businessmen" and even the military!! These are the same people who forced the PT from power and threw Lula in jail!
This is a completely bankrupt strategy which furthermore had already failed during the presidential election.
Meanwhile, the masses are expressing their opposition to Bolsonaro AND Moro by banging pots and pans. Only the entry of the masses into the scene can offer a way out of this crisis in a way which would benefit the working class and the poor. Otherwise, a reactionary demagogue will be replaced by a "democratic" bourgeois politician and nothing fundamental will change.
The comrades of the Esquerda Marxista [the IMT in Brazil] are agitating for the setting up of Fora Bolsonaro committees. Their analysis of recent events (in Portuguese) is available here.
Lula even maintained this position of demanding respect for the legitimacy of Bolsonaro's presidency after he had been released from jail. In the last few hours the PT leadership has changed its tune and is now calling for "Fora Bolsonaro". But what is the real content of this slogan for the PT? According to Veja:
"The PT will convene a meeting of its executive in the next few days to evaluate the implications of the campaign ‘Fora, Bolsonaro!’. Until then, emissaries of the party will try to build bridges with the most diverse sectors, reaching out to political parties and businessmen. Senator Jaques Wagner and ex-chancellor Celso Amorim, former defense ministers of PT governments, have been tasked with resuming talks with the military."
Instead of organising a campaign of mass mobilisations and strikes to bring down the government, the PT leaders want a broad coalition of "all democratic politicians". They want to appeal to "businessmen" and even the military!! These are the same people who forced the PT from power and threw Lula in jail!
This is a completely bankrupt strategy which furthermore had already failed during the presidential election.
Meanwhile, the masses are expressing their opposition to Bolsonaro AND Moro by banging pots and pans. Only the entry of the masses into the scene can offer a way out of this crisis in a way which would benefit the working class and the poor. Otherwise, a reactionary demagogue will be replaced by a "democratic" bourgeois politician and nothing fundamental will change.
The comrades of the Esquerda Marxista [the IMT in Brazil] are agitating for the setting up of Fora Bolsonaro committees. Their analysis of recent events (in Portuguese) is available here.
The Greek tragedy: Act Three
by michael roberts
On Thursday night, EU leaders again failed to agree on how to provide proper fiscal support for hard-hit member states to cope with the health costs of the coronavirus pandemic and collapse of their economies from the lockdowns.
The EU leaders have already agreed to a €540bn package of emergency measures. This sounds a lot but is really just a bunch of loans from the European Stability Mechanism, which lends only on strict conditions on spending and repayment by member states who borrow. Only E38bn has been offered without conditions for health system support across the whole Eurozone. The so-called coronavirus mutual bond where the debt is shared by all is a dead duck.
At Thursday’s meeting the countries hardest hit, backed by France, demanded a massive direct fiscal boost. But the ‘frugal four’ of Germany, Austria, Netherlands and Finland again rejected straight grants in any proposed ‘recovery fund’. While the EU Commission President von der Leyen talked about a E1trn fund, this would be mostly just more loans. Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister, said piling more loans on embattled countries risked causing a “new sovereign debt crisis”. “Grants are like water in a fire fight while loans are the fuel,” he said.
Lucas Guttenberg of the Jacques Delors Centre said there was a temptation for the EU to come up with huge headline figures for the fund, but this needed to be backed with significant transfers of cash to the worst affected countries, not just guarantees for private investment projects and loans that added to their debts. “The question is do we want to create an instrument that gives Italy and Spain significantly more fiscal space?” he said. “That requires a lot more real money on the table.”
But Germany’s Merkel insisted that any funding borrowed on the markets must ultimately be paid back. There were “limits” on what kind of aid could be offered, she told leaders, adding that grants “do not belong in the category of what I can agree”. So the recovery plan looks like offering just more loans plus guarantees in return for increased investment by private sector companies. But “we are at a moment where companies are not going to invest because there is a lot of uncertainty,” said Grégory Claeys, a research fellow at Bruegel, the think-tank. What economies needed was direct public spending, he added, because the private sector will do little.
The EU Commission is going to fund its plan by doubling the EU annual budget from 1% of EU GDP to 2% along some borrowing in capital markets. But as I argued in a previous post, this will be far too little to turn Europe’s weaker economies around once the lockdowns are over. What Europe needs is an outright public investment programme, budgeted at around 20% of EU GDP. This should by-pass the banks and launch directly employed public projects in health, education, renewable energy and technology across borders in Europe. But there is no chance of that.
While the EU Commission ponders what to do and reports back next month, Europe as a whole, and the weaker economies of the south in particular, are spiralling into a slump that will exceed the depths of the Great Recession in 2008-9. Much has been talked about the impact on relatively large economies like Italy and Spain. But there is less talk about the country that was crushed by the Great Recession, the euro debt crisis and the actions of the Troika (the EU, ECB and IMF) - Greece.
I followed the Greek drama in a dozen posts on this blog since 2012 (search for 'Greece'). Now the tragedy of the Greece has become a drama of three acts. The first was the global financial crash and ensuing slump that exposed the faultlines in the so-called boom of the early years of Greece’s membership of the Eurozone. The second was the terrible period of austerity imposed by the Troika to which the left Syriza government eventually capitulated, despite the referendum vote of the Greek people to reject the Troika’s draconian measures.
Since then, the Greek capitalist economy has struggled to recover. By 2017, the deep depression ended and there was some limited growth. But the real GDP level is still some 25% below its 2010 level. And real GDP growth started to slow again (as it did in many countries) just before the pandemic hit. Productive investment has been flat for seven years, while employment is down by one-third because so many educated Greeks (half a million) have emigrated to find work. Large parts of the capitalist sector are in a zombie state – over one-third of loans made by Greek banks are not being serviced and Greek banks have the highest level of non-performing loans in Europe
Above all, Greek capital has experienced low and falling profitability. According to the Penn World Tables, the internal rate of return fell 23% from 1997 to 2012. From then to 2017, it recovered by just 14%. But in 2017, profitability was still 12% below 1997. Since 2017, according to AMECO data, profitability improved, but was still 10% below the pre-crisis level of 2007.
But now Greece’s tragedy is in its third act with the pandemic. The global economy has entered a slump in production, trade investment and employment that will outstrip the Great Recession of 2008-9, previously the deepest slump since the 1930s. And Greece is right in the firing line. Around 25% of its economy is in tourism and that is being decimated.
And the government is no financial position to spend to save industry, jobs and incomes. For years, under the imposition of the Troika first, and later the EU, Greek governments have been forced to run large primary surpluses on their budgets – in other words the government must tax people much more than any spending on public services.
The difference has been used to pay the rising burden of interest on the astronomical level of public debt. Every year, 3.6% of GDP is paid in interest on public debt that continued to mount to 180% of GDP.
Now the slump will drive down real GDP by 10% according to the IMF and send the debt level to 200% of GDP. This year, the gross financing needs of the government will reach 25% of GDP (that’s the budget deficit and maturing debt repayments). Unless fiscal support comes from the rest of the EU, the Greek people will be plunged into another long round of austerity once the lockdown is over.
And there is little sign that Greece will get any more help than it did in Act Two - except to absorb yet more debt.
The failure of the EU leaders to give fiscal support produced a frustrated reaction from former Syriza finance minister and 'rockstar' economist Yanis Varoufakis. Now recently elected as an MP, Varoufakis took note of the EU leaders' reaction to plight of Italy and Greece. He thought that “the disintegration of the eurozone has begun. Austerity will be worse than in 2011". As he argued back in 2015 during Greek debt crisis, the northern states ought to see “common sense" as it was in their interest to help the likes of Italy and Greece to save the euro. But if they will not,then Varoufakis reckoned that “the euro was a failed project” and all his work to save Greece and keep it in the euro had been wasted.
Back in 2015, Varoufakis, the self-styled ‘erratic Marxist’, as Syriza’s finance minister, had tried to persuade the Euro leaders of the need for unity. He had argued that the long depression of the last ten years was “not an environment for radical socialist policies after all". Instead “it is the Left’s historical duty, at this particular juncture, to stabilise capitalism; to save European capitalism from itself and from the inane handlers of the Eurozone’s inevitable crisis”. He said “we are just not ready to plug the chasm that a collapsing European capitalism will open up with a functioning socialist system”. So his solution at the time was that he should “work towards a broad coalition, even with right-wingers, the purpose of which ought to be the resolution of the Eurozone crisis and the stabilisation of the European Union… Ironically, those of us who loathe the Eurozone have a moral obligation to save it!”
In 2015, the role of Tsipras and the Syriza was even worse. I’m singling out Varoufakis because he claims allegiance to Marxism, of a sort, and opposition to the capitulation by Syriza in Act Two. But in his memoirs covering the period of his negotiations with the EU ‘right-wingers’ called Adults in the Room, Varoufakis shows that he went all the way and back to get a deal from the Troika that would not throw Greece into permanent penury – but failed.
In a new book, Capitulation between Adults, Eric Toussaint, scathingly exposes the wrongheaded approach of the ‘erratic marxist’. Toussaint, who at the time acted as a consultant on debt for the Greek parliament, argues that there was an alternative policy that Syriza and Varoufakis could have adopted.
In a recent interview, Varoufakis was asked “what would I have done differently with the information I had at the time? I think I should have been far less conciliatory to the troika. I should have been far tougher. I should not have sought an interim agreement. I should have given them an ultimatum: "a restructure of debt, or we are out of the euro today".
Too late for that change of view now. Instead Act Three of the tragedy has begun.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)