More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Vivian Norris de Montaigu

Vivian Norris de Montaigu

Posted: July 19, 2010 09:35 AM

Choosing Sides in a 1930s-like Economy

What's Your Reaction:

Many years ago, when writing about World War II and Occupied France, I found a quote that basically said not making any kind of choice was still a choice. In that case it was a choice between collaboration and resistance. Beginning pre-war, in the 1930s, there were groups of industrialists, which we found out were collaborating in the shadows, the "cagoule" they were called...and they went on to build and lead (or already were) some of the biggest companies in France (L'Oreal, Renault, etc) just as Standard Oil and others had done in the U.S. They were fascists, using their so-called anti-Communism as an excuse for their violence (much like Pinochet who supported Economist Milton Friedman and the Neocon point of view in the US did as well), and went on in some cases to reap great profits before, during and after the war.

In the summer of 2001, while attending an anti-globalization meeting during then President George W. Bush's first trip to Europe, just prior to the EU Summit in Gothenburg, Sweden, I met an elderly Swedish woman protesting against the cuts to her health care. As we spoke, she told me of her memories of the 1930s and how 2001 reminded her of 1933. Later that same summer, a Swiss-Italian man told me exactly the same thing, as did a retired Dutch professor, who had served in the Resistance and been captured by (and escaped from) the Nazis. With the attacks of 9/11 at the end of that summer of growing protests and police and state violence against the protesters, we saw fear and so-called "anti-terrorist" controls almost bring that movement to a halt.

What has been going on that reminds three people from three different countries in Europe, all who had been young adults during the war, to be reminded of those years leading up to the horrific events which killed millions? Why were they reminded of the 1930s and how can we see that what has been going on is replicating that frightening period in when fascism emerged and human beings made choices that lead to so much death, destruction and yet also profits?

The gap between the rich and poor is greater than it was even during the last Depression in the 1930s. Job insecurity and unemployment, in the U.S. and increasingly in Europe and other parts of the world, is at an all-time high. Nationalistic tendencies, trade wars, a return to gold and many other factors are tell-tale signs of an increasingly unstable time, during which alliances formed lay bare choices made (or not made), which demonstrate which side people are on (or not).

In other words, it is time to choose sides. But guess what? We are all human beings and we all have to live together on this planet. In order to survive and to create a better world, we all have to be on the same side! There is no place for disturbingly huge gaps between rich and poor, there is no reason for poverty, and as the Nobel Peace Prize winning economist and banker to the poor, Muhammad Yunus has stated time and again, if we wanted to get rid of poverty we could!

What is the point of so few people having so much, even if they then decide to leave it to charity? No one elected Paul Allen or Bill Gates or Warren Buffett to any kind of office so why should we who treasure democracy allow those with so much cash and thus power, decide what affects ourselves, our country and so much of the world? It simply is not sustainable.

So look around you at what is happening. Beware of racist, fascist and elitist tendencies in everything from seemingly off he cuff remarks to a Texas-like choice of rewriting history in schoolbooks (Stalin did the same thing). If you are truly for freedom and prosperity, it must be for all humans, not just a select spoiled few. Elect people like Elizabeth Warren to office, fight for people who truly represent the best interests of all versus those who protect profits before humans. And while you (we) are at it, let's protect the earth and the future for generations to come. I am an optimist, even as I see my native Gulf Coast polluted, and people losing jobs, the inequality...I also see many many more people speaking out and saying this is enough!

Make a choice Americans! Stand with humanity not hunkering down in fear! We are more than that! Support Obama's attempts to make America a better place! He has already done so much especially considering the mess he was left with! And President Obama, please support people like Elizabeth Warren and do not let pressure from banks (not humans) force your hand! We are also asking you to make a choice to stand with us!

 

Follow Vivian Norris de Montaigu on Twitter: www.twitter.com/vivigive

 
 
  • Comments
  • 16
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
12:44 PM on 09/11/2010
Please explain what you expect to get out of voting "none of the above".

Or do you plan to not vote at all since there is no "none of the above".

What does anyone get out of not voting.

I would appreciate a reply.

Thank you
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carl Caroli
Give peace a chance
09:26 AM on 07/20/2010
If only Obama were going to make a big difference. Unfortunately the difference he's making is marginal at best and that doesn't help the lower 80% of the population much. He's deferring to business, as usual, even as they scream bloody murder. We need to change our two party, do nothing, system. Campaign finance reform has been chewed up and spit out by lobbyists. We really need a "none of the above" column in the ballot box.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcaunter
Profile: schizoid, INTJ, IQ145
06:29 AM on 07/20/2010
Right. We can choose sides.

We have the choice of the Republicans, who are exactly like a bunch of Herbert Hoovers reincarnated, or we can choose the Democrats are exactly like a bunch of Herbert Hoovers reincarnated. Gee, I'm sure thrilled about getting out to the polls in November to help select which party Wall Street is going to use to ruin America.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ndem
03:17 AM on 07/20/2010
The author is pointing out an extreme imbalance and history shows that these imbalances ALWAYS end up with some kind of correction...the problem being that there is less democracy when there are these kinds of elites allowed to control not only industry (thank God we have some left!!) but also areas which normally should be decided by vote or elected officials.

It is frighteningly true how close we are to a 1930s type of situation and with rising unemployment, it will only get worse.

As for the fascist tendencies in industry well Halliburton, Blackwater, Wackenhut private prisons...that military industrial complex which needs war to feed itself.
07:32 PM on 07/19/2010
Why is classism always the issue, but no solution is ever presented that directly solves the problem if it is a problem? The message is always that the rich gets taxed too little and the poor too much resulting in too much left for the rich and not enough for the poor. How does taking future revenue solve the rich poor problem that already exists? If it is a major problem, as this article suggests, why not just directly take the assets of the rich and give them to the poor? The article suggests that it is wrong, that the best of the rich unfairly gives their assets away in a manner that they see fit, instead of a manner that the author would see fit.

Why not then pass a law to currently confiscate half of the rich's assets? Think of the spending spree the government could go on with half of Buffets, Gates assets...not too mention half of all the country's 401k's and pension assets....

So, why not solve the rich poor gap permanently?
08:45 PM on 07/19/2010
Ummmm not really sure that's would be in keeping with the whole freedom and we are a nation of laws thing we got going here. But we could raise taxes on the rich.
09:28 PM on 07/19/2010
didnt know freedoms were a priority of libs? Since rich folks are hated, we need to prevent people from becoming rich right? How about 100% tax rates?
03:33 AM on 07/20/2010
Agreed more solutions needed here:
1) Get rid of private campaign contributions...forever!
2) Get rid of lobbyists...forever!
3) Bring back strong public schools (Obama working at this) to help get rid of the imbalances
4) Create a strong infrastructure overall: transportation, health care etc Obama is working hard on these and has done more than any other
5) Make companies pay tax inside the US NOT off-shoring thus no taxes!! Goldman Sachs only paid 1% tax last year. The $550m fine is a drop in the bucket! The problem is almost every company because of tort reform and thus penalty limits would choose to pay penalties rather than change their obscene behavior.
6) Tax rates in line with countries which have good public schools, health care etc!
7) Look into foundations and how their money is invested. If their mission statement is one thing but they are invested in something which negates the help they are providing or even worse which indirectly benefits their personal investments (inside info), then the result is the use of the foundation is not solely to do good thus NO tax break!
8) Strong unions can also mean bringing back real industry to the US. Why would people take these kinds of jobs if they have no protection?
9) And, finally, yes, tax the tiny 1% super rich much much more, do not just let them create foundations. Many of them benefit from these tax-free structures.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AxelDC
04:42 PM on 07/19/2010
How to end the deficit with the least pain to most people:

1) Allow Bush tax cuts to expire as he scheduled them to.
2) Allow the government to negotiate drug prices for Medicare Part D, just like the Canadian provincial governments do.
3) Repeal the Ag Subsidies that Clinton sunsetted and Bush tripled.
4) End these 2 endless wars.
5) Bring Defense spending back to reasonable levels.
6) Lift the cap on FICA for incomes over $90k. This will give Social Security a small surplus over the next 50 years.
7) End the $60 billion in weapons systems that the Pentagon considers obsolete.
8) Restore pay-go rules to Congress that count tax cuts as expenditures.

While Republicans will oppose everyone of those, it will bring our deficit to near zero will the least amount of pain for the vast majority of Americans.

Telling older people to work 5 years longer is an unacceptable proposal when these solutions are available.
11:52 PM on 07/19/2010
Good points. But it is hard enough to get the democrats to agree to all of those, especially 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8. I am a limited government advocate and would loathe to support 1, but might would compromise if pay-go was restored which IMHO is the best idea to come out of the Democratic Party.
03:20 PM on 07/19/2010
I ran as a Republican for the U. S. Congress in 1990. Since that time, I have seen the signs of creeping fascism. There is not now race baiting and persecution of minorities, but it is Socialism for the rich. Competition around the globe continues to shrink while mergers and acqusitions continue unabated. When discussing coporate acqusitions, one of our wealthiest corporate CEO's explains that it is important for that company to have a protective moat (i. e., no competitors). We must turn this around or face the wrath of the mob. My greatest fear is not the 1930's, but rather 1789 France or 1917 Russia. While the wealthy may get their due under such circumstances, there is so much blood letting that countless innocents parish as well. As anyone with a bodyguard already knows, holding wealth poses its own risks.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Shaddup
05:41 PM on 07/19/2010
These days, it should.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DebtNavigation
Attorney and Author
02:24 PM on 07/19/2010
The Texas rewrite is back to how things were before a Wilson-era rewrite that (with few exceptions) portrayed African-Americans as cyphers pre-1865 and villains or victims thereafter. Anyone who is always villain or victim can't be "us" and won't be accorded the rights and responsibilities of autonomy, whether it means miring them in welfare or throwing them in prison. Likewise, those who are treated that way won't see themselves as full participants in society, but as second-class citizens at best. If the Texas rewrite contains specific factual inaccuracies, let those be corrected. But don't put things back the way Woodrow Wilson (an avowed admirer of "Birth of a Nation") would have wanted them.

As for the rich/poor gap ... some wealth IS the result of democratic decisions. The decision to buy an iPhone is the most democratic of choices, and it enriches Steve Jobs. Concentrations of hereditary wealth are where the targeting should occur ... and one place where stern scrutiny could be applied is the so-called charitable foundations and other institutions where privilege is perpetuated in ways that are difficult to measure. If the Kennedy family funds charities, foundations and colleges, is it unreasonable to question whether individual Kennedy family members in succeeding generations will be accorded status and perquisites irrespective of individual merit by the entities they funded? Should they still get a tax break from this?

These are the kinds of things that really need a look.
11:47 AM on 07/19/2010
Easier said than done, Vivian. But the corporate media in America, especially the propoganda outfit known as Fox News, will make sure that the masses never know the true ills of society. They have to make sure not to step on the toes of those running and ruining people's lives so that they can continue collecting ad revenue from these same corporations. Add to the recent decision by the Supreme Court that corporations can sponsor political candidates for their campaigns and you've got a world of trouble.
10:54 AM on 07/19/2010
That's the message already deliver, in the first instance to President Clinton 14 years ago:

"There is nothing wrong with individuals becoming wealthy. It is only when wealth begins to concentrate in the hands of a relative few at the expense of billions of others who are denied even a small share of finite wealth that trouble starts and physical, human suffering begins. It does not have to be this way. Massive greed and consequent massive human misery and suffering do not have to be accepted as a givens, unavoidable, intractable, irresolvable. Just changing the way business is done, if only by a few companies, can change the flow of wealth, ease and eliminate poverty, and leave us all with something better to worry about. Basic human needs such as food and shelter are fundamental human rights; there are more than enough resources available to go around--if we can just figure out how to share. It cannot be "Me first, mine first"; rather, "Me, too" is more the order of the day."

http://www.p-ced.com/1/about/history/

As was pointed out then and since capitalism overall has been more effective at killing people than any alternate ideology including communism and fascism.

http://www.p-ced.com/1/projects/ukraine/sumy/iscs2009/

Why journalists should studiously disregard those involved in doing in is to me a mystery.
Democrat in the South
Empathy, the most important word
09:50 AM on 07/19/2010
It looks to me like a revolution is inevitable. Money has the power to make ANYTHING happen!