Maria Karistianou: “The concepts of “right” and “left” are outdated – Greece needs a state of law”

Maria Caristianu stated that political concepts “Right” and “Left” more do not reflect reality and belong to the pastemphasizing that a key priority for the country should be the formation state law.

According to her, what she creates political movement will be based on specific valueswhile in it existing politicians will not participate. Caristianu noted that she consciously avoids traditional ideological labels because they have lost their meaning.

This position, it is emphasized, creates serious difficulties for its political opponents, since it deprives them of the opportunity to accuse the new movement of belonging to a certain party camp.

Speaking on the program “10 Παντού” on the TV channel Open Monday morning (January 19, 2026), Caristianu spoke in detail about the political project, the official announcement of the creation of which is expected in the near future.

“Right and Left are definitions from the past. I don’t want to put labels on me because I cooperate with people from all parties“- emphasized Maria Caristianuspeaking about the principles of the new movement.

“Valuables cannot have a specific sign“, she added, specifying that the political association being created is not monothematic.

The main task, according to her, remains one thing: “the most important and paramount thing is that Greece can become a state of law“

What do her words really mean?

The formula “right and left are outdated” is not philosophy or abstract humanism. This conscious refusal to play by the rules of the current party system. It does not offer a new ideology. She offers remove the socket from the old one.

Her key phrase is not about labels. Key phrase – “state of law”. In the Greek context it reads unambiguously:
corruption, mutual responsibility, impunity of elites, failure of institutions, tragedies without accountability. This is a direct reproach to the entire system at once, without exception.

That is why her position is dangerous for opponents.
It is impossible to name it:

• “right”
• “left”
• “populist”
• “systemic”.

Which means, according to her The usual tools of discrediting do not work.

What could this really lead to?

There are three real scenarios.

First. Fast growth and sharp ceiling.
It can gather significant protest support, enter parliament or even become a factor in coalitions, and then run into the wall of institutions. The system in Greece knows how to crush those “outside the system” without direct conflict.

Second. Interception and neutralization.
The most classic option. “Benevolent advisers,” “experts,” and “technocrats” will begin to appear around her. Gradually, the movement will acquire familiar faces, and it will be neatly integrated into the existing architecture. Formally – success. In fact, it’s a blur.

Third. Real destabilization of the party field.
If she maintains control and really does not allow professional politicians in, it could destroy the usual division of the electorate. Then panic will begin in the old parties, because the threat will not be ideological, but moral. And it’s the hardest thing to fight.

Who can be behind her?

This is where it is important to be precise:
There are no signs of a classic “puppeteer” yet.

Not visible:

• big business,
• oligarchic media,
• foreign centers of influence,
• party machines.

And this is precisely what makes her phenomenon interesting and unstable.

Now her real support is public fatigue.
Fatigue from:

• tragedies without consequences,
• investigations without convictions,
• promises without responsibility.

This is a strong resource, but it very poorly controlled.

If external support appears, it will not be in the form of “money and staff”, but in the form of:

• networks of lawyers,
• civil society activists,
• individual former second-tier officials,
• people from the judicial and human rights community.

That is, not the elite, but counter-elite.

Does she have serious support other than society?

Bye – No. And this is both her strength and her weakness.

Strength – because it looks incorruptible and uncontrollable.
Weakness – because without institutional support they cannot live long in Greece.

The main question is not how many supporters she has now.
The main question is will she be able to survive the moment when the system begins to either buy or break.

And then it will become clear what it was:

• a brief outburst of protest,
• or the beginning of a very unpleasant process for the entire political structure.

For now, Karistianu is not an alternative to power.
She – system diagnosis.

And, as you know, neither patients nor doctors like diagnoses.

Source link