‘A’ putsch ‘in Congress’, by Joan Ferran

98 years have passed since putsch of the Bürgerbräukeller Brewery, also known as the putsch from Munich. That afternoon of November 8, 1923, Adolf hitler, along with a large group of SA members, broke into the brewery where the governor of Bavaria he was delivering a speech to more than 3,000 people. The nazis fired into the air and blocked the exit doors so that Hitler, perched on a chair and flanked by Rudolf hess and Hermann Göring, announce that a provisional government seized power in Bavaria at the same time that the national socialist revolution. A Coup attempt in full rule that of the Austrian cape. Inspired and encouraged by the successful march on Rome by Benito Mussolini, the Nazis wanted to make Munich the epicenter of their fight against the German government. The genesis of a rebellious state in Bavaria was the first link to advance on Berlin and liquidate the Weimar Republic. The coup failed and its leaders ended up in jail. On those same days in November, but in 1938, the serious anti-Semitic incidents known as the night of broken glass.

Almost a hundred years have passed, but, looking back over history, one gets the impression that the events tend to repeat themselves even if it is in a peaceful and sweetened version. And this happens without the human race having been able to avoid the paths that lead to hatred and barbarism. The National Socialism it was a mass phenomenon without whose analysis and explanation we would not be able to understand what happened in the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st. It is convenient to study how the aggressive speech of the extreme right played to break down democracy, weaken freedoms and introduce the citizenship mistrust in institutions. Every time a fiery messiah has tried to lead his people to the promised land, tragedy and disaster have been chewed up. In Spain, Vox and certain groups independentists they show a common denominator. Both are bent on reissue old speeches brimming with aggressiveness and emotionality. Some and others seek obstruct the action of democratic governments, take political controversy to extremes, and introduce the outburst and the provocation in the political and parliamentary debate. Those who act like this are destabilizers that open wide the doors to disaffection and populism. The anger and insult in parliament weaken the credibility of democracy. Obviously we are not in times of rallies in breweries, nor before great currents and doctrines of vocation emancipatory similar to fascism or communism, but yes to the rise of proposals for authoritarian court. Surely brown shirts will not parade through our streets again, but a whiff of intolerance it is taking over the political atmosphere. When all a Nobel Prize like Mario Vargas Llosa He tells us that “The important thing in an election is not that there be freedom, but to vote well” we have a problem here and in Latin America. When the moderates adopt the customs, the lexicon and the forms of the intransigents, harmony fades and the doors of great conflicts are opened. Today it is no longer necessary to draw a putsch in a brewery; True, it is more comfortable, and less risky, to do so from the seats of a parliament. If this practice has the support of some media friendsunscrupulous, they will agree with me that the egg of another snake is being incubated. And while it happens mobs of exalted they storm the Capitol from United States, they destroy the CGIL headquarters in Rome or associate the increased crime with the arrival of immigrants.

We want to give thanks to the writer of this article for this outstanding material

‘A’ putsch ‘in Congress’, by Joan Ferran

Hank Gilbert