{"id":2233,"date":"2026-04-23T18:05:00","date_gmt":"2026-04-23T15:05:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/en.tomanifesto.gr\/?p=2233"},"modified":"2026-04-23T18:05:00","modified_gmt":"2026-04-23T15:05:00","slug":"alexis-tsipras-the-pinocchio-returns-with-a-vengeance-video","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/en.tomanifesto.gr\/?p=2233","title":{"rendered":"Alexis Tsipras: the… Pinocchio returns with a vengeance (video)"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Alexis Tsipras returns with rhetoric of “stability and normality”<\/b>, glossing over the SYRIZA<\/b> and raising questions about the new narrative<\/b> and its new re-entry strategy with attacks<\/b> on the entire political system<\/b>. <\/p>\n

At the 11th Delphi Economic Forum<\/b>, Alexis Tsipras attempted yet another rebranding of his political profile<\/b>, reinvesting in his familiar formula of “alternative government proposal”<\/b>, “patriotic responsibility” and the need for a “return to normality and stability”<\/b>. <\/p>\n

In a speech that moved between institutional criticism, political targeting of the government<\/b> and personal rebranding, the former prime minister<\/b> – apart from Parliament and out of leadership roles<\/b> – has attempted to re-establish himself as a solution to the problem<\/b> that he describes as an “institutional aberration”<\/b>. The question that arises, however, is whether this is a new political project<\/b> or the re-circulation of an already familiar political product in a different package<\/b>.<\/p>\n

In the Delphoi, Alexis Tsipras<\/b> presented a mixture of political self-justification and aggressive criticism of the government<\/b>, arguing that the country is not functioning with “normality”<\/b>and that his re-emergence on the political scene is linked to the need to restore stability<\/b>. <\/p>\n

He invoked the European Public Prosecutor and spoke of institutional deficits<\/b>, while criticising the productive model of the economy<\/b>, the banks and the management of European funds<\/b>. He also presented proposals such as the “National Convergence Fund”<\/b> and the “patriotic contribution<\/b>“, attempting to give a social and redistributive slant to his new narrative<\/b>. <\/p>\n

On the political level, he left spikes for the opposition<\/b>, while he did not avoid also personal spikes with a scathing tone<\/b> on issues of political reboot and party naming<\/b>.<\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

Behind the rhetoric of “new plan” and “patriotic responsibility”<\/b>, however, a familiar political pattern<\/b> emerges: the ongoing attempt to re-install a leader who has already been tested in power<\/b>, has been judged by the people<\/b>, and is now trying to come back not as a continuation<\/b>, but as a supposed renewal<\/b>. This is precisely where the political contradiction that accompanies Tsipras’ return to the limelight<\/b> lies.<\/p>\n

The “normality” as a second-use political narrative
<\/h3>\n

The reference to “normality and stability” by Alexis Tsipras could, under different circumstances, be an institutional statement. However, coming from a politician who was prime minister during one of the most turbulent periods in the country’s modern economic history, it takes on an almost ironic dimension. The invocation of normality feels more like rhetorical reconstruction than political self-criticism.<\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

The former prime minister’s political language attempts to shift the focus from the past to the present, but the political footprint is not erased in words. And that’s precisely the problem with the new narrative: it doesn’t answer “what happened”, but insists on “what could happen now”.<\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

The “patriotic responsibility” and the recycling of political vocabulary<\/h3>\n

The phrase “patriotic responsibility” was presented as the ideological foundation of the new political proposal. In practice, however, it functions more as a rhetorical tool to re-normalise a political space that has already tried different versions of social rhetoric.<\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

The reference to “patriotic contribution”, social inequalities and “allergy to predation” attempts to reintroduce a moralistic dichotomy into the political debate. But political experience has shown that such schemes, when not accompanied by a coherent and implementable plan, end up as communication exercises without institutional depth.<\/p>\n

In this context, it cannot be ignored that the same political footprint has been associated with choices that have caused deep divisions in the public debate, such as the Prespa Agreement, which recognized the state of Skopje with the constitutional name “North Macedonia” and triggered strong reactions within the country. <\/p>\n

For its critics, the agreement was seen as a highly controversial national concession to the symbolic and historical core of Macedonia’s name. And here the political question reasonably arises: how does this choice fit into the narrative of “patriotic responsibility” currently invoked by Alexis Tsipras, when for much of public opinion it was interpreted as its exact opposite?<\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

So, the invocation of patriotism as a modern political tool seems to clash with the very political past that shaped it. And this contradiction is not verbal; it is deeply political, and remains open in the public domain.<\/p>\n

The narrative of return: solution or recycling?<\/h3>\n

The most characteristic phrase – “I return so that there can be normality and stability in the country”- sums up the central paradox of the politics of return. On the one hand, the former prime minister presents himself as a solution provider. On the other hand, his own political journey is the subject of intense public debate and different interpretations.<\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

“Return” is not a neutral concept in politics. It is evaluative. And when it is accompanied by an admission that the country is “not normal”, then the discussion inevitably shifts to the past of governance, not only to the future.<\/p>\n

Technocratic criticism as a political substitute
<\/h3>\n

The attack on the production model, the banks and the management of European resources is part of a now classic tactic: technocratic criticism without governmental responsibility. It is easier to describe distortions than to have managed them.<\/p>\n

The proposal for new funds, pricing and redistributive interventions reiterates a familiar pattern of a statist approach, but one that has already been tested in practice and judged politically.<\/p>\n

The political irony of the “new authority”
<\/h3>\n

The political paradox is clear: a former prime minister, out of parliament and out of party leadership, is attempting to re-establish himself as a guarantor of stability. And that in itself creates an ironic role reversal.<\/p>\n

The “new beginning” is not accompanied by a new political identity, but by a restatement of old positions with a new vocabulary. And this is precisely where political narrative meets its limits: when the change is not substantive, but verbal.<\/p>\n

Politics as a recurring narrative
<\/h3>\n

The Tsipras case at Delphi is not just another political speech. It is an attempt to reposition himself in a political scene that has already been shaped without him as a central player. The invocation of “normality”, “stability” and “patriotic responsibility” functions more as political rebranding than as a new programme of governance.<\/p>\n

In the final analysis, the question is not whether Alexis Tsipras is returning. The question is whether the political scene needs the return of a narrative that has already been tried and tested – or whether it is simply watching it, once again, being recycled in a different wrapper.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Alexis Tsipras returns with rhetoric of “stability and normality”, glossing over the SYRIZA era and raising questions about the new narrative…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2234,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2233","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-politics"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/en.tomanifesto.gr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2233","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/en.tomanifesto.gr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/en.tomanifesto.gr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.tomanifesto.gr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.tomanifesto.gr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2233"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/en.tomanifesto.gr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2233\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.tomanifesto.gr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/2234"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/en.tomanifesto.gr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2233"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.tomanifesto.gr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2233"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/en.tomanifesto.gr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2233"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}