Less than a month after its founding, the new political party Hope for Democracy is facing internal fractures — and Maria Karystianou, its founder and public face, has responded with a defiant message. In a social media post, she dismissed recent departures as part of a broader campaign aimed at undermining the movement, accusing critics of resorting to ‘mud-slinging’, ‘slander’, and enlisting ‘willing accomplices’ to sow division.
A Broader Battle
Karystianou framed the turmoil not as an internal crisis but as external aggression — a coordinated effort by what she called a ‘convenient, corrupt, and instigated system’ targeting a ‘living, active movement’. She stressed resilience: ‘We are not intimidated, we do not withdraw, we do not bend.’ Her message was clearly aimed at rallying supporters and reinforcing unity among the party’s base.
First Cracks Appear
The tensions came to light following high-profile exits, including that of Vasilis Kokotsakis — a forensic expert in the Tempi train disaster investigation — and retired Air Force General Athanasios Papanikolaou. TikTok personality Dimitris Savvidis also distanced himself publicly.
In an open letter, Kokotsakis cited ‘serious organisational deficiencies’ and raised concerns about democratic functioning. He argued that no civic movement can operate effectively ‘without rules, without institutions, without transparency, without accountability, and without a clear organisational framework’. He criticised the absence of substantive discussion on structural, institutional, or political matters — and pointed to a decision-making model concentrated in ‘very few hands’.
‘You cannot preach transparency while operating behind closed doors,’ he wrote — a pointed rebuke echoing wider concerns about opacity and centralised control.
‘A Closed Circle’
Papanikolaou echoed those sentiments, stating he no longer has any affiliation with Karystianou’s party. He described how a movement initially presented as open and inclusive had evolved into what he called ‘a closed circle’ — marked by internal directives and ideological entrenchment.
Savvidis, meanwhile, questioned the gap between rhetoric and action, accusing the initiative of ‘branding’ hope without turning it into tangible political practice. He highlighted unfulfilled promises and hinted at concerns over the public image and communication strategies of key figures involved.
Dozens Have Left
According to Vima, more than 50 people have quietly or publicly withdrawn from the group — out of an initial cohort of around 80 individuals involved in shaping the party’s political and ideological foundations. Most come from SYRIZA, PASOK, and the Freedom Movement. Notably, some were among those who originally encouraged Karystianou to lead a new political initiative following the mass mobilisations after the Tempi rail tragedy.
Among their criticisms are references to ‘non-existent political processes’, ‘authoritarian behaviour’, and ‘extremism’ — though the Greek text cuts off before completing the final term.