A problem that belongs to reality and has not been selected in an artificial manner, doesn’t necessarily have a partisanly solution, but that doesn’t mean that it is not solvable.
A political party line by necessity follows a doctrine, which will create a actual framework for a way of thinking.
This however has a basic defect.
The problem may have a solution that is outside that context, and is therefore not accessible.
What’s worse, is both the problem and the solution to be within this line, but the solving of the problem as a methodology to be outside it.
That’s when they all assume that it’s only within their context that the method should be found.
In Greece’s case, there are problems that can not be solved, because of the specific political party context and it’s not necessarily that they can’t be solved.
Merely, the solution with its existence alone, will challenge the political party.
And the point is, that a solution which is regarding the Nation as such, wouldn’t be selected, simply so it would not cause problems to the political party.
But what’s interesting, is that when we historically examine the data of the Soviet Union after 1917, Lenin himself was forced to accept a solution that was proposed by Trotsky as early as 1920, which in 1921 became the New economic policy.
Its characteristics were of course capitalistic according to the political party data.
It was however functional, and it saved the country economically.
It was continued for years on, as even after Lenin’s death in 1925, it was promoted by Bukharin, up until Stalin officially abolished it in 1930.
A move which led only hree years later to the Holodomor.