The Hellenic Initiative and New Democracy

The recent interfacing of the Prime Minister of Greece with members of The Hellenic Initiative (THI) in Athens reminded me of the research I started three-to-four years ago but suspended it due to overwhelming workload.

 
THI is a global diasporic organization undertaking philanthropic and grant-giving work in Greece while the majority in its board of directors are involved in global investing including Greece. It maintains strong hubs in the USA, London, Canada, and Australia, enjoying grassroots and elite support.

In my initial work I identified two intertwined modalities of citizenship practiced by the organization, which I called emotional and neoliberal. The meeting in Athens reminded me of two passages I had located which in juxtaposition indicated the alignment of THI’s language of institutional identity with New Democracy’s language of political identity. The connecting thread was along the principles of neoliberal citizenship.

I am sharing the following tentative writing, though the quotes I cite firmly establish the convergence between THI and New Democracy's political philosophy.

 
It is unusual and risky to publish a draft in such an early stage, but I make it public anyway in case fellow scholars wish to build on this observation. This is an important political issue regarding diaspora-Greece affiliations, and I hope it will spark the interest of the research community if it has not already.

[July 24, 2026]

***

The Hellenic Initiative’s (THI) ideology links emotional with neoliberal citizenship by building on the trope I identified earlier, heroism. Specifically, it draws an analogy between its project to rebuild Greece with that of Filiki Eteria’s, an early nineteenth century revolutionary organization founded with the purpose of establishing an independent Greek state. In fact, THI has inscribed this line of identification in its organizational structure by creating The 1821 Society (1821 marking the start of the Greek revolution against the Ottoman empire):

 
"The 1821 Society has been founded by The Hellenic Initiative as a new “Philiki Eteria” (the secret society founded in 1814 by Diaspora Greeks to fight for Greek Independence). As modern-day Diaspora Greeks, we are as committed to that freedom for Greece as our ancestors ever were. Today, that cause means helping Greece rebuild its economy, reversing the brain drain, and addressing Greece’s humanitarian needs." (NHI’s website, 2023[check])

[One-year individual membership for the Freedom Fighters section of the 1821 Society is $1821.
Two-year individual/couple membership for the Lord Byron section of the 1821 Society is $18,210.]

And along similar lines in the most recent statement (2026) about the mission of The 1821 Society:

"The 1821 Society is The Hellenic Initiative’s global membership community, bringing together Hellenes and Philhellenes who are committed to strengthening Greece and advancing Hellenism around the world.

In 1821, as Greece fought for independence from the Ottoman Empire, the effort extended far beyond its borders, supported by diaspora Greeks and Philhellenes who mobilized resources, influence, and advocacy. In 1814 they founded “Philiki Eteria,” a secret society dedicated to the cause of Greece’s liberation.

Nearly two centuries later, during Greece’s economic crisis, that same spirit reemerged. Once again, the Greek diaspora stepped forward, this time to help rebuild the country’s economy, support its people, and create opportunity for future generations. This was the spirit under which The Hellenic Initiative was founded."

The language of freedom in the context of the Greece crisis necessarily evokes the desire to free Greece from its economic dependency, from the immense debt to foreign creditors, the infamous troika, which bailed out the country from bankruptcy. But it could also translate today as the aim of aiding Greece through investments to negotiate its current enormous debt [cite numbers].
The lexicon of economic development as freedom aligns with the ideology of neoliberal economy [cite Frazer], which is currently central in the ruling New Democracy (ND) party. As Yiannis Mylonas (2021) notes, “One of ND’s potentially most catchy electoral TV and social media ad [in the 2019/check electoral campaign] stressed that ‘development means freedom.’”

 
Visualized through the depiction of people moving towards open horizons, this message contains a utopian dimension to appeal to the voters’ emancipation desires, spinning neoliberal economic activity toward what xxx frames as “forward thinking and liberatory” (Fraser 2019: 15). (193)

In its commitment to Greece [identify its problems] THI recognizes the structural deficiencies of the country. But it refrains from addressing structural problems linked with poverty, unemployment, part-time employment lacking benefits, soaring real estate prices and cost of everyday necessities (food, electricity, housing). Its approach to the grim realities of poverty, which it acknowledges, is limited to an emphasis in supporting nonprofit relief organization which may alleviate hardship and poverty for some but does not solve the problems that ravage not only the working poor but also the low middle and increasingly the middle class. It also refrains from deliberating of how these social ills may connect with neoliberal capitalist practices. Investments are not translated into major developments in capital-labor relations (level of wages, health care benefits) or environmental preservation. Capitalist development as the promise of freedom appears as a panacea at a time when a list of freedoms, the freedom of the press for example, or the freedom to afford decent housing are seriously compromised in the country. By refraining to deliberate on these issues, THI’s linear view of a redemptive future may be contributing to greater financial freedom for some and at the same time the unfreedom of many others.

Work Cited

Yiannis Mylonas. 2021. "Crisis, Authoritarian Neoliberalism, and the Return of 'New Democracy' to Power in Greece." Stasis.

Yiorgos Anagnostou
Draft 2023

On Greek American (and Diasporic) Leadership (3)

In the context of the ongoing exchange on the topic of Greek American leadership and its varying quality, the Research Center for Excellence in Greek American, Migration, and Diasporic Studies has implemented the following initiative:

Qualification exam for Greek American and Diasporic Leadership candidates

Thematic: Ethnic and Diasporic Historical and Cultural Literacy

Context

This assignment aligns with our community’s commitment to the value of educational excellence. It invites you to reflect on the significance of Greek American (or Greek-American, Greek/American, American Hellenic, Greek immigrant, and/or Greek and American) learning within your leadership vision.

All of the exam materials below are drawn from the two mandatory courses you have taken on Greek American and Diaspora Studies, administered by our Center at Super Excellent University (SEU).

Modality of the exam: In person

Duration: 12 hours

You are required to engage with all of the following questions

(the use of AI is strictly prohibited as evidence of fake leadership)

Questions

• Identify the latest scholarly book you have read about Greek American history and identity. What is the argument of the author(s)? In what ways does it contribute to your educational policy regarding the promotion of Greek American paideia?

• Identify a recent Greek American novel published by a reputable publisher. How does it inform your leadership vision?

• Identify three historians born between 1910 and 1950 who have written about the Greek American working-class past. Does knowing this past matter? Connect your answer with the 100th anniversary of the Castle Gate Mine Disaster.

• Why has Harry Mark Petrakis "raised the ire" of many Greek Americans in the past, according to Charles Moskos? Is there a Greek American museum featuring his work and outlining the controversy? If not, why is that the case? (hint: you may wish to discuss the Chicago case).

• What do you know about the Greek American working class today? Identify a sociologist who is working on this topic. What is the significance of his/her research in our understanding of Greek America and its main identity narratives?

• The narrative of “struggle and success,” which is at the core of Greek American identity, has been criticized on many counts. Discuss. How do you agree or disagree with the critique?

• Does it matter to remember Louis Tikas? What is the seminal Greek American book on this historical figure? What is a famous documentary on this topic? Discuss.

• The documentary The Greek Americans (PBS, 1998) has been criticized by Greek American studies scholars. What was the critique all about? Do you agree or disagree with the gist of the critique? Explain.

• There has recently been a community discussion about the usage of a hyphenated Greek American identity (Greek-American, Greek/American). What is your position? What is the difference between the hyphen and the slash in the two forms of the hyphenation? Provide a brief summary on how the Greek American hyphen has been theorized in connection to Greek American poetry.

• Identify a Greek American scholar who has recently reflected on the notion of “ethnic or diasporic” leadership (drawing on political and sociological theory). Summarize the argument. What are your points of agreement and disagreement?

• Do you support Greek American learning (history, culture, the arts) at all levels of Greek America’s educational network, including universities? Discuss.

• Journalists and scholars from Greek Australia and Greek America have written extensively (in Greek and English, in newspapers and journals) on the notion of Diasporic Hellenism. Identify five of the most important points they have articulated. What is your position?

• There has been discussion lately, both in Greek America and Greek Australia, about a new paradigm on the topic of Greece-Diaspora or Diaspora-Greece relations. What are the major points of this paradigm? What is your position?

Yiorgos Anagnostou

August 4, 2026

Περί Ελληνοαμερικανικής Ηγεσίας (συνέχεια)

Η πρόσφατη συζήτηση περί διασπορικής ηγεσίας συνεχίζεται, προσφέροντας χρήσιμες επισημάνσεις.

Εδώ θα ήθελα να υποδείξω μια πρόσθετη πτυχή η οποία αφορά την ηγεσία σχετικά με την εκάστοτε διασπορική παροικία. Συγκεκριμένα, τη θέση της ηγεσίας –οργανισμοί, λομπίστες, εκκλησιαστικοί φορείς, πολιτισμικοί παραγωγοί (cultural producers, όπως οι ντοκιμαντερίστες)– στα αφηγήματα που αναπαριστούν την ελληνοαμερικανική ταυτότητα.

Πρόκειται για αφηγήματα που συστηματικά, όπως επισημαίνω εδώ και δύο δεκαετίες, παρουσιάζουν την Ελληνική Αμερική μέσω ανιστόρητων ομογενοποιήσεων, ουσιοκρατικών αντιλήψεων και εθνικών μύθων (bootstraps)· ένα πλέγμα προσεγγίσεων που ακυρώνει την ιστορικότητα και την ετερογένεια του διασπορικού πεδίου (για παράδειγμα, βλ. το ντοκιμαντέρ «Οι Ελληνοαμερικανοί» του George Veras που προβλήθηκε από το PBS).

Σε αυτήν την κατάφωρη υπονόμευση αξιών τις οποίες η ηγεσία ισχυρίζεται επανειλημμένα ότι ασπάζεται –τη δημοκρατικότητα και τη γνώση– κανείς φορέας δεν έχει ασκήσει κριτική. Το φάσμα εκτείνεται από τη σιωπηλή συναίνεση και τον έπαινο έως την κατά κόρον αναπαραγωγή τους από κάποιες ηγετικές μορφές.

Το ζήτημα υπό συζήτηση, επομένως, εγείρει τουλάχιστον τρία καίρια ερωτήματα:

(α) τι είδους ηγεσία επιθυμούμε όσον αφορά τη στάση της απέναντι στον αυτοπροσδιορισμό και την αυτογνωσία μας (και όχι μόνο σε σχέση με την Ελλάδα, όπως έχει τεθεί αρχικά· τα δυο εξάλλου είναι αλληλένδετα)·

(β) για ποιο λόγο η ηγεσία συναινεί στην παραγωγή και αναπαραγωγή μιας γνώσης που αποκλείει τις εσωτερικές διαφοροποιήσεις και αντιστέκεται στην ιστορικοποίηση·

και (γ) πώς η νέα ηγεσία θα υπερασπιστεί τις αξίες της γνώσης και της δημοκρατικής συμπεριληπτικότητας μέσα στις υπάρχουσες δομές εξουσίας που σήμερα τις αναιρούν.

Οποιοσδήποτε ουσιαστικός διάλογος για το θέμα οφείλει να εξερευνήσει σε βάθος και τα τρία.

Γιώργος Αναγνώστου

Αύγουστος 1, 2026