We are publishing this opinion piece by Liberté Cherie° and the statement from the Communist group on the A-M General Council. Of course, the contents are the sole responsibility of the authors.
Liberté Cherie – G20 Counter-Summit in Nice: “Poor” alter-globalists!
They came, they are all here, the alter-globalists and the indignant of all sorts, the anarchists, the anti-capitalists, the Trotskyists, the communists, the radical ecologists, the opponents to everything and nothing.
The parade of short ideas
The day after their meager parade (less than 5,000 people), the media rejoices in its “non-violence.” It’s the least one can expect that for once, they leave behind neither scorched earth nor a ransacked city. We can thank the police forces who sufficiently supervised the protest and helped prevent any overflow.
Nevertheless, if we look closely at this famous “counter-summit,” it appears pathetic, sinister (despite the various costumes displayed by some protesters and the striptease by a hundred of them). But above all, how poor in ideas and realism is this “fiesta” of the embittered, spoiled bourgeois and small-time agitators.
What exactly are they demanding? The end of capitalism? The taxation of financial transactions? The exit from globalization? The disappearance of tax havens?
And now, in addition, they logically applaud the suicidal approach of the Greek prime minister!
Seductive slogans, canned phrases, facile, hollow, and meant to recruit what they wish to be enraged masses, seduced by the simplistic nature of a demagogic discourse. Fortunately for us, it is not so easy to rally entire populations, lobotomized and fanatical, behind oneself. Not everyone can be a Hitler or a Stalin!
Against capitalism?
They are against capitalism but have no other viable system to propose. Capitalism has flaws, certainly, has made mistakes, certainly, but to throw the entire system into the fire, there is a margin that only such irresponsibles are ready to breach. As Winston Churchill humorously pointed out: “Under capitalism, people have more cars. Under communism, they have more parking lots.”
Against finance?
They want to tax financial transactions, implement the famous “Tobin Tax” which is now rejected by its own inventor. This tax on financial transactions would aim to reduce speculation and, implicitly, prevent future banking crises and prevent excess income drawn by speculative finance actors. Believing that such a tax could have any influence is an illusion, because either it is very high, on the order of several percents of the transaction value, and it will kill the futures markets of currencies that are at the origin of international trade expansion and the corresponding price drops; or it is on the order of 0.1% or less and it will have no effect because daily price changes are well above this threshold and it will not slow anything down. A tax is a brake, and braking is known to be one of the worst means to prevent a system from oscillating, notably because it requires huge braking to be effective (thus not even a 1% maximum tax would stop speculators when a currency begins to fall by 5% in a day).
Against globalization?
They are for de-globalization, the new form of protectionism. In 2011, to avoid appearing xenophobic towards developing countries, this idea hides behind well-meaning pretexts like social and environmental production conditions. A ridiculous and utterly senseless idea is de-globalization: large companies are completely intertwined with the global economy. Take Airbus as an example: Airbus has obtained from European governments, via their French credit insurance company (Coface), the German and the British ones, guarantees for Chinese airlines buying Airbuses made in China. Why does Airbus solicit governments? To compete on equal terms with Boeing, which also benefits from American credit insurance and extends this to Chinese buying companies. Why do European governments agree? Because 20% of Airbus’s turnover depends on Chinese buyers, which thus contributes to employment, especially at the Toulouse site. And this even though Airbuses are labeled as Chinese, because 95% of the finished product actually comes from Airbus’s European factories. What could the order of “bank control” mean in such a partnership context? And what is a Chinese or European product, how to define which products to apply protectionism to? And what results to expect from the closure of trade borders, if not retaliatory actions? Abandon Airbus sales and corresponding jobs, negate the entire international trade system? Do the French being asked to approve de-globalization even understand the stakes? De-globalization is the selfish refusal born in our Western countries to see emerging countries become equal if not sometimes more powerful economic partners (example of China). So, would these countries then be our enemies? But if we overtax their products, they will disqualify ours and our economies will turn inward to anemia. From any angle one approaches globalization, whose logic dates back to the Middle Ages, it can be envisaged to modify it; not to turn one’s back on it.
Against tax havens and for Greek bravado?
As for the disappearance of tax havens, who can seriously believe that the world’s misfortunes are caused by these? Who can be so gullible to think that the crisis shaking our economies comes straight from these tax havens, like a “scapegoat” rabbit from a magician’s hat?
Finally, should we not laugh at all these poor lost souls, convinced of having changed the world by wearing out their soles for a few hours on the Nice pavement, and who today feel like they have found a new idol in the figure of the Greek Prime Minister, a crafty politician trying to escape his country’s early elections…
Let’s remind them that Greece, which abused the easy credit provided by the euro’s signature, has put itself in difficulty, unlike the northern European countries that have followed stricter disciplines and made necessary reforms. Let’s remind them that the European bailout plan is precisely a plan to save the country, not sink it!
Obviously, it would be vain to try to open the eyes of alter-globalists and the “indignant,” who prefer nonsensical utopias, soothing speeches, and slogans that crackle and evaporate during a counterproductive counter-summit.
An indecent and shocking deployment!
At a time when the current power and its local intermediaries, ESTROSI and CIOTTI, continuously unleash calls for the most implacable austerity, justifying severe cuts in all social budgets under the pretext of debt, the deployment of considerable means to receive the world’s powerful appears particularly indecent. Because the real planet wreckers are in Cannes at the G20 and not in Nice, at a counter-summit where participants showed all their sense of responsibility to make yesterday’s demonstration a success and a moment as peaceful as it was dynamic, which never fell into the crude trap of provocation. Despite the entire campaign of terrorization of the population of the east districts of the City led notably by Eric CIOTTI, which consequently appeared as a clumsy electoral manipulation.
But more seriously, it was an opportunity for a police forces deployment totally disproportionate with the implementation of a system whose first consequence was to make residents’ life impossible for the entire afternoon. Blocked streets, restricted flow of people, closed shops, deafening helicopters, water cannons ready for use, how many millions of public money thus squandered when it’s so badly needed for public School or Healthcare, in particular. And what an eloquent symbol of their societal choices to see armed officers, plain-clothed, on duty in front of bank agencies or consumer temples.
For as far as security is concerned, the inhabitants of these districts mainly suffered from an excessive system preventing them even from returning home once the procession was over, sometimes even getting manhandled by police members. It’s not from the peaceful and joyful protesters we were with that any difficulty came.
But should we be surprised from those who worry that a people might be democratically consulted on austerity measures that will make their life even harder than what they have been enduring for months? Hearing ESTROSI’s declarations about the referendum announced by the Greek Prime Minister, one might wonder who is truly irresponsible? How can those who claim to be “democrats” be alarmed that a people can have a say on a plan that might considerably impact their life during the coming years? Since when does consulting a people on such crucial questions amount to a cataclysm in a democracy? On the pretext that it would worry markets? Rating agencies? What kind of parody of democracy is this?
Not surprising from those who disregarded the French people’s sovereign vote in 2005 during the European Constitution referendum to then pass it through in a small committee.
There is, for us, no triple AAA that could justify ransoming the people to repay debts that are primarily those of banks handing out bonuses and not those of populations. More than ever, it is urgent to sanction those for whom public policy must be determined according to the whims of finance.
So that other choices prevail and that it is “human first!”
Noël ALBIN – Francis TUJAGUE – Jacques VICTOR
Communist General Councillors
