We live in a dangerous world, with Putin wanting to re-establish the Russian Empire in Europe, Trump wanting anything and everything, and the extreme right seemingly forgetting Nazism and the world wars. Not to mention the fashionable fake news that prohibits any debate based on facts, not fantasies. So we have to prepare ourselves for Putin’s expansionist aims and increase the funding of our armies. All this in difficult conditions, with the far right just about everywhere at the gates of power, and that’s where revisiting history is always beneficial.
In his rather brilliant book, Chapoutot explains to us that Hitler did not come to power through elections, but through the planned and deliberate suicide of the Weimar Republic. The old Field Marshal Hindenburg (a rather parallel figure to Pétain) was bought (his property was offered to him under dubious conditions). He was totally unwilling to compromise with the Social Democrats and of course the Communists. The big capitalists convinced him (along with Von Papen) that Hitler was the solution, because ‘this little corporal could easily be guided’. (They realised a little too late that this was not the case). Basically, as usual, Hitler was preferable to the left and the sharing of power and resources. We have seen this here too.
However, maintaining our social gains and at the same time financing weapons requires the support of the nation. This is conditioned by the reduction of inequalities and the taxation of millionaires who do not take their share of the burden. In this respect, our situation is not unlike that of 1933… If he ever did both at the same time (defence and reduction of inequalities), he would go down in history as Roosevelt and not as Daladier. The former imposed taxes of up to 85%, particularly on the richest; the country and the economy did well. Macron’s decision not to raise taxes is absurd, at least as far as the richest are concerned (only 2% of those who have 100 million in property). It would bring in the missing sums, not to mention the taxation of large multinationals and in particular GAFA. But this requires our president to override his ‘genetic’ banking vision.
This would make it possible to release the necessary funds for hospitals, research, in short for our social system, and to finance the defence effort. We must never forget that the main achievements of 1945 resulted from the fact that the big bosses had essentially collaborated and that the communists were on the verge of power and that it was impossible to give guarantees to the wealthy. Whereas now, this week’s edition of the canard reveals that several hundred million in taxes that Bolloré should have paid have been ‘reduced’, not to mention the facilities offered to his media, which call for hatred and denunciation across the airwaves. Several of the presenters of these channels would be in prison in a real democracy. These elements attest to the porosity and the preferences of the leaders who govern us; in the end they have chosen the same solutions as those who brought Macron (and before him Hitler) to power: they will never give up their privileges. We are going to make the far right seem tolerable after all – they have changed. Because you see, sir, they are never going to tax the rich. This is the only valid criterion. The harsh and repeated criticisms of Mélenchon and the LFI are only about that after all. The rest (pro-Islam, anti-Semitic, etc.), even when there are justifications for them, are still excuses. He or his close associates (who may, moreover, be more plausible candidates) will make the rich pay, unlike the others, from the RN to the right, via the centre, the social democrats in Holland, Cazeneuve, etc. At the crucial moment, they will always side with the ruling circles (‘My enemy is finance’ he promised…). It is not a question of convincing readers to vote for such and such a person (we are still a democracy), but simply of not forgetting that the sole purpose of what the media highlight all day long (immigration, insecurity, etc.) is to divert attention and prevent people from seeing the real problems. Frankly, in the situation we find ourselves in, is immigration our main problem? More important is the question: where do the hundreds of billions of deficits that our financial geniuses have created come from, a classic transfer to the benefit of the richest? So let’s look at the past if we don’t want it to happen again, and Chapoutot’s analysis of history is enlightening!
Johann Chapoutot “The irresponsible: who brought Hitler to power?”
