{"id":74163,"date":"2011-10-20T10:46:10","date_gmt":"2011-10-20T10:46:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2011\/10\/20\/unir-tea-party-occupy-wall-street\/"},"modified":"2011-10-20T10:46:10","modified_gmt":"2011-10-20T10:46:10","slug":"unir-tea-party-occupy-wall-street","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2011\/10\/20\/unir-tea-party-occupy-wall-street\/","title":{"rendered":"Unir Tea Party<\/em> & Occupy Wall Street<\/em>?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Le bouillonnement actuel aux USA ne date pas, comme l’on sait, de Occupy Wall Street<\/em>. Nos lecteurs ont pu suivre la progression, depuis le printemps 2009, de Tea Party<\/em> que nous avons toujours pris soin de prendre pour ce qu’il \u00e9tait : d’abord un mouvement populiste, tr\u00e8s vite touch\u00e9 par des interf\u00e9rence douteuses (pressions du parti r\u00e9publicain, interf\u00e9rences du Big Business<\/em>) mais qui n’a jamais perdu sa vertu et son efficacit\u00e9 initiales. Aujourd’hui, avec le formidable \u00e9lan d’Occupy Wall Street<\/em>, se pose effectivement la question, que nous avons nous-m\u00eames effectivement<\/a> envisag\u00e9e, des rapports entre les deux mouvements.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tNous pensons que cette question va devenir de plus en plus actuelle, et de plus en plus pol\u00e9mique \u00e0 mesure des pressions, et des r\u00e9actions contre ces pressions, exerc\u00e9es par le Syst\u00e8me dont l’int\u00e9r\u00eat \u00e9vident est de garder ouverte cette diff\u00e9rence souvent antagoniste per\u00e7ue selon les vieux r\u00e9flexes d\u00e9pass\u00e9es des id\u00e9ologies des XIX\u00e8me et XX\u00e8me si\u00e8cles. Nous notons plusieurs interventions qui vont dans le sens d’une plaidoirie implicite ou explicite pour un rapprochement entre ces deux mouvements. Un tel rapprochement donnerait \u00e0 l’ensemble une vigueur peut-\u00eatre irr\u00e9sistible et aurait surtout la vertu exceptionnelle d’exposer les deux ailes du parti unique \u00e0 des tensions internes extr\u00eamement fortes et particuli\u00e8rement int\u00e9ressantes.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t(Nous continuons \u00e0 tenir la position d\u00e9j\u00e0 ancienne, pr\u00e8s de 15 jours, une \u00e9ternit\u00e9 par les temps qui courent ! du vice-pr\u00e9sident Joe Biden sur cette question comme particuli\u00e8rement remarquable, et matrice de questions int\u00e9ressantes sur la position et les intentions de Biden autant que sur la fragilit\u00e9 de la coh\u00e9sion \u00e0 l’int\u00e9rieur du parti unique. On la mentionnait le 7 octobre 2011<\/a> : \u00abMais, sans aucun doute, la prise de position la plus surprenante et la plus remarquable est celle de Joe Biden. Le vice-pr\u00e9sident ne fait rien de moins que dresser une \u00e9quivalence presque compl\u00e8te entre Occupy Wall Street et Tea Party, dans un sens approbateur pour les deux.<\/em>\u00bb [Ron Paul a une position sym\u00e9triquement proche, r\u00e9publicain qui affirme son soutien \u00e0 OWS, mais une telle position de la part de Ron Paul ne peut \u00e9tonner, au contraire de celle de Biden.])<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t Il y a d’abord l’intervention de William Pfaff, ce chroniqueur et historien US de si grande qualit\u00e9. Nourri \u00e0 une grande et vieille exp\u00e9rience de l’histoire de son pays, et conduit \u00e0 un certain scepticisme \u00e0 cet \u00e9gard, Pfaff a d’abord nettement signifi\u00e9, \u00e0 sa grande tristesse d’ailleurs, qu’il ne croyait pas \u00e0 la r\u00e9ussite de Occupy Wall Street<\/em> (voir le 6 octobre 2011<\/a> : \u00abWhy Americans’ Indifference to Street Protests?<\/em>\u00bb). (Sa tristesse de devoir pr\u00e9voir une telle issue, selon sa conviction, \u00e9tait nettement perceptible et m\u00eame renforc\u00e9e d’une r\u00e9elle fureur, inhabituelle chez un homme de cette pond\u00e9ration cultiv\u00e9e, notamment par le terme rascal<\/em>, peu am\u00e8ne, qu’il emploie dans cette phrase : \u00abCan the Wall Street sit-downers inspire a national popular rising to throw today’s rascals out?<\/em>\u00bb) Avant-hier (le 19 octobre 2011<\/a>), Pfaff publie un article sur cette question en avan\u00e7ant avec nettet\u00e9 et fermet\u00e9 que Tea Party<\/em> et Occupy Wall Street<\/em> sont sans aucun doute les deux ailes d’un mouvement populiste g\u00e9n\u00e9ral et puissant qui s’oppose directement, et sym\u00e9triquement pourrait-on dire, \u00e0 l’\u00e9lite washingtonienne et au Syst\u00e8me, comme cela est dit dans le titre. Justement, nous pr\u00e9f\u00e9rons largement le titre de cet article sur son site (\u00abThe Tea Party and Wall Street Protesters Versus the System<\/em>\u00bb) que celui qui a \u00e9t\u00e9 choisi pour la reprise<\/a> de ce m\u00eame article sur Truthdig.com<\/em> (\u00abOccupy Wall Street and Tea Party Movements More Alike Than Not<\/em>\u00bb) ; le premier va au cur du probl\u00e8me tandis que le second ne fait qu’indiquer comment aller au cur du probl\u00e8me Si Pfaff reste sans doute r\u00e9serv\u00e9 sur les chances de succ\u00e8s de ce mouvement populiste as a whole<\/em> (en fait il ne dit mot sur ce point), l’analyse qu’il d\u00e9veloppe montre que son \u00e9tat d’esprit a chang\u00e9 depuis le 6 octobre Quelques extraits de l’article de Pfaff.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abThere is something else that goes unrecognized. Few Americans are willing to acknowledge that Occupy Wall Street and the tea party movement are two manifestations of the same explosive American anger at the American government and the modern corporate system.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbBoth movements are essentially populist protests. The OWS people want to break the power of finance and the rich in America. So do tea party voters. To the extent that the tea party represents victims of the economic crisisand probably most of its members are such victims, having lost jobs, businesses or homes, they feel the crisis more keenly and have more reason to hate the people who did this to them, than do the people of the OWS movement. The latter are more likely to be middle and upper-middle class people, better educated, liberal in political and cultural outlook, and in the long run more likely than the tea partyers to have the skills to find new jobs.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbBoth movements blame the bankers for what has happened. Both also blame the politicians in Washington. They just blame different politicians. The tea party people identify the enemy as liberals, Democrats, mainstream journalists, people who live in Washington, New York and Los Angeles, and are in one way or another in league with banking, international finance and cosmopolitan society.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe OWS people hate the bankers whom they identify with greed, financial manipulation (often crooked) and the oppression of the rest of their countrymen. They see their enemies as rightists: the tea party, fundamentalist Protestants, cultural conservatives, Republicans, warmongers, and self-righteous and xenophobic patriots. These days, a lot of them have saved some hate, or grief, for Barack Obama, who, they believe, has betrayed them.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbIn occupying Wall Street, theirs has been more a ca\u00bbse of the police rising against the people than the people rising against the police. Mayor Bloomberg’s police were ordered to get this riffraff off the street, and off television, and the demonstrators mostly moved politely out of the way while tweeting their friends to come and join, and arguing with one another about their program, or whether there should be a program at all.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbBoth sides are obsessed with the other and cannot recognize what they have in common, which is victimization by a finance- and corporate-dominated American business establishment in effective control of the United States government, whose elected officials now are themselves victims of a system of campaign contributions, upon which their careers depend. They have only themselves to blamepoliticians of both parties, and their Supreme Courthaving deliberately removed all regulation or limit from what is now a fundamentally corrupt electoral finance system.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe two protest movements have erupted without easily or specifically identifiable causes, but out of general and widely shared political resentment and economic distress. They began without coherent reform programs. They may never find such programs. The tea party found easily recognizable enemies in Barack Obama, the liberals who supported him, the liberal media, and of course the Democratic Party, then in power in Congress. The Wall Street occupiers have found their enemies even more easily. They have even named themselves after them.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t Dans le m\u00eame sens et d’un auteur \u00e9galement estimable, mais d’une orientation diff\u00e9rente de celle de Pfaff, on notera la chronique de Justin Raimondo du 17 octobre 2011<\/a>. Raimondo s’attaque \u00e0 l’alerte anti-iranienne d’il y a quelques jours, la r\u00e9duisant \u00e0 sa juste proportion de complet montage<\/a> pour d\u00e9tourner l’attention de la pouss\u00e9e populiste. C’est l\u00e0, effectivement, qu’il met en \u00e9vidence, lui qui est partisan de Tea Party<\/em>, la compl\u00e9mentarit\u00e9 de Tea Party<\/em> et de Occupy Wall Street<\/em>. Quant \u00e0 la farce de l’alerte \u00e0 l’Iran, elle est \u00e0 mesure de l’extraordinaire petitesse et pauvret\u00e9 des robots qui nous dirige ; rien \u00e0 voir, tout de m\u00eame, soyons s\u00e9rieux, avec la Deuxi\u00e8me Guerre mondiale, ni avec FDR du c\u00f4t\u00e9 des dirigeants-Syst\u00e8me Plus personne ne se souvient du montage anti-iranien d’il y a cinq jours mais tout le monde a \u00e0 l’esprit la vague de populisme antiSyst\u00e8me aux USA. (En passant, et rendons cette gr\u00e2ce aux commentateurs US, par opposition aux f\u00e9tus de paille germanopratin : ils ne vont pas imm\u00e9diatement sombrer dans la naus\u00e9e et les vapeurs de salon d\u00e8s que le mot populisme est prononc\u00e9. Ils savent de quoi il retourne.) Raimondo :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abWhat they have learned from history is how their predecessors managed to stay on top in an existential crisis such as the one we are facing today. Confronted with economic collapse and the failure of his New Deal policies to lift the nation out of its downward spiral, Franklin Delano Roosevelt turned his energies toward dragging a reluctant America down the path to another worldwide conflagration. War hysteria was a useful tonic to lift the nation’s spirits, and rationing masked the effects of the downturn by equalizing scarcity. The wartime emergency paved the way for the New Dealers to complete their takeover of the US economy and shut down their critics, especially on the isolationist right.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbWar with Iran would solve many of the present administration’s problems, in the short term<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbWar, in short, is the ultimate government bailout, which our political class hopes and prays will save their political asses. I can hear the Dear Leader now, as he explains how war must unite all Americans, and this new unity will be echoed on both sides of the political spectrum, as media outlets from Fox News to MSNBC urge us to become one and smite the Iranian foe. With the ever-present Israel lobby out in force to maintain the party line, and rein in any dissenters, politicians of the left as well as the right will march to war in lockstep. Every crisis is an opportunity, as one of Obama’s sleazier former top lieutenants put it, and in this instance you can bet our rulers intend to utilize the latest manufactured crisis in US-Iranian relations to perpetuate their incompetent and vulgar reign.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbGorbachev sought to co-opt the anti-Soviet revolutionaries by initiating a campaign of glasnost, and ushering in the era of perestroika. It didn’t work: indeed, it may have hastened the demise of the Leninist project. Our own rulers, however, are much cleverer than that, or so they seem to believe: they think they can latch on to and capture the populist movements that are rising on the left and the right. The Republicans are doing their best to co-opt and tame the so-called tea party movement, and the President himself is actively courting the Wall Street occupiers. By stamping these movements with partisan labels, the two parties hope to de-radicalize and derail them in the process of using them and keep them divided along out-dated left\/right lines, so that they never realize how closely their complaints complement each other. For their anger and anger is the chief motivating factor in politics is directed at a single foe: the elites who have reigned over the American empire since the end of World War II<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t On notera, dans un tr\u00e8s r\u00e9cent texte de Tom Engelhzardt, le rapport qui est fait d’une visite de travailleurs du b\u00e2timent, en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral des durs r\u00e9publicains qui n’aiment gu\u00e8re les jeunes intellectuels r\u00e9volutionnaires, \u00e0 OWS samedi dernier (sur TomDispatch.com, le \n<\/p>\n

\t\u00a0\u00bb class=\u00a0\u00bbgen\u00a0\u00bb>19 octobre 2011<\/a>)..<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abI was at the edge of Zuccotti Park the other day when members of SEIU 32BJ, the building workers union, arrived, a sea of yellow T-shirts and signs. With a new contract on the horizon, they had been demonstrating on their own in the Wall Street area and decided spontaneously so several told me to march to the park. (As one SEIU organizer put it, Our members really get it, the connection between this and us.) The energy was sky-high, the excitement palpable, the chanting and cheering loud as they looked down on what could only be described visually as a hippie encampment.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbHad this been the 1960s, conflict would undoubtedly have followed. I found myself with a burly white guy wearing a red Communications Workers of America T-shirt on one side of me and a young black woman with a yellow SEIU T-shirt on the other. He promptly commented with indignation and accuracy: You know, we were saying the 1% and the 99% for like five years and nobody paid attention because we’re unions, we’re the wallpaper! I braced myself for the coming diatribe against the Zuccotti Park protesters for appropriating the slogan and grabbing the glory. Instead, he continued with unmistakable enthusiasm, You know, it’s great that these kids have taken it and put it on the map! At which point the young woman next to me chimed in with equal enthusiasm, It’s not just the unions any more! It’s bigger than that!<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t Enfin, on terminera par une intervention remarqu\u00e9e au cur m\u00eame de la contestation, devant le camp de base de OWS \u00e0 Wall Street m\u00eame, du professeur de Harvard Lawrence Lessing. Il devait avoir \u00e0 l’esprit un tr\u00e8s r\u00e9cent sondage du National Journal<\/em>, montrant la popularit\u00e9 et la notori\u00e9t\u00e9 toujours grandissante de OWS, avec 60% des personnes interrog\u00e9es approuvant OWS. Dans ce chiffre, surprise, surprise, on trouve un tiers de personnes se d\u00e9clarant du parti r\u00e9publicain RAW Story<\/em> a rapport\u00e9, le 19 octobre 2011<\/a> cette interventions de Lessig, qui se r\u00e9sume \u00e0 ceci : Tea Party<\/em> fait partie des 99% en r\u00e9volte<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abSpeaking to a crowd gathered for Occupy D.C. this week, Harvard professor Lawrence Lessig touched upon that small but rising tide, which says and says again that the tea party is also part of the 99 Percent. What is inspiring about this movement is its potential to rally our country around an idea that we all believe fundamentally: this government is corrupt, he said. Pointing to the need to constantly raise funds for a member of Congress or a political party to maintain their power, Lessig called out the system of campaign finance as plain, open-air corruption, giving America’s elite enough say-so over Congress that they could even ensure a member is booted from office if they don’t go along with the agenda of wealth.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThat is terrifying, Lessig said. [2008] is the first time in American history where we have seen a collapse followed by no fundamental re-regulation of the financial services sector, because they have the power to block change from either the Democrats and Republicans. They hold this country hostage because of that power, because of that corruption, he continued.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbHe went on to recall a time he went to a tea party conference, only to hear legitimately angry, homespun grassroots activists talk about this very problem in the same manner as the Occupy groups, who he said should put aside what they believe as far as gay rights or abortion or other social wedge issues. You can build this movement to unite America around this idea that the time for crony capitalism must come to an end, Lessig said. There is no one on the left or the right who defends the system of crony capitalism, they just practice it. And you, the movement you’ve begun, can begin the recognition across America of why and how we need to end that corruption. You do that by framing this in a way that they can hear you, and inviting them in to your conversation by explicitly bringing them in.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tDans sa pr\u00e9sentation de l’intervention de Lessig, RAW Story<\/em> notait une r\u00e9elle mont\u00e9e d’un appel \u00e0 l’unit\u00e9 aux USA aujourd’hui, entre les deux ailes du populisme : \u00abthere is another, quieter voice that’s rising, urging unity to fight the greed on Wall Street.<\/em>\u00bb Il s’agit d’une situation unique dans l’histoire du populisme aux USA, histoire qui est vari\u00e9e, diverse, agit\u00e9e, mais qui n’a jamais rencontr\u00e9 une occurrence o\u00f9 deux courants populistes d’une telle puissance chacun, si marqu\u00e9s \u00e0 droite et \u00e0 gauche, se d\u00e9veloppant chacun de leur c\u00f4t\u00e9, avec un certain d\u00e9calage mais sans que l’un ne remplace l’autre, et dans des circonstances extr\u00eames pour l’un et l’autre qui devraient les opposer, et, pourtant tout cela d\u00e9bouchant sur une pouss\u00e9e nouvelle \u00e0 l’unit\u00e9. Il faut par cons\u00e9quent que les circonstances soient tr\u00e8s graves, que les dynamiques \u00e0 l’uvre soient d’une puissance consid\u00e9rable mais en m\u00eame temps tr\u00e8s adaptables, que le climat psychologique soit effectivement explosif. Aucune de ces propositions ne nous effraie ni ne nous semble improbable, parce que nous plaidons continuellement en faveur autant de leur activation que de la reconnaissance de leur existence potentielle.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tComme d’autres cas d\u00e9j\u00e0 envisag\u00e9s et impliquant Tea Party<\/em> et Occupy Wall Street<\/em> dans d’autres situations relatives, y compris une situation conflictuelle, cette hypoth\u00e8se d’un rapprochement Tea Party<\/em>-OWS est \u00e9galement explosive. Les revendications indirectes ou les non-revendications des deux mouvements aboutissent en fait, par leur dynamique propre, \u00e0 une seule et unique revendication, et une telle pouss\u00e9e unitaire sera ainsi comprise par le Syst\u00e8me, si elle a lieu, qui est tout simplement la revendication de la destruction du Syst\u00e8me. Impossible ? Impensable ? Ces appr\u00e9ciations ne sont pas d’actualit\u00e9. Nous parlons de ce qui serait<\/strong> ou de ce qui sera<\/strong>, selon ce qu’il adviendra de cette \u00e9ventualit\u00e9 unitaire ; et qu’il n’y ait pas de solution pr\u00e9visible ne nous importe pas, parce que nous sommes dans des situations que la raison humaine (pervertie<\/a>, certes) n’appr\u00e9hende plus, ne comprend plus, parce que ces situations viennent de domaines hors de sa port\u00e9e, et sous l’inspiration compl\u00e8te de ces domaines. Si l’on est tent\u00e9, dans l’\u00e9ventualit\u00e9 expos\u00e9e, par l’hypoth\u00e8se d’une riposte brutale du Syst\u00e8me, c’est que l’on fait, l\u00e0 encore, trop confiance \u00e0 cette m\u00eame raison pour les pr\u00e9visions. Le Syst\u00e8me ne cesse de montrer son aveuglement, son incapacit\u00e9 de r\u00e9agir, ce qui dissimule en fait son impuissance \u00e0 r\u00e9agir D’o\u00f9 notre interpr\u00e9tation dans la perspective de cette possible unit\u00e9 : Tea Party<\/em> et OWS, en r\u00e9alit\u00e9s cr\u00e9ations indirectes des catastrophiques dynamiques du Syst\u00e8me, constituent finalement des outils privil\u00e9gi\u00e9s de la dynamique d’autodestruction du Syst\u00e8me.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’alliance Tea Party<\/em>-OWS n’est certainement pas, bien entendu, la seule hypoth\u00e8se \u00e0 envisager, mais elle prend du poids et du cr\u00e9dit. Pour le reste (pour les autres hypoth\u00e8ses hors celle-ci), la plupart des autres possibilit\u00e9s m\u00e8nent de toutes les fa\u00e7ons \u00e0 la m\u00eame impasse de l’affrontement avec le Syst\u00e8me, avec le m\u00eame r\u00e9sultat. La logique de l’autodestruction est en train d’atteindre sa phase irr\u00e9sistible. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 20 octobre 2011 \u00e0 10H46<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Le bouillonnement actuel aux USA ne date pas, comme l’on sait, de Occupy Wall Street. Nos lecteurs ont pu suivre la progression, depuis le printemps 2009, de Tea Party que nous avons toujours pris soin de prendre pour ce qu’il \u00e9tait : d’abord un mouvement populiste, tr\u00e8s vite touch\u00e9 par des interf\u00e9rence douteuses (pressions du… <\/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":[4646,1381,4032,11600,1131,5303,9869,4337],"class_list":["post-74163","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-antisysteme","tag-engelhardt","tag-harvard","tag-lessig","tag-pfaff","tag-populisme","tag-professeur","tag-raimondo"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74163","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=74163"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74163\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=74163"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=74163"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=74163"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}