Greek riots: An interpretation

From the Harvard International Review:

In addition to these three factors, some analysts have also mentioned deeper historical elements which -allegedly- make such riots, and insurgency in general, easier in Greece than in other parts of the world. Among these are the strong family networks which have challenged the authority of the Greek State since its very foundation in 1930; the clientelism which has always been at the heart of Greek political life, perverting the functioning of representative democracy; and the Greek Civil War, which divided Greece from 1946 to 1949 and which has left profound memories and divisions in Greek society.

While all of these explanations do carry some truth, there is one historical element which is worth stressing in particular. As Professor Stathis Kalyvas has observed, there is a certain cult of student unrest in Greece which goes back to 1973, when the occupation of the Polytechnic school by students contributed to the overthrow of a military dictatorship which had ruled Greece since 1967. The cult of this occupation persisted well after the reestablishment of democracy in 1974. It is celebrated every year and taught at schools as one of the most glorious events of Greek history. Those who lived it have often kept a belief that the politicization and mobilization of the youth is essentially good for democracy, even when it takes violent forms.

In this atmosphere, occupation of universities by students or even anarchist groups throwing stones at the police take place almost every year and it is not uncommon for teenagers to occupy their schools in order to protest against an educational reform. Such occupations have usually been tolerated by Greek public opinion. They are often seen as an inherent part of one's student life. For this reason, during the first couple of days, a significant part of the public opinion, including some mainstream newspapers, tolerated -and often even supported- the riots, which were interpreted as a marginal but more or less legitimate part of the democratic process. This initial tolerance of the public partly explains the endurance of the movement.