A l’image de cette sorte d’institution dont le syst\u00e8me am\u00e9ricaniste raffole, l’institut FERI<\/a> (The Franklin & Eleanor Roosevelt Institute<\/em>, install\u00e9<\/a> en 1939) est per\u00e7u comme l’une des institutions assurant le legs \u00e9conomique et social du FDR du New Deal<\/em>, voire le legs spirituel du newdealism<\/em>. L’aspect tr\u00e8s social du FERI (l’attention port\u00e9e au sort des Am\u00e9ricains touch\u00e9s par la crise \u00e9conomique) est marqu\u00e9 par la pr\u00e9sence, dans son intitul\u00e9, de Eleanor aux c\u00f4t\u00e9s de son mari Franklin Delano Roosevelt; Eleanor Roosevelt, qui eut un r\u00f4le politique, fut, dans le couple, la plus \u00e0 gauche, la plus pr\u00e9occup\u00e9e par l’aspect social en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral, et plus pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment du d\u00e9sastre de la Grande D\u00e9pression. Le FERI est une sorte de gardien du temple FDR, tendance Eleanor. Par cons\u00e9quent, le texte publi\u00e9 par un de ses membres, Marshall Auerback, le 25 juin 2009<\/a> sur le site du FERI, et repris ce m\u00eame 25 juin 2009<\/a> sur Huffington.post<\/em>, sonne comme un jugement tr\u00e8s s\u00e9v\u00e8res des m\u00e2nes de FDR et de sa femme, de l’action de BHO.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tLe jugement est sans appel: BHO est exactement l’anti-FDR, alors qu’il para\u00eetrait, ou pr\u00e9tendrait para\u00eetre de la m\u00eame veine L’article d\u00e9taille l’aspect technique qui conduit \u00e0 observer cette aide massive des banques, sans r\u00e9el b\u00e9n\u00e9fice pour la population, parall\u00e8lement avec une d\u00e9gradation acc\u00e9l\u00e9r\u00e9e de la situation sociale suivant une d\u00e9gradation de la politique \u00e9conomique. Clairement sous-jacente dans le texte, et marqu\u00e9e par le titre (\u00abRisk of Major Social Upheaval Likely if Bank Bonanza Continues<\/em>\u00bb), la crainte de troubles sociaux<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbBanks are also benefiting from lending programs that effectively allow them to borrow at zero and reinvest in Treasuries at around 3%. A bank doesn’t have to do anything to make money. The banks’ return on equity is going to be very good. They are going to be able to restore their finances.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbWhile this is good for banks, is it good for anyone else? The problem is the government’s \u00ab\u00a0free money\u00a0\u00bb program means banks have little or no incentive to do any actual lending. Combined with rising unemployment and the ongoing housing crisis, this means any recovery is likely to be muted, at best, especially given the ongoing weakness in the real estate market. Growing income inequality will likely be perpetuated and exacerbated with<\/em> all of the resultant social strains. ..<\/em><\/strong> […]<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abThe key is building<\/em> a political case<\/em><\/strong> for the stimulus. This means getting people around a common objective where everybody is perceived to be benefiting and that the sacrifices are being borne fairly. This was clearly the situation in WWII when the budget deficit as a percentage of GDP got as high as 30.3% of GDP, yet nobody complained about the \u00ab\u00a0sustainability\u00a0\u00bb of government expenditures. The upshot was that by 1946, the GDP per capita was 25 percent higher than it had been in the last peace years before the War. GDP per capita continued to grow during the Marshall Plan years. Despite giving away two percent of U.S. GDP, American residents (and taxpayers) experienced a higher standard of living each year. And nobody spoke about us running out of money.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbBy contrast, the current bonanza for banks is neither economically efficient, nor politically sustainable<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abBoth FDR and JFK had a brain trust that could help forge public opinion. Obama has his halo, Geithner, and Summers. We’ve known from the start that was a misstep.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbIn the meantime, beyond automatic stabilizers, the door appears to be shutting to further active fiscal ease. I wonder if the stage is already being set for tax hikes, as rumors of a federal VAT (value added tax) have been floating around of late. Add this to rising commodity prices and interest rates, and the profile of any recovery may become increasingly in question, a la 1937-8. Add to that additional bank write-offs, further credit contraction and a minimalist welfare system which leaves nothing in the way of social cohesion, and the prospects<\/em> for major social upheaval look dangerously likely.<\/em><\/strong>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tDans ce texte tr\u00e8s technique, qui s’appuie essentiellement sur des r\u00e9f\u00e9rences au programme du New Deal<\/em>, et essentiellement sur la dimension sociale et politique de ce programme, nous avons soulign\u00e9 en gras quelques observations qui montrent combien les pr\u00e9occupations de l’auteur portent sur l’absence, dans l’action de l’administration Obama, de la dimension politique d’une action de mobilisation sociale.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tCette politique de l’administration Obama est encore illustr\u00e9e par son attitude vis-\u00e0-vis du cas californien. Le site WSWS.org<\/em>, qui suit de pr\u00e8s cette affaire, d\u00e9crit ce 26 juin 2009<\/a> la d\u00e9vastation sociale de la Californie, avec l’exemple d’Imperial Valley (Californie du Sud) o\u00f9 le ch\u00f4mage officiel atteint 26,1% (la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 \u00e9tant autour de 40%), apr\u00e8s avoir comment\u00e9, le 25 juin 2009<\/a>, l’\u00e9chec du budget de l’Etat pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 par le gouverneur Schwarzenegger. Tout cela suit une requ\u00eate qui s’est heurt\u00e9e \u00e0 une fin de non recevoir d’une aide f\u00e9d\u00e9rale pour la Californie, \u00e9galement pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e par WSWS.org<\/em> le 18 juin 2009<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abThe Obama administration has rejected any immediate aid to the state of California. State officials went to Washington over the weekend to request emergency loans to address California’s looming budget and financial crisis.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbWe’re not expecting any help from the federal government, the California state treasurer’s office stated after the meeting. At this point, we’re on our own. The state faces a $24 billion budget gap, and the state controller said California faces a complete financial meltdown as soon as July 28.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbTreasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, along with White House economists Lawrence Summers and Christina Romer, insisted that the state take measures of its own to address its fiscal crisis. A lot of the burden, Geithner said earlier in congressional testimony, is going to be on them to lay out a path that gets their deficits down to the point where they’re going to be able to fund themselves comfortably.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bb In taking this position, the administration is giving its full support to a series of crushing austerity measures proposed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state’s Democratic Party. The state government is responding to the financial crisis by destroying what little remains of the social safety net upon which millions of people depend.<\/em>\u00bb <\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tLe cas californien illustre combien la critique des orthodoxes rooseveltiens, qui porte sur la coh\u00e9sion sociale per se<\/em> et l’absence de mobilisation politique de la population comme ce fut le cas avec le New Deal<\/em>, pourrait \u00eatre \u00e9tendue \u00e0 la coh\u00e9sion structurelle de l’Union, notamment par les conditions aggrav\u00e9es dans certains Etats du fait du refus de l’aide f\u00e9d\u00e9rale, contrastant \u00e9videmment avec l’aide massive accord\u00e9e \u00e0 Wall Street (et alors que les citoyens des Etats fournissent eux-m\u00eames des subventions au niveau f\u00e9d\u00e9ral avec leurs imp\u00f4ts). Pour l’heure, cette politique, avec ses r\u00e9sultats \u00e9vidents, continue \u00e0 entretenir le myst\u00e8re autour du personnage d’Obama, dont l’attitude, dans ce cas o\u00f9 il soutient une politique maximaliste, extr\u00e9miste et d\u00e9structurante, contraste avec son attitude dans d’autres volets, notamment certains cas de sa politique \u00e9trang\u00e8re, o\u00f9 il suit l’attitude inverse. La question est de savoir si, dans l’un ou l’autre cas, il s’est aper\u00e7u de ce qui se passe quant aux v\u00e9ritables conditions des politiques suivies.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \tMis en ligne le 26 juin 2009 \u00e0 14H21<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A l’image de cette sorte d’institution dont le syst\u00e8me am\u00e9ricaniste raffole, l’institut FERI (The Franklin & Eleanor Roosevelt Institute, install\u00e9 en 1939) est per\u00e7u comme l’une des institutions assurant le legs \u00e9conomique et social du FDR du New Deal, voire le legs spirituel du newdealism. L’aspect tr\u00e8s social du FERI (l’attention port\u00e9e au sort des… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[8431,2849,8429,3184,8430,3256,6208,3080,8432,3372,3132],"class_list":["post-70863","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-cohesion","tag-deal","tag-eleanor","tag-fdr","tag-feri","tag-new","tag-obama","tag-roosevelt","tag-sociale","tag-street","tag-wall"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70863","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=70863"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70863\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=70863"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=70863"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=70863"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}