Unspeakable, 2: the double populist oven.

Unspeakable, 2: the double populist oven.

After the post last time, where I said that the main Italian newspapers (La Stampa, Corriere and Repubblica) are on the side of Trump's populist agenda because they are not explaining that the coming crisis is due to the trade wars unleashed by Donald, I've received several scoldings.

The first and most common: I am reproached for having quoted the "Sturmer" when both Elkann and Cairo are Jewish. To tell the truth, I'm not so sure: it's certainly documented for the Elkanns, there are contradictory sources by De Benedetti and by Urbano Cairo too. In any case, even if all three Jews were involved, it has nothing to do with the matter, since the question is: they are supporting Trump, Bannon & co, so they are populists . And therefore anti-Semitic, given that the base of populist parties is almost always white supremacist, that is Nazi, and therefore anti-Semitic.

One asks me to explain if I find it fair (or not) that most of the publishing and press in Italy (with the sole exception of the Berlusconi) is in the hands of the same minority, that is the Jews. My answer is:

Unspeakable, 2: the double populist oven.
Good try. Let me know if it worked with other blogs.

But let's get back to the point, because there is much more untold to say. The first point is: because some countries (Spain, Greece, Italy) have TWO populist parties, one on the right and one on the left, while others (France, Germany for example) have only one, and (extreme) right ?

The answer is simple: populist parties that can be elected on the left were created precisely because they were to be included in the levers of power. The logic is that of those families from Romagna who in the last world war pushed "one son to join the fascists and one to join the partisans". It served to be ready for the future.

Take for example France or Germany. No matter how hard he tries to turn his face, AfD remains a far-right party fishing in the shadow zone of Hitler's sympathizers. Not for nothing its successes are limited to East Germany and the areas that traditionally "hang to the right".

A government that wants to ally itself with AfD should therefore take into account the fact that it is possible to do so only if the voters digest this thing of the extreme right. CSU and FDP perhaps could, but the rest of the parties did not. Is there a left-wing populism in Germany? Of course, but it is a "traditional" populism, and in the past political tradition left-wing populism was called "radical left". Linke is therefore a populist leftist party, but follows an old and unattractive folklore (still aesthetic).

Likewise, in France, with the electoral system that the FN has, it does not have much hope: the whole country should move to extreme positions, and all on one side, so that FN can win the elections. Is there a leftist populist party in France? We are rehearsing, but La France insoumise uses, like Linke, a traditional aesthetic, that is obsolete. The "traditional" left parties are parties of the modern , while today we are in the post-modern era because the modern is dead.

On the other hand, there are countries where the press masters have practiced a double oven policy: they have pushed SIA to grow a party of populist leftists and a party of right-wing populists.

The first example occurred in Greece with Syriza. It is a party of left-wing populists (that is, a radical left) that has been pumped by the media of the Hellenic bourgeoisie to prevent the rich from paying the bill for the rehabilitation. And it happened: they paid the poor and only them.

The same happened in Spain, where a party of populist leftists was pushed by the local media to become a huge party. As much as we say "stranger" at least officially to the levers of power, Podemos has succeeded in paralyzing Spanish politics so that in the end, the rich are always richer and the sacrifices make them poor. And this tells us that a populist party was born with the aim of not doing, or not letting it go, a tax policy unfavorable to the rich. Whether they achieve the goal by doing, by not doing or by preventing others from doing, it counts for little.

The question now is why this happened.

The truth is that situations such as German and French have proved to be of little use to the local predatory bourgeoisie. AfD is increasingly relegating itself to certain areas (social and geographical) of Germany where culture is so alien that it can only represent a Hartz-IV-lich ghetto of voters. They will never be majority.

On the contrary, in Greece Syriza managed to apply the whole Trojka recipe without touching any of the rich people that existed before . The Greek upper bourgeoisie has remained untouched by the economic measures taken by the government:

The very rich families, owners of newspapers, who invested in Syriza to make it grow and come to power received a rich prize from their investment. Their riches remained intact, while the poor were massacred.

In the same way, the semi-stalemate situation that has arisen in Spain thanks to the growth of Podemos is putting the wealthy Spaniards, who own the mass media, away from government-based economic measures.

In Italy the situation was derailed almost immediately, and because of Renzi: his "no" to form a government with M5S had created a strange yellow-green abortion, which is like saying an AfD-Linke government in Germany, or FN – France Insoumise in France.

On the contrary, the goal of the Italian Mainstream press had been from the beginning the M5S / PD alliance.

La Stampa, the Republic and Il Corriere push M5S (and the alliance with the PD) because the task of M5S is to prevent some budgetary rigor from touching the very rich Italians, who are also owners of those newspapers.

M5S exists to save the Elkann, the Cairo and the De Benedetti from an aggressive fiscal policy.

You see it immediately when you notice the "modesty" with which M5S treats tax havens. This does not depend on the vicissitudes of its leader, Grillo: the tax havens most used by the Italians are in Switzerland, Malta and Israel, followed by Luxembourg, Holland, Cyprus and Gibraltar.

And on the first three there is a grave silence from the grillini: not that of the others one speaks a lot, to tell the truth. One of these, despite being the largest tax haven in the Mediterranean, is almost never mentioned by the Italian press as such, to discover that Israel is a tax haven we must go … in the Israeli press:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-is-one-of-the-worlds-most-generous-tax-havens-complains-tax-chief/

Unspeakable, 2: the double populist oven.
Times of Israel: well-known anti-Semitic newspaper.

To tell the truth, Israel as a tax haven will not last long because towards the end of 2018 it has chosen to adhere to the tax data exchange treaty: they are still blacklisted because implementation takes time. So it's a tax haven being dismantled.

But why am I talking about taxes and tax heaven?

The problem is this: wealth is being distributed too unequally due to tax avoidance, and "gatekeepers" are needed. It is necessary because sooner or later, it will be necessary to take the money where it is found: in the coffers of the rich. And someone, a gatekeeper party, must prevent it. This means that sooner or later it will be necessary to tax the rich , and ugly. The word "balance sheet" is only postponed.

Unfortunately, all the upper Italian bourgeoisie (with the sole exclusion of Berlusconi) is deployed in the center or on the left, so they cannot support a gatekeeper like Salvini, who with his Flat Tax would have benefited the De Benedetti, Cairo and people like the Elkann.

They need a gatekeeper: it does not matter that M5S / PD makes a flat tax: these days, in times of crisis, it is enough that it does nothing, and the cost of the crisis will fall on the less wealthy classes due to the automatisms already essero.

M5S exists to prevent the rich "center-left" from paying the bill. No matter how he does it, whether he is doing something or doing nothing. The important thing is that it succeeds.

In this sense, for the "center-left" press it is always advisable to create TWO populist parties that play good cops and bad cops. In a party of "right-wing populists" the extreme right will be recognized, in the other the extreme left, or that bundle of anticontroboicottini, cazzari, incompetent and incoherent movements, which even though they say they want a fairer world, do not it will NEVER touch the richness of the rich "center-left".

The M5S / PD coalition will be able to do everything, in Europe or in Italy, to straighten out public accounts, and probably will, but on one condition:

The condition for M5S to have the blessing of the "center-left" press is that it blocks any attempt to make the rich Italians pay for fiscal consolidation.

M5S was, in fact, created to be the gatekeeper of the rich "progressive" Italians. The apparent disgust shown by the newspapers (La Stampa, Corriere, Repubblica) was just an excuse to put M5S on the front pages of the three main newspapers in the country, taking away space from those who wanted to undermine the wealth of the "progressive" rich.

M5S does not exist "despite the media", let alone Casaleggio (which deals with advertising) could exist on the market having against the galaxies of the main advertising Molochs: RCS, GEDI, Fininvest. If Casaleggio had really been a problem for these three Molochs, or even for one, they would have crushed him like a gnat with a couple of phone calls to customers.

M5S was brought to the government as a "left-wing" gatekeeper to prevent the recovery of public accounts from touching the "left-wing" rich. And the PD / M5S government will do just that.

It's just a question of taxes, Darling. And rich people who will piss on your head while you die of hunger, and they won't even lose time to make you believe it's rain.

links

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.