Nous n’en finissions pas de jouer au ballon de l’\u00e9galit\u00e9 avec la quadrature du cercle, de faire des cercles vicieux pour que le serpent puisse se mordre la queue sans se blesser selon les droits d\u00e9mocratiques des minorit\u00e9s ethniques, culturelles et persif[fl]euse (car le serpent, non seulement siffle, mais va jusqu’\u00e0 persif[f]ler). Aujourd’hui, notamment aux USA où ils sont violemment pris \u00e0 partie par les candidats d\u00e9mocrates type Warren\/Sanders, les hyper-riches, les fameux 1% de 1%, ou bien les 0,001% qui se distinguent identitairement par les $milliards qui les caract\u00e9risent comme la flexibilit\u00e9 du genre, la couleur de la peau, la religion tr\u00e8s-stricte ou le p\u00e9dophilisme caract\u00e9risent d’autres, se r\u00e9voltent au nom des droits des minorit\u00e9s, et surtout du droit des minorit\u00e9s \u00e0 \u00eatre respect\u00e9es en tant que telles. Ils jugent en effet qu’ils sont une minorit\u00e9 pers\u00e9cut\u00e9e, notamment par la tendance populiste incontestablement d’origine fasciste, et que nul ne pr\u00eate attention \u00e0 leur sort inf\u00e2me et tragique. Qui trouverait \u00e0 redire \u00e0 cette logique sublime que toute notre \u00e9poque postmoderne a enfant\u00e9e, non pas dans le douleur mais dans l’extase ?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Lloyd Blankfein, ancien CEO de Goldman-Sachs, a donc tweet\u00e9, apr\u00e8s avoir sugg\u00e9r\u00e9 que cette attitude anti-milliardaires relevait de la discrimination<\/a> : « Surpris d’\u00eatre mis en vedette <\/em>[d’une mani\u00e8re n\u00e9gative] dans la publicit\u00e9 de campagne <\/em>[de la s\u00e9natrice] Warren, avec les nombreuses et s\u00e9v\u00e8res critiques s\u00e9v\u00e8res qu’elle \u00e9met <\/em>[contre moi]. Ce n’est pas ma candidate, mais nous sommes d’accord sur de nombreuses questions. Diaboliser les gens en tant que membres d’un groupe peut \u00eatre bon pour sa campagne, pas pour le pays. Peut-\u00eatre que le tribalisme est compl\u00e8tement dans son ADN<\/em>. »<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Il nous paraît inutile de poursuivre un commentaire qui sera in\u00e9vitablement d\u00e9bordant de sarcasmes persifleurs et d’ironie bombastique avec int\u00e9r\u00eat r\u00e9duit \u00e0 0%. Il est vrai que nous ne sommes pas loin d’atteindre l’escale finale, le port d’attache in\u00e9luctable du d\u00e9veloppement de la culture LGTBQ..XYZ, de l’intelligence r\u00e9duite aux acqu\u00eats des zombieSyst\u00e8me de la postmodernit\u00e9, de l’autodestruction saluant avec une gr\u00e2ce extr\u00eame l’accomplissement irr\u00e9sistible de la surpuissance de la modernit\u00e9 motoris\u00e9e par le Syst\u00e8me en mode-turbo. <\/em>Dans ce cas, la protestation de la minorit\u00e9 opprim\u00e9e des hyper-riches a le droit d’\u00eatre \u00e9mise, elle s’appuie fermement sur la logique invertie jusqu’aux abysses qui gouvernent nos talk-shows<\/em>, elle r\u00e9pond au devoir la\u00efc de la d\u00e9mocratisation et de l’\u00e9galit\u00e9.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Par cons\u00e9quent, est-il n\u00e9cessaire de traduire l’excellent texte<\/a> de Helen Buyniski, de RT.com, qui int\u00e8gre \u00e9galement l’expression « War on Wall Sreet<\/em> », qui est certainement une guerre inf\u00e2me comme toutes les guerres ? Il se comprend de lui-m\u00eame, il se hume et se p\u00e8se comme l’effet-cascade que nous promettait Macron en supprimant l’imp\u00f4t sur les grandes fortunes. Ainsi soit-il, puisque l’extr\u00eame in\u00e9galit\u00e9 parvient, dans un mouvement d’une parfaite r\u00e9volution (au sens de la figure spatiale de l’\u00e9lipse que favorisait Hannah Arendt, où le terme rejoint le commencement), \u00e0 se ranger dans les cat\u00e9gories qui ont elles aussi un droit absolu et inali\u00e9nable \u00e0 l’\u00e9galit\u00e9 de la parole, du traitement, du respect de l’existence en tant que telle, – bref, \u00e0 l’\u00e9galit\u00e9 ontologique.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n ________________________<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Billionaires are scrambling to ward off the specter of populist anger – from wealth taxes to increased regulation – looming over an age of unprecedented inequality. Perhaps they should have thought of this outcome 40 years ago.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n The 2020 election may trigger a \u00ab\u00a0war on Wall Street and wealth,\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> too-big-to-fail bank Citi has warned<\/a> its clients in a letter quoted by Bloomberg this week. The bank laments that the rich these days are merely seen as a cash cow for \u00ab\u00a0re-distributional policies, including further tax relief for low- and middle-income persons\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> – never mind that the primary beneficiaries of Trump’s 2017 tax cuts were the same rich individuals who received Citi’s letter, as well as the corporations they own. The pitchforks are coming out, and Citi wants its customers to be prepared.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n The Citi letter is far from an isolated case of billionaires declaring themselves a persecuted class. The wealth tax floated by Democratic presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren to pay for a much-needed reinforcement of the country’s tattered social safety net has clearly struck fear into the hearts of the super-rich, combined as it is with an upsurge in populist rhetoric and the gradual realization in other parts of the world that neoliberal capitalism isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Bloomberg, the only outlet to publish the letter, is named for its founder Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City who is so opposed to the idea of wealth taxes and increased regulation that he jumped into the presidential race last month, despite an already-crowded field and an electorate with no particular desire for another wealthy white male septuagenarian in the race. As mayor, he turned New York into a playground<\/a> for the super-rich and a police state for the poor, a record that appeals to few – except, of course, his fellow billionaires.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \u00ab\u00a0The vilification of billionaires makes no sense to me,\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> hedge fund billionaire Leon Cooperman told<\/a> CNBC last week, tearing up on national television as he defended his fortune from the grasping hands of a hypothetical President Warren and insisted his fellow billionaires – Bloomberg included – have made the world a \u00ab\u00a0better place.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> Cooperman has called the wealth tax a \u00ab\u00a0bankrupt concept\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> and warned that the stock market would crash if Warren is elected – a prediction that sounded more like a threat than a warning from the hedge-funder. When he dies, \u00ab\u00a0I plan to give away all my money!\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> he whined, apparently shocked that such posthumous philanthropy didn’t impress politicians.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Fear of the pitchfork-wielding masses is nothing new, but with inequality so entrenched that billionaires are actually paying a lower tax rate than the working class, even a slight correction is bound to feel like a punishment to the monstrously rich. Perhaps this is why so few of them are trying to avoid the anticipated class war by championing initiatives that might work out positively for working people, such as closing the tax loopholes that allow the wealthy to hide their fortunes overseas or in \u00ab\u00a0charitable\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> foundations, taxing Wall Street transactions, or taxing massive fortunes as Sanders and Warren want to do. Instead, billionaires are following the lead of former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz – the only Democratic candidate whom people have turned out to protest<\/a> against – who insisted the public refer to his ilk as \u00ab\u00a0people of means,\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> because of the negative connotation of the word \u00ab\u00a0billionaire.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n After Warren released a commercial splicing together several billionaires’ incredulous reaction to her wealth tax, several of them fought back. Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein suggested dumping on billionaires was discrimination<\/a>, – \u00ab\u00a0criticism of people as a group\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> – and got in a dig at the Massachusetts senator’s ‘Native American’ origins. Cooperman got nastier, snarling \u00ab\u00a0She doesn’t know who the f*** she’s tweeting\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> in response to her choice to superimpose \u00ab\u00a0charged with insider trading\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> over his face.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \u00ab\u00a0In America, people don’t hate the wealthy, they want to be them,\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> hedge funder Cooperman pleaded, continuing in his tearstained defense of obscene wealth.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n But it’s not as easy as it used to be to enter the ranks of the rich in the erstwhile Land of Opportunity. Social mobility has dropped 70 percent in the US in the last half-century, according to Harvard economist Raj Chetty, to the point where by 2016 half of 30-year-olds were earning less than their parents had at the same age. The bottom half of workers by income have seen no real growth<\/a> in their earnings since the 1970s, though Chetty points to 1980 as the \u00ab\u00a0inflection point\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> after which inequality exploded. The once-secure American middle class has been decimated by offshoring and the dismantling of unions, while the \u00ab\u00a0trickle-down\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> economic policies that kicked off the inequality epidemic have instead caused the savings<\/a> of the working class to trickle up to the wealthy. And most Americans<\/a> – four out of five – are struggling with some kind of debt. It’s not surprising people are starting to wake up from the American dream.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n But it was one particular complaint of Cooperman’s that epitomizes the billionaires’ panic. \u00ab\u00a0The idea of vilifying wealthy people is so bogus – they’re appealing to the masses!\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> he cried<\/a>, as if appalled that any politician would speak to voters rather than the donors who typically fill their war chests. Big-time Democratic donors have even threatened<\/a> the party with the removal of their support if Warren (or Sanders, who famously threw down the gauntlet with \u00ab\u00a0I don’t think billionaires should exist,\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> now a bumper sticker) gets the nomination.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Genuinely populist politicians haven’t been a problem in the past – the last Democrat in the White House, Barack Obama, staffed his cabinet under the direction of Citi executives despite promising to fight for the people on the campaign trail. While he was taking orders, his predecessor was bailing out Citi and the rest of the banks that had destroyed the US economy with predatory mortgage lending, leaving almost a million families out on the street<\/a> in 2008 alone. But a stubborn populist current has infiltrated American politics despite the best efforts of the (billionaire-owned) media, which equates populism<\/a> with fascism<\/a> any chance it gets – and young Americans are looking increasingly favorably upon socialism. Neither of these trends predicts a rosy future for the super-rich.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Of course, even if the next president sticks to their guns and targets billionaires in the wallet, success is not guaranteed. Citi alluded to this in its letter, reminding investors that any reform-minded president will have a tough time pushing legislation through a Congress loyal to Wall Street. And the rich can take comfort in the fact that everything else Washington has declared war on in the last 50 years – poverty, drugs, and terrorism – are all still thriving.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Les hyper-riches, minorit\u00e9 opprim\u00e9e ? Nous n’en finissions pas de jouer au ballon de l’\u00e9galit\u00e9 avec la quadrature du cercle, de faire des cercles vicieux pour que le serpent puisse se mordre la queue sans se blesser selon les droits d\u00e9mocratiques des minorit\u00e9s ethniques, culturelles et persif[fl]euse (car le serpent, non seulement siffle, mais va… <\/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":[14],"tags":[6676,9051,19486,9658,4169,13256,3034,18706,3372,3132],"class_list":["post-78954","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ouverture-libre","tag-banques","tag-blankfein","tag-buyniski","tag-helen","tag-identite","tag-lgtbq","tag-lloyd","tag-milliardaires","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\/78954","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=78954"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78954\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=78954"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=78954"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=78954"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}dedef.org<\/em><\/h4>\n<\/p>\n
Billionaires declare themselves a persecuted minority<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n
Helen Buyniski<\/h4><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"