LE BLOG DE JOEL LEON.: 2016

Friday, December 23, 2016

La victoire d’Alep

Par Antoine Charpentier
Mondialisation.ca, 21 décembre 2016

La victoire se profile à Alep. Une des plus grandes et des plus déterminantes batailles a été remportée par l’armée syrienne. Les perdants semblent toujours persister dans le mensonge, appuyés par leurs médias de masse, eux-mêmes dominés par un tiers qui ne dit pas son nom, que le président Hugo Chavez nommait autrefois « la main invisible ».

Le mensonge de l’Occident impérialo-sioniste s’achève en Syrie, trouvant comme tombe la ville d’Alep avec une sépulture inscrivant dessus le mot HONTE. Oui, honte au monde libre, au monde moderne et soi-disant développé, honte à la Démocratie, honte aux Droits de l’Homme qui dans la pratique n’ont que l’appellation.

Après la victoire, les mensonges proférés à propos d’Alep par les dirigeants occidentaux vacillant les uns après les autres vont être révélés. Le monde dit moderne et libre va découvrir qu’Alep n’est pas uniquement la partie est où il y avait 250 000 civils pris comme bouclier humain par des factions terroristes ; factions bombardant quotidiennement un million et demi de civils à Alep-ouest, tuant des femmes et des enfants, dans l’indifférence de l’Occident qui n’a jamais évoqué ce drame d’une façon correcte et juste. Il convient de préciser que les combattants ne bombardaient pas les positions de l’armée syrienne, mais anarchiquement les civils. Ce sont ces mêmes éléments armés qui ont réclamé une trêve humanitaire face à l’avancée pertinente de l’armée syrienne à Alep-est. Mais savent-ils la signification exacte du mot humanitaire ?

Plusieurs trêves humanitaires ont eu lieu avec l’accord de l’Etat syrien et de ses alliés. Mais certaines ont servi au ravitaillement en armes des terroristes. Tandis que lorsqu’il y avait vraiment des aides alimentaires ou médicales, elles ont été confisquées par les soi-disant rebelles modérés et vendues trois à quatre fois plus chères aux habitants d’Alep-est.

Alep qui a vaincu n’est pas uniquement celle des enfants morts par les bombardements anarchiques des terroristes, mais aussi celles des filles et des femmes maltraitées, violées et réduites à l’état d’esclaves. Toujours dans le silence d’un bon nombre de pays occidentaux et de leurs alliés dans le Monde.

Alep qui a vaincu est celle dont le président a accordé l’amnistie pour toute personne déposant les armes, se rendant à l’Etat légitime. Que feraient d’autres présidents, s’ils venaient à affronter les mêmes problématiques ?

Alep qui a vaincu est celle de l’armée qui a ouvert plusieurs couloirs humanitaires pour permettre aux civils de sortir du piège, et aux nombreux combattants ayant la volonté de se rendre. En revanche, les « rebelles modérés » ont posté des snipers afin de tirer sur tout ce qui bouge de l’est vers l’ouest.

Alep qui a vaincu est celle qui constitue la malédiction de tous les dirigeants qui ont comploté contre elle, et qui sont en train de partir les uns après les autres, destination la poubelle de l’Histoire. Tandis que, face au fait accompli, les nouveaux dirigeants lâchent en partie les monstres et les criminels que leurs prédécesseurs soutenaient.

Alep a vaincu, mais la bataille n’est pas terminée. Cependant, la Syrie a changé le paysage politique mondial, en avortant la tentative du printemps arabe et avec elle le projet le plus diabolique pour le Moyen-Orient.

Alep a vaincu pendant que la nouvelle administration américaine semble modifier sa stratégie au Moyen-Orient.

Alep a vaincu puisque la Turquie ne peut pas aller plus loin face à la ténacité de l’armée et du peuple syrien, ainsi que face à l’habileté des dirigeants et diplomates syriens.

Alep a vaincu puisque l’Europe s’affaiblit de plus en plus à cause de son alignement aveugle et sans conditions sur la politique étatsunienne concernant la crise syrienne.

Aujourd’hui, la victoire d’Alep est militaire. À l’instar de celle qui se déroule actuellement autour de la ville de Douma dans la banlieue de Damas, ainsi qu’aux réconciliations nationales entre les Syriens qui sont des victoires aussi importantes que celle d’Alep.

Après la reprise d’Alep par l’armée syrienne, il y a Idlib, puis Raqqa, ensuite Deir El-Zor. Seules deux solutions peuvent être envisagées à propos d’Idlib qui devient le lieu de rassemblement et de stockage des combattants en Syrie, suite à leurs sorties de différentes localités syriennes. La première solution, et la plus préférable, est tout simplement une réconciliation, sinon une grande bataille aura lieu à l’image de celle de la ville d’Alep.

Quant à l’armée turque, elle se retirera définitivement de la Syrie. Les terroristes reviendront d’où ils sont venus, laissant aux Syriens de trouver les réponses aux aspirations de leurs concitoyens kurdes.

En attendant, Alep et toute la Syrie savourent une victoire bien méritée contre tous les diables de la terre.

Antoine Charpentier

Avis de non-responsabilité: Les opinions exprimées dans cet article n'engagent que le ou les auteurs. Le Centre de recherche sur la mondialisation se dégage de toute responsabilité concernant le contenu de cet article et ne sera pas tenu responsable pour des erreurs ou informations incorrectes ou inexactes.

The Italian Banking Crisis: No Free Lunch – Or Is There?

By Ellen Brown
Global Research, December 22, 2016
Web of Debt 21 November 2014

It has been called “a bigger risk than Brexit”– the Italian banking crisis that could take down the eurozone. Handwringing officials say “there is no free lunch” and “no magic bullet.” But UK Prof. Richard Werner says the magic bullet is just being ignored.

On December 4, 2016, Italian voters rejected a referendum to amend their constitution to give the government more power, and the Italian prime minister resigned. The resulting chaos has pushed Italy’s already-troubled banks into bankruptcy. First on the chopping block is the 500 year old Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA (BMP), the oldest surviving bank in the world and the third largest bank in Italy. The concern is that its loss could trigger the collapse of other banks and even of the eurozone itself.

There seems little doubt that BMP and other insolvent banks will be rescued. The biggest banks are always rescued, no matter how negligent or corrupt, because in our existing system, banks create the money we use in trade. Virtually the entire money supply is now created by banks when they make loans, as the Bank of England has acknowledged. When the banks collapse, economies collapse, because bank-created money is the grease that oils the wheels of production.

So the Italian banks will no doubt be rescued. The question is, how? Normally, distressed banks can raise cash by selling their non-performing loans (NPLs) to other investors at a discount; but recovery on the mountain of Italian bad debts is so doubtful that foreign investors are unlikely to bite. In the past, bankrupt too-big-to-fail banks have sometimes been nationalized. That discourages “moral hazard” – rewarding banks for bad behavior – but it’s at the cost of imposing the bad debts on the government. Further, new EU rules require a “bail in” before a government bailout, something the Italian government is desperate to avoid. As explained on a European website called Social Europe:
The EU’s banking union, which came into force in January 2016, prescribes that when a bank runs into trouble, existing stakeholders – namely, shareholders, junior creditors and, sometimes, even senior creditors and depositors with deposits in excess of the guaranteed amount of €100,000 – are required to take a loss before public funds can be used . . . .

[The problem is that] the subordinated bonds that would take a hit are not simply owned by well-off families and other banks: as much as half of the €60 billion of subordinated bonds are estimated to be owned by around 600,000 small savers, who in many cases were fraudulently mis-sold these bonds by the banks as being risk-free (as good as deposits basically).

The government got a taste of the potential backlash a year ago, when it forced losses onto the bondholders of four small banks. One victim made headlines when he hung himself and left a note blaming his bank, which had taken his entire €100,000 savings.
Goldman Sachs Weighs In

It is not just the small savers that are at risk. According to a July 2016 article titled “Look Who’s Frantically Demanding That Taxpayers Stop Italy’s Bank Meltdown”:

The total exposure of French banks and private investors alone to Italian government debt exceeds €250 billion. Germany holds €83.2 billion worth of Italian bonds. Deutsche bank alone has nearly €12 billion worth of Italian bonds on its books. The other banking sectors most at risk of contagion are Spain (€44.6 billion), the U.S. (€42.3 billion) the UK (€29.8 billion) and Japan (€27.6 billion).

. . . All of which helps to explain why banks and their representatives at the IMF and the ECB are frantically demanding a no-expenses-spared taxpayer-funded rescue of Italy’s banking system.

It could also explain why Goldman Sachs took it upon itself to propose a way out of this dilemma: instead of buying Italian government bonds in their quantitative easing program, the ECB and the central bank of Italy could buy the insolvent banks’ nonperforming loans.
As observed in a July 2016 article in The Financial Times titled “Goldman: Italy’s Bank Saga – Not Such a Big Deal,” Italy’s NPLs then stood at €210bn, and the ECB was buying €120bn per year of outstanding Italian government bonds as part of its quantitative easing (QE) scheme. The author quoted Goldman’s Francesco Garzarelli, who said, “by the time QE is over – not sooner than end 2017, on our baseline scenario – around a fifth of Italy’s public debt will be sitting on the Bank of Italy’s balance sheet.” Bringing the entire net stock of bad loans onto the government’s balance sheet, he said, would be equivalent to just nine months’ worth of Italian government bond purchases by the ECB.

Buying bank debt with money generated by the central bank would rescue the banks without cost to the taxpayers, the bondholders or the government. So why hasn’t this option been pursued?

The Inflation Objection

Perhaps the concern is that it would be inflationary. But UK Prof. Richard Werner, who invented the term “quantitative easing” when he was advising the Japanese in the 1990s, says inflation would not result. In 2012, he proposed a similar solution to the European banking crisis, citing three successful historical precedents.

One was the US Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing program, in which it bought $1.7 trillion in mortgage-backed securities from the banks. These securities were widely understood to be “toxic” – Wall Street’s own burden of NPLs. The move was highly controversial, but it worked for its intended purpose: the banks did not collapse, the economy got back on its feet, and the much-feared inflation did not result. Werner says this was because no new money entered the non-bank economy. The QE was just an accounting maneuver, an asset swap in the reserve accounts of the banks themselves.

His second example was in Britain in 1914, when the British banking sector collapsed after the government declared war on Germany. This was not a good time for a banking crisis, so the Bank of England simply bought the banks’ NPLs. “There was no credit crunch,” wrote Werner, “and no recession. The problem was solved at zero cost to the tax payer.”

For a third example, he cited the Japanese banking crisis of 1945. The banks had totally collapsed, with NPLs that amounted to virtually 100 percent of their assets:
But in 1945 the Bank of Japan had no interest in creating a banking crisis and a credit crunch recession. Instead it wanted to ensure that bank credit would flow again, delivering economic growth. So the Bank of Japan bought the non-performing assets from the banks – not at market value (close to zero), but significantly above market value.

In each of these cases, Werner wrote:
The operations were a complete success. No inflation resulted. The currency did not weaken. Despite massive non-performing assets wiping out the solvency and equity of the banking sector, the banks’ health was quickly restored. In the UK and Japanese case, bank credit started to recover quickly, so that there was virtually no recession at all as a result.

For Italy and other “peripheral” eurozone countries, Werner suggests a two-pronged approach: (1) the central bank should buy the distressed banks’ NPLs with QE, and (2) the government should borrow from the banks rather than from bondholders. Borrowing in the bond market fattens the underwriters but creates no new money in the form of bank credit for the economy. Borrowing from banks does create new money as bank credit. (See my earlier article here.)

Clearly, when central banks want to save the banking system without cost to the government or the people, they know how to do it. So the question remains, why hasn’t the ECB followed the Federal Reserve’s lead and pursued this option?

The Moral Hazard Objection

Perhaps it is because banks that know they will be rescued from their bad loans will keep making bad loans. But the same moral hazard would ensue from a bailout or a bail-in, which virtually all interested parties seem to be advocating. And as was observed in an article titled “Italy: Banking Crisis or Euro Crisis?”, the cause of the banks’ insolvency in this case was actually something beyond the banks’ control – the longest and deepest recession in Italy’s history.

Werner argues that the moral hazard argument should instead be applied to the central bank, which actually was responsible for the recession due to the massive credit bubbles its policies allowed and encouraged. Rather than being punished for these policies, however, the ECB has been rewarded with even more power and control. Werner writes:
There is thus a form of regulatory moral hazard in place: regulators that obtain more powers after crises may not have sufficient incentives to avoid such crises.

What May Really Be Going On

Werner and other observers suspect that saving the economies of the peripheral eurozone countries is not the real goal of ECB policy. Rather, the ECB and the European Commission are working to force a political union on the eurozone countries, one controlled by unelected bureaucrats in the service of a few very large corporations and banks. Werner quotes David Shipley on Bloomberg:
Central bank officials may be hoping that by keeping the threat of financial Armageddon alive, they can coerce the region’s people and governments into moving toward the deeper union that the euro’s creators envisioned.

ECB and EC officials claim that “there is no free lunch” and “no alternative,” says Werner. But there is an alternative, one that is cost-free to the people and the government. The European banks could be rescued by the central bank, just as US banks were rescued by the Federal Reserve.
To avoid the moral hazard of bank malfeasance in the future, the banks could then be regulated so that they were harnessed to serve the public interest, or they could be nationalized. This could be done without cost to the government, since the NPLs would have been erased from the books.

For a long-term solution, the money that is now created by banks in pursuit of their own profit either needs to be issued by governments (as has been done quite successfully in the past, going back to the American colonies) or it needs to be created by banks that are required to serve the public interest. And for that to happen, the banks need to be made public utilities.

Ellen Brown is an attorney and author of twelve books, including the best-selling Web of Debt. Her latest book, The Public Bank Solution, explores successful public banking models historically and globally. Her 300+ blog articles are at EllenBrown.com. She can be heard biweekly on “It’s Our Money with Ellen Brown” on PRN.FM.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.

The Liberation of Aleppo: A Regional Turning Point. Setback for US-Led Aggression

By Prof. Tim Anderson
Global Research, December 21, 2016

In late 2016, at the cost of many young lives, Syrian forces took back the eastern part of the city of Aleppo, occupied by NATO and Saudi backed terrorists for more than four years.

The liberation of Aleppo, Syria’s second city and an ancient marvel, represents the most serious setback for the 15-year long Washington-led aggression on the entire region. An effective recolonisation of the region has stretched from Afghanistan to Libya, under a range of false pretexts. Invasions and proxy wars have been backed by economic sanctions and wild propaganda.

But this great war of aggression – called the creation of ‘New Middle East’ by former US President George W. Bush – has hit a rock in Syria. The massive proxy armies bought and equipped by Washington and its regional allies the Saudis, Turkey, Qatar and Israel, have been beaten back by a powerful regional alliance which supports the Syrian nation.

Prof Tim Anderson’s International bestseller, click image to order directly from Global Research

The endgame in Aleppo involves a handful of foreign agents – US, Saudi, Israeli and others – said to remain with the last al Qaeda groups in a tiny part of what was once their stronghold. The US in particular is keen to secure their release, because their presence is further evidence of the foreign command of what was claimed to be a ‘civil war’.

After a storm of western government and media misinformation (claims of massacres, mass executions and ‘civilians targeted’) over the evacuation of around 100,000 civilians and many thousands of terrorists, the UN Security Council authorised some ‘independent observers’ to monitor the process. However most of that evacuation is now over. Resettlement and reconstruction is already underway, and army reserves have been called up to defend the city.

Syrian, Iranian, Russian and independent reporters (including Maytham al Ashkar, Shadi Halwi, Asser Khatab, Khaled Alkhateb, Ali Musawi, Lizzie Phelan, Murad Gazdiev, Vanessa Beeley, Eva Bartlett and the late Mohsen Khazaei) have already told us quite a lot. What they said bore little resemblance to the western apocalyptic stories. For example, outgoing UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, a close ally of Washington, claimed in his last press conference that ‘Aleppo is now a synonym for hell’. Those claims were based on stories from NATO’s desperate jihadists.

Reporters on the ground told a different story. As Syrian forces smashed the al Qaeda lines, the trapped civilians streamed out. They published video of long lines of people leaving east Aleppo and finding relief, food and shelter with the Syrian Arab Army. Tired and relieved, they told their stories to anyone who cared to listen. Russia and Iran gave many tonnes of food, clothing, blanket and shelter aid. By contrast, western countries generally gave nothing and the terror groups rejected all aid from the Syrian alliance.

Civilians were prohibited from leaving the al Qaeda enclave, many were shot dead when they tried to do so. The armed gangs had food reserves but kept it for their fighters. Arms factories including toxic chemicals were found and were being made safe. Some of the armed men were taken into custody, but most were shipped out to Idlib, where Damascus has been concentrating the foreign-backed fighters.

When the hell canons fell silent, and no more home-made gas cylinder mortars landed in the heart of the city, there was elation and dancing in the streets, shown widely on social media. The US State Department spokesman claimed he had not seen this.

Al Qaeda in Aleppo was crushed. All the anti-Syrian government armed groups in Aleppo were either the ‘official’ al Qaeda in Syria (Jabhat al Nusra aka Jaysh Fateh al Sham) or deeply embedded associates. When the US pretended to suppress Jabhat al Nusra in 2012 and 2016, all the ‘Free Syrian Army’ groups protested, saying ‘we are all Jabhat al Nusra’. One might have thought that the US Government – which once claimed to be engaged in a global war against terrorism, in the name of 3,000 people murdered in New York back in September 2001 – would be as elated as those on the streets of Aleppo. They were not.

Much of the western media, reflecting their governments, solemnly reported on ‘the fall of Aleppo’. The Syrian victory over the al Qaeda groups was a great tragedy, they said. On the other hand, the near simultaneous recapture of Syria’s ancient city of Palmyra, by the eastern al Qaeda group ISIS, was reported differently. That city was said to have been ‘retaken’.

All this underlines what should have been an obvious point, admitted by many US officials, that every single armed group in Syria (whether ‘moderate’ or ‘extremist’) has been armed and financed by the US and its allies, in an attempt to overthrow the Syrian Government. All the talk about ‘moderate rebels’, a ‘brutal regime’ and a ‘civil war’ just tries to hide this.

The final evacuations of Aleppo – which included an exchange of civilians besieged for 20 months in the Idlib towns of Faoua and Kafraya for remaining NATO-jihadists in eastern Aleppo – were organised between Russia and Turkey. There was some serious sabotage of these agreements, but the understandings have so far stayed on track. Now Iran is engaged with Russia and Turkey, in three way talks. Practical matters are being discussed.

It is notable that the Obama administration is playing no direct constructive role in the endgame over Aleppo. Its ‘regime change’ proxy war on Syria is failing and, in its place, the incoming Washington regime promises a new approach. More importantly, a new regional alliance has formed to reject any new aggression from the colonial powers.

Many things have changed during the war on Syria. The Syrian alliance has beaten back powerful NATO-GCC forces. The Muslim Brotherhood and its patrons in Egypt, Qatar and Turkey have received another beating. Egypt and Iraq now support Syria. The Saudis have joined with Israel against Iran and Syria. Russia has built stronger bonds with Syria and Iran. The Arab League, having backed the destruction of two Arab states, seems all but dead. Will the new, enhanced ‘Axis of Resistance’ take its place?

Duterte Says He'll 'Burn Down The United Nations'

Chris Riotta,International Business Times 8 hours ago

Rodrigo Duterte offered his latest controversial remarks on Thursday. This time they were aimed at the United Nations’ human rights chief. The Philippines president attacked the U.N.'s high commissioner for human rights for suggesting the organization should open a murder investigation against Duterte, describing Zeid Ra'ad al-Hussein as an "idiot" and claiming he'd "burn down the United Nations."

Duterte, who became president of the Philippines in June 2016, has repeatedly shared detailed accounts of killings against suspected drug dealers and criminals he committed on the streets of Davao, when he was mayor of the city. "In Davao, I used to do it personally, just to show the guys that if I can do it, why can’t you?" Duterte said earlier in December. His recent comments followed a statement from the United Nation’s high commissioner for human rights, who condemned the Duterte's remarks, which appeared to openly boast about killing civilians of the Philippines in the street.

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte pointing to a piece of paper containing a list of personalities he alleged are involved with the drug trade, as he delivered a speech during an awarding ceremony for outstanding Filipinos and organizations overseas, at the Malacanang Palace in Manila, Philippines Dec. 19, 2016. Photo: Reuters

"It is unthinkable for any functioning judicial system not to launch investigative and judicial proceedings when someone has openly admitted being a killer," al-Hussein said in his statement.

"You do not talk to me like that, you son of a bitch," the president responded, speaking at an army base in the southern city of Zamboanga Sunday. "I will burn down the United Nations if you want. I will burn it down if I go to America." The president has also encouraged vigilante-styled killings of anyone openly breaking the law in the Philippines as part of his crackdown on drugs and crime throughout the country.

"Your understanding of international law is lacking," Duterte continued. "We are the ones contributing to the United Nations. You morons! You sons of whores! And I pay your salaries. Do not open your mouth there. I employ you."

The Philippines' "war on drugs" has been linked to more than 5,900 deaths since Duterte took office in June. Of those killings, 2,086 were part of police operations, while 3,841 were extrajudicial or vigilante-style killings, CNN reported. The killings, as well as Duterte’s controversial remarks, have sparked international outcry since he became president in June.

The U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee recently called Duterte’s "war on drugs" into question in a letter sent to the department on Thursday, describing the president’s efforts "a campaign of mass atrocities thinly disguised as a response to a public health emergency."

"Rather than address the systemic problems related to the country’s drug crisis, invest in treatment programs, or approach the epidemic with a focus on the health and well-being of the Philippine people," the letter, signed by Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, and two Democratic senators, Sen. Markey and Sen. Coons, said. "President Duterte has instead pledged to kill another 20,000 to 30,000 people, many simply because they suffer from a drug use disorder."

CIA chief warns against in-kind retaliation for Russian hacking

Reuters 14 hours ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan has warned the U.S. government against a tit-for-tat response to Russian hacking during the presidential election.

"I don't think we should resort to some of the tactics and techniques that our adversaries employ against us. I think we need to remember what we're fighting for," Brennan told National Public Radio in an interview that aired on Friday. (http://n.pr/2ily7zS)

"We're fighting for our country, our democracy, our way of life, and to engage. And the skullduggery that some of our opponents and adversaries engage in, I think is beneath this country's greatness," Brennan said on NPR's "Morning Edition."

U.S. officials have accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of supervising his intelligence agencies' hacking during the U.S. presidential election in an effort to help Republican Donald Trump. Russian officials have denied accusations of interference in the Nov. 8 election won by Trump..

President Barack Obama, who has asked spy agencies to deliver an analysis of Russian meddling in the election before Trump takes office on Jan. 20, last week strongly suggested that Putin personally authorized the election hacking. He also left the door open to retaliation, possibly under a Trump administration.

U.S. Republican and Democratic senators have called for a special bipartisan panel to investigate cyber attacks against the United States by foreign countries with a focus on Russia's alleged efforts to influence the U.S. presidential election.

Brennan also predicted that despite the fall of eastern Aleppo to forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, there would be no end to the violence there.

"Aleppo's fall, to me is not a sign that there is going to be an end to this conflict because I am convinced that many, many of those oppositionists, the ones who are trying to reclaim their country for their families, for their neighbors, for their children, will continue to fight," he told NPR.

(Reporting by Eric Walsh; Editing by Phil Berlowitz)

Thursday, December 22, 2016

How Fear and Ignorance Birth The Unpredictability in America!

"When all institutions are under the dictate of a single thought or a single party, I mean the 3 powers of the state, legislative / judicial / executive, the citizen becomes a hero. In fact, the last shield to defend freedom. Montesquieu, Hobbes, and Fanon are in danger. "

Joel Leon

In the beginning, I had the perception that the 2016 presidential election was a no-brainer. And that, Hillary Clinton, would make a mouthful of the Republican competitor and enters history as the first woman elected to the presidency of the United States. Also in the line of Barak Obama who became the first black American president 8 years ago, in 2009. This introspection was due to the reactionary speeches of conservative candidates in the primary of the Republican Party. They were all war mongers, extremely xenophobic, furiously denouncing immigration, exasperated against Islam, and at times brutally racist. I was not the only one to have that inkling because traditionally the average Americans vote in the middle.

Mitt Romney, the former 2012 Republican loser candidate had the unpleasant experience, and summarized his election failure as follows: "I think the biggest mistake I made; I was not concentrating early enough on minority voters."

Katie Packer Gage, former campaign manager for Mr. Mitt Romney shared this same documented reflection: "Candidates perceived as anti-immigration will start the general election with a disadvantage of 24 points among likely voters ...”. Definitely, immigration was an important factor in these specific US elections. All the evidence supporting my reading of political theater was ill-calculated. For other much more fundamental and profound reasons, the minds of "deep America’’ have been deeply occupied.

After the catastrophic end of the brief doctrine, described as a "third way" in Europe in the 2000s (marked by Bill Clinton, Tony Blaire and Lionel Jospin), the extreme right reappears. Since then, populist leaders have continued to threaten the post-war political citadel dated to 1945. With millions of refugees invading the lands of the West in recent years, the old racist demons take advantage of this new actuality to claim power. Jörg Haider almost took the power in Hungary; Jean Mary Lepen (father of Marine Lepen), during the year 2002 was in the second round of the French presidential election. On May 23, 2016, Norbert Hofer was on the verge of winning the Austrian elections; Marine Lepen, leader of the "Front National" retains a good chance to win the French presidential in 2017, in France. Many people thought that the United States was immune to this extreme right-wing plague. It was well counted, but ill-calculated!

Demography and Immigration

Many progressive thinkers are deluded by the alleged links between Vladimir Putin, the master of Moscow, and Donald Trump, president-elect of the United States of America as a flicker of hope. They are two men of different cultures and experiences. Putin made his debut in the aisles of the Soviet Communist Party, then in the ranks of the KGB as colonel of intelligence; Trump, a born capitalist, his favorite interest is the art to accumulate fortunes. Therefore, the juxtaposition is of a strategic order based on cultural ramifications, empty of any progressive ideological inclination. The two people, as well as all from Western countries, have in common the specter of the prediction of "2050".

United Nations department of economics and social affairs (UNDESA) expected a turning point regarding world population by 2050. It is predicted that the Russian population will decrease from 143 million today to 114 million. Currently, 197 million people in the United States are white, accounting for 67% of the population, and therefore constitute a large majority. By 2050, they will decline to 47%, consequently a minority. Nicholas Eberstadt, a demography specialist, made the following projection: "In 1995 the estimate of the population of Europe and Africa was almost exactly equal. By 2050, by these projections, Africans would exceed Europeans by more than 3 to 1 ". Jose Angel Gutierrez, a professor of political science in the state of Texas, elegantly translates the Western anguish as follows: "We have an aging white population. They are no longer babies. So they disappear. The inhabitant’s explosion is in our population (Mexico). They shit out of fear in their pants. I love it.” The undeniable reality is that the West stops to give birth. In the meantime, Asia, Africa, and Latin America continue to bring millions of children into the world, accordingly to the book of Genesis chapter 17: 6.

The West countries are experiencing depopulation that has been haunted them for decades; the only viable solution is to admit a great community of immigrants to fulfill the consequences inherent to industrialization. However, they intend to fill up this emptiness according to their own terms. The only dilemma is that the world is no longer what it used to be when we introduced slavery in America during the 16th century. If neo-liberalism has replaced slavery, people are no longer the innocents of the recent past. They react differently, and in accordance with their interests. The impoverishment of the peripheral countries, the fomented civil wars, the destabilization of unfriendly governments, produce unforeseen effects. The most dazzling of them is the flow of refugees. The immigrants do not wait for invitations like in the 60s; they invite themselves to the Western nations. Some observers think they go where their wealth are stolen and piled up. The Haitians stormed the coast of Florida; the Mexicans scaled the barbed wire of "Tijuana", the Africans and the Mediterranean invaded Europe.

The consequence is obvious. The extreme right, starting from this human wave arriving and staying "illegally" in western countries, finds the fatal weapon to twist the weak-minded. Now, populism discovers the ideal target to blame all the problems that strike their country. Exploiting that advantageous reality, the extreme right is advancing to the Europe continent, and seizing power at the very heart of the capital of the so-called civilizing world.

Race and Culture

The United States of America has a wide population of 324,707,000 inhabitants, 197 million are white (including immigrants from Europe and the Middle East), representing 67.7 percent of the total population. On November 4, 2008, a sudden event happened in the United States. Barack Obama, the charismatic black senator from the state of Illinois, was elected president in opposition to Senator Hillary Clinton. In my humble opinion, it looks like white America was in a lethargic state, and then woke up on January 20, 2009, to find a direct descendant of Africa to the White House.

It was a white cataclysm!

America was stunned by this awesome coup. Caught unprepared, White America was preparing its revenge. This faction of society saw with annoyance the presence of Michelle and Barak Obama accompanied by their daughters living in the White House, the building that represents the highest symbol of racial domination. The citadel had been taken by assault, and invaded by astuteness, without firing a shot. It has to be recovered. In fact, Pamela Taylor of West Virginia expresses loudly what millions of people think in a low voice, namely, "It will be refreshing to have an elegant, beautiful and dignified First Lady in the White House. I'm tired of seeing an ape in heels (Michelle Obama). “The vengeance must be remarkable, spectacular and unambiguous by placing the cynicism in power!

As Donald Trump embarked on a particularly pro-fascist diatribe, his popularity grew exponentially. He became a half-god. Thousands of people traveled to listen to him. He reflects the aspiration of a large fringe of American society. which Richard Nixon liked to call "silent majority", to describe the defectors from the Democratic Party who, after the signing of the civil rights agreement by Lyndon Johnson in 1964, forsaken it.

Donald Trump's vote reflects this aspect of American life. In a few words, "the worm is in the fruit". The social contract concluded in 1865, after the cruel war of secession is expired. It is necessary to redefine the political and cultural parameters of the different entities that inhabit the country. The United States ceased to be formally a united Christian nation under one God for several decades. The Supreme Court, although conservative, does ratify anti-Christian laws, such as same-sex marriage. Liberals and Conservatives are constantly confronting each other on all accounts, which make the cohabitation very perilous, sometimes impossible to manage.

This cultural mixture, called melting pot, denounced with loquacity by the conservatives has reached its culmination point. They warn against the redefinition of the American identity if there is one left. To accomplish this heavy task, they must resort to extreme means, including violence and isolationism. Imagine America “the civilizing people", now to preserve its culture does not hesitate to lock itself up in a cage, far from the forthcoming immigrants. We forget that exchanges between peoples worldwide are not a one-way street. From Marco Polo, through Christopher Columbus to Jacques Cousteau, civilizations have always intermingled to create a symbiosis.

We are in the aftermath of the new world that John Lennon sang in "Imagine":

Imagine that there is no country/It's not hard to do/No reason to kill or die for/And no religion either/Imagine all people/Living in peace

On 30 June 1991 apartheid was abolished in South Africa. A date that, despite its greatness in the annals of the struggle for "the season of men” symbolizes also an ultimate humiliation for many. It announces the beginning of the end of a long reign that the "fearful whites" constantly warn against his arrival. The Zimbabwean event also frightens much of the white population that dominates the wealth, culture and international monopoly of violence. For them, Matthew 20:16 takes the human form, and threatens their domination in the world. Fear is a key element in the arsenal of ideological and political manipulation of the weak minded masses.

This American cultural war has now reached its highest point. Conservative circles, trapped in the defensive for more than half a century, are fighting back very hard. "The best way to win a war is to go on the offensive." The problem is that Trump is not a true conservative. This burden to bring the union back to the great traditional values of the founding fathers should be guided by an authentic ideologue, not a salesman. So the victory of 8 November 2016 is ephemeral. Its survival is already widely contradicted. History never backtracks. Those who feast today, weep tomorrow. Besides, the resistance of the citizens is already visible on the streets of many cities in America. When all institutions are under the dictates of a single thought or a party, I mean the 3 powers of the state, legislative / judicial / executive, the citizen becomes a hero. It’s the last shield to defend freedom for all in America. Montesquieu, Hobbes, and Fanon are at risk. Democracy is at an impasse in the heart of America.

Finally, many can consider other justification about the real nature of this crisis that threatens American society from the inner self. Is it not the corollary manifestation of a much deeper crisis? Is it not the beginning of the decline of American hegemony? These contradictions, as I have described them above, show signs of uncontrollable contradictions. If this is the case, the world should be prepared for a widespread crisis, since any decline of this magnitude can lead to a domino effect.

Joel Leon

Bibliography

Migration Policy Institute-MPI

American Community Survey-ACS

Allan J. Lichtman –“The keys of the white house”

Natalie Dickinson-West Virginia under fire for racist Michelle Obama.

Larry Bartels& John Zaller- “Presidential vote models” (March 2001)

Pat Buchanan- “The death of the west”.

US Census Bureau

United Nations Department of Economics and Social Affairs-UNDESA

Politico.com-June 2015

Chris Cillizza- “How immigration could cripple the republican nominee long before 2016 election” (Washington post, June 2015)

Felicia J. Persaud- “Haiti makes its way into last US presidential debate” (News Americas)

Frantz Fanon- “Les Damnés de la Terre »

Montesquieu- « L’esprit des Lois »

Thomas Hobbes- « Léviathan »

Comment La Peur et L’Ignorance Accouchent l’imprédictibilité aux Etats-Unis d’Amérique

Comment La Peur et L’Ignorance Accouchent l’imprédictibilité aux Etats-Unis d’Amérique!

« Lorsque toutes les institutions sont sous le dictat d’une pensée ou d’un parti unique, je veux parler des 3 pouvoirs de l’état, législatif/judiciaire/exécutif, le citoyen devient héros. Le dernier bouclier défendant la liberté. Montesquieu, Hobbes et Fanon sont en danger».

Par Joël Léon

Tout au début, j’avais la perception que : a) l’élection présidentielle américaine de 2016 allait être une tâche facile ; b) Hillary Clinton ferait une bouchée du concurrent républicain et entre dans l’histoire comme la première femme élue à la présidence des Etats-Unis. Ainsi, elle aurait laissé une empreinte indélébile tout comme Barak Obama qui devint le premier président noir américain 8 ans de cela, soit en 2009. Cette introspection a été due aux discours réactionnaires des candidats conservateurs au primaire du parti républicain. Ils étaient tous des va-t-en guerre, extrêmement xénophobes, dénonçant rageusement l’immigration, en exaspération contre l’Islam ; parfois, ils étaient brutalement racistes. Je n’étais pas le seul à avoir cette sensation, car traditionnellement les américains moyens votent au milieu. Beaucoup d’anciens candidats à la présidence en avaient fait la désagréable expérience.

Mitt Romney, l’ancien candidat perdant républicain de 2012, a résumé son échec électoral comme suit : « Je pense que la plus grosse erreur que j’ai commise, je ne me concentrais pas assez tôt sur les électeurs des minorités. »

Katie Packer Gage, ancien manager de la campagne de Mr Mitt Romney a partagé cette même réflexion documentée, à savoir que : « Les candidats perçus comme anti-immigration vont commencer l'élection générale avec un désavantage de 24 points parmi les électeurs probables… ». D’où l’importance de l’immigration dans les élections. Tous des éléments justificatifs confortant ma lecture du théâtre politique. C’était mal calculé. Car, d’autres raisons beaucoup plus fondamentales et profondes occupaient les esprits de « l’Amérique profonde ».

Apres la fin catastrophique de la doctrine momentanée qualifiée de « troisième voie » en Europe dans les années 2000 (marquée par Clinton, Tony Blair et Lionel Jospin), la droite extrême refaisait surface. Depuis lors, les dirigeants populistes ne cessent de menacer la citadelle politique datée de la période d’après-guerre, soit en 1945. Avec des millions de refugiés qui envahissent les terres de l’occident durant ces dernières années, les vieux démons racistes en profitent pour requérir le pouvoir. Jörg Haider a failli de peu prendre le pouvoir en Hongrie ; Jean Mary Lepen (père de Marine Lepen), au cours de l’année 2002 fut au deuxième tour de la présidentielle française. Le 23 mai 2016 dernier, Norbert Hofer était à deux doigts de gagner les élections autrichiennes ; Marine Lepen, leader du « Front National » conserve une bonne chance de gagner la présidentielle française de 2017. D’aucuns pensaient que les Etats-Unis étaient immunisés par cette pandémie extrême-droitiste. C’était bien compté, mais mal calculé !

Démographie et Immigration

Beaucoup de penseurs progressistes s’illusionnent des prétendus liens qui existeraient entre Vladimir Putin, le maitre de Moscou, et Donald Trump, président élu des Etats-Unis d’Amérique, comme une lueur d’espoir. Deux hommes de différentes cultures et d’expériences : Putin fait ses premières armes dans les allées du parti communiste soviétique, puis dans les rangs du KGB comme colonel de renseignement ; Trump, un capitaliste né _ son intérêt favori est l’art d’accumuler des sommes d’argent. Donc, la juxtaposition est d’ordre stratégique basée sur des ramifications culturelles, dépourvue de toute velléité idéologique progressiste. Russes et Américains, comme l’ensemble des pays occidentaux, ont en commun le spectre de la prédiction de « 2050 ».

Le département des affaires économiques et sociales des nations-Unies (UNDESA) avait déjà considéré un grand décalage au niveau de la population mondiale d’ici 2050. A partir de cette date, il est prévu que la population russe passera de 143 millions aujourd’hui, à 114 millions. Présentement, 197 millions d’habitants des Etats-Unis sont blancs ; ils représentent 67% de la population, donc largement majoritaire. En 2050, ils passeront à 47%, donc infiniment minoritaire. Nicholas Eberstadt, spécialiste en démographie, a fait la projection suivante : « En 1995, l’estimation des populations de l'Europe et de l'Afrique étaient presque exactement égales. En 2050, par ces projections, les Africains dépasseraient les Européens de plus de 3 à 1 ». Jose Angel Gutierrez, professeur de sciences politiques dans l’état de Texas, traduit élégamment l’angoisse occidentale en ces termes : « Nous avons une population blanche vieillissante. Ils ne font plus de bébés. Donc, Ils disparaissent. L'explosion démographique est dans notre population (Mexique). Ils chient de peur dans leur pantalon. J'adore ça. » L’incontestable réalité, c’est que l’occident cesse d’enfanter. Entretemps, L’Asie, l’Afrique et l’Amérique Latine continuent de mettre régulièrement au monde des millions d’enfants, conformément au livre de Genèse chapitre 17 : 6.

L’occident fait l’expérience de la dépopulation qui le hante depuis des décennies. Il a un grand besoin d’immigrants. Mais, il entend emplir cette vacuité selon son propre terme. Le seul problème, c’est que le monde n’est plus ce qu’il était autrefois quand on introduisait l’esclavage en Amérique au 16^e siècle. Si le néo-libéralisme remplace l’esclavage, par contre, les peuples ne sont plus les innocents d’antan. Ils réagissent différemment, conformément à leurs intérêts. L’appauvrissement des pays de la périphérie, les guerres civiles fomentées, les déstabilisations des gouvernements inamicaux produisent des effets non escomptés. La plus fulgurante d’entre eux : le flux de refugiés. Donc, l’immigration. Les émigrés n’attendent plus les invitations comme dans les années 60. Ils s’invitent eux-mêmes chez les occidentaux. Certains disent qu’ils vont là où leurs richesses sont volées et entassées. Les Haïtiens prennent d’assaut les côtes de la Floride ; les Mexicains escaladent les barbelés de « Tijuana » ; Africains et Méditerranéens envahissent l’Europe.

La conséquence est manifeste. L’extrême droite, à partir de cette marée humaine qui entre et séjourne « illégalement » dans les pays occidentaux, trouve l’arme fatale pour pervertir les faibles d’esprit. Maintenant, le populisme découvre la cible idéale pour jeter les blâmes de tous les maux qui frappent leur pays. Le vent en pourpre, l’extrême droite fait la pluie et le beau temps en Europe ; maintenant, elle saisit le pouvoir au cœur même de la capitale du monde dit civilisateur.

Race et Culture

Les Etats-Unis d’Amérique ont une population dense de 324.707.000 habitants dont 197 millions sont blancs (incluant les immigrants d’Europe et ceux du Moyen-Orient), représentant 67.7% de la population globale. Le 4 novembre 2008, un événement soudain arriva aux Etats-Unis. Barak Obama, le charismatique sénateur noir de l’état d’Illinois fut élu président contre la sénatrice Hillary Clinton. A mon avis, on dirait que l’Amérique majoritairement blanche se trouvait dans un état léthargique, puis se réveilla le 20 Janvier 2009, pour retrouver un descendant direct de l’Afrique à la maison blanche. Ce fut un cataclysme blanc !

L’Amérique fut abasourdie par ce coup de grisou impressionnant. Prise au dépourvu, l’Amérique blanche préparait sa revanche. Cette frange de la société constatait avec agacement la présence de Michelle et de Barak Obama accompagnés de leurs filles habitant la maison blanche. Édifice qui représente pour elle le haut symbole de la domination raciale. La citadelle avait été prise d’assaut et investie par la ruse, sans le tir d’un coup de fusil. Il faut la récupérer. D’ailleurs, Pamela Taylor _ habitante l’ouest de la Virginie_ a exprimé bien haut ce que des millions pensent tout bas, à savoir et je cite : "Ce sera rafraîchissant d'avoir une première Dame élégante, belle et digne à la Maison Blanche. Je suis fatiguée de voir un singe en talons (Michelle Obama). " Il faut que ce soit remarquable, spectaculaire et ahurissant en plaçant le cynisme au pouvoir !

Donald Trump, le plus virulent des adeptes du discours enflammé, gagnait haut la main les primaires républicains. Les modérés du parti de Lincoln sortaient par la petite porte. Automatiquement, je me suis rendu compte à l’évidence que nous sommes en face d’une situation spéciale. C'est-à-dire d’un mouvement. Le leader n’est rien d’autre que Donald Trump. Un monsieur qui se passe de présentation, tantôt libéral, tantôt conservateur. Cette fois avec un discours indigne de «l’Amérique terre de mansuétude », mais qui répond aux revendications d’une masse de citoyens, à forte majorité blanche. Donc, Donald n’est le fils de personne. Il est lui-même.

Au fur et à mesure qu’il se lançait dans des diatribes particulièrement pro- fascistes, sa popularité augmentait exponentiellement. Il est devenu un demi-dieu. Des milliers de personnes se déplaçaient pour l’écouter. Il traduit l’aspiration d’une grande frange de la société américaine que Richard Nixon aimait appeler « la majorité silencieuse », c’était pour décrire les transfuges du parti démocrate qui, après la signature de l’accord sur les droits civiques par Lyndon Johnson en 1964, abandonnèrent le parti démocrate.

En filigrane, « le vers est dans le fruit ». Le contrat social conclu en 1865, après la cruelle guerre de sécession, arrive à expiration. Il faut redéfinir les paramètres politiques et culturels du pays. Les Etats-Unis cessent d’être formellement une nation chrétienne unie depuis plusieurs décennies. La cour suprême, quoique conservatrice, ratifie par contre des lois anti chrétiennes, par exemple le mariage homosexuel. Libéraux et conservateurs s’affrontent en permanence sur tous les fronts, ce qui rend la cohabitation périlleuse, parfois impossible. Le vote de Donald Trump traduit cet aspect de la vie américaine.

Ce brassage culturel, dénoncé avec loquacité par les conservateurs, a atteint son paroxysme. Ils mettent en garde contre la redéfinition de l’identité américaine, s’il en reste une. Pour accomplir cette lourde tâche, il faut recourir à des moyens extrêmes, incluant la violence et l’isolationnisme. Imaginons l’Amérique « civilisatrice des peuples », pour préserver sa culture, n’hésite pas à s’enfermer dans une cage, loin des immigrants. On oublie que les échanges entre les peuples ne se font pas en sens unique. De Marco Polo, en passant par Christophe Colomb jusqu'à jacques Cousteau, les civilisations s’entremêlent pour créer une symbiose.

Nous sommes au lendemain du monde nouveau que chantait John Lennon dans « Imagine » :

« Imagine qu'il n'y ait pas de pays/Ce n'est pas difficile à faire/Aucune raison de tuer ou mourir pour/Et pas de religion non plus/Imaginez tous les gens/Vivre la vie en paix »

Le 30 juin 1991, l’apartheid fut aboli en Afrique du sud. Une date qui, malgré sa grandeur dans les annales de lutte pour « la saison des hommes », marque aussi pour beaucoup une dégradation. Elle annonce le début d’une fin de règne que les « les blancs peureux » ne cessent de mettre en garde contre son arrivée. L’événement zimbabwéen, lui aussi effraie une bonne partie de la population blanche qui domine les richesses, la culture et le monopole international de la violence. Pour eux, Mathieu 20 : 16 prend la forme humaine et menace leur domination dans le monde. La peur est un élément clé dans l’arsenal de la manipulation idéologique et politique des masses faibles d’esprit.

Cette guerre culturelle américaine a maintenant atteint son point culminant. Les milieux conservateurs, coincés à la défensive de plus d’un demi-siècle, livrent un combat acharné. « La meilleure façon de se vendre est de passer à l’offensive ». Le problème, c’est que Trump n’est pas un véritable conservateur. Cette pesante charge de ramener l’union dans les limites des grandes valeurs traditionnelles des père-fondateurs devrait être guidée par un authentique idéologue, non un « salesman ». Donc, la victoire du 8 novembre 2016 est éphémère. Sa survie est déjà comptée. L’histoire ne fait jamais marche-arrière. Ceux qui festoient aujourd’hui pleurent demain. Trump deviendra le pire ennemi à combattre par ces mêmes groupes ultra conservateurs qui l’ont propulsé au pouvoir. D’ailleurs, la résistance citoyenne se fait déjà sentir. Lorsque toutes les institutions sont sous le dictat d’une pensée unique ou d’un parti, je veux parler des 3 pouvoirs de l’état (législatif/judiciaire/exécutif) le citoyen devient héros. Le dernier bouclier défendant la liberté. Montesquieu, Hobbes et Fanon sont en danger. La démocratie est dans l’impasse en plein cœur de l’Amérique.

En dernier lieu, on peut se poser d’autres questions sur la nature réelle de cette situation de crise qui menace la société américaine, de l’intérieur. N’est-elle pas la manifestation corollaire d’une crise beaucoup plus profonde ? N’est-elle pas le début du déclin de l’hégémonie américaine. Ces contradictions, comme je les ai décrites plus haut, affichent des caractères ingérables. Si c’est le cas, ne faudrait-il pas que le monde se prépare à une crise généralisée, car tout déclin de cette envergure peut entrainer un effet domino. D’où la nécessité de se mettre en garde contre tout débordement autoritaire pour ne pas reproduire le même schéma néo -colonial.

Joël Léon

Bibliographie:

1-Migration Policy Institute-MPI

2-American Community Survey-ACS

3-Allan J. Lichtman –“The keys of the white house”

4-Natalie Dickinson-West Virginia under fire for racist Michelle Obama.

5-Larry Bartels& John Zaller- “Presidential vote models” (March 2001)

6-Pat Buchanan- “The death of the west”.

7-US Census Bureau

8-United Nations Department of Economics and Social Affairs-UNDESA

9-Politico.com-June 2015

10-Chris Cillizza- “How immigration could cripple the republican nominee long before 2016 election” (Washington post, June 2015)

11-Felicia J. Persaud- “Haiti makes its way into last US presidential debate” (News Americas)

12-Frantz Fanon- “Les Damnés de la Terre »

13-Montesquieu- « L’esprit des Lois »

14-Thomas Hobbes- « Léviathan »