The quote is often falsely attributed to the German playwright Bertolt Brecht, but it belongs to a compatriot of his, the Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller, an early follower of Adolf Hitler who eventually became a relentless critic. It is not a poem, as the commonplace maintains, but a public speech that he used to repeat. He speaks of the silent complicity of German society in the rise of the dictator and says: “First they came for the socialists, and I was silent because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the unionists, and I did not speak because I was not a unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not say anything because I was not Jewish. Then they came for me, and by then there was no one left to speak on my behalf.”
The message is transparent and alludes to a behavior that is repeated throughout history and different geographies, from Nazi Germany to Argentina’s process of “don’t get involved” and “it must have been for a reason.” When a superior and uncontrolled force messes with the weakest, or with a minority or, as now, with a nation isolated in continental geopolitics such as Venezuela, the rest usually remain silent and look the other way. Overall, they are not the Chavistas. Even some, like Javier Milei and his officials, applaud enthusiastically.
But how does the story continue? Who will it be next?
After the coup against Nicolás Maduro, the new and self-proclaimed sheriff of the world, Donald Trump, already warned that other countries could suffer the same fate if they do not behave as expected. Mexico and Colombia are just two examples.
Not without reason, the detractors of what happened in Caracas, leaders who range from the center to the left of the ideological spectrum, speak of a flagrant violation of the national sovereignty of Venezuela and the right of self-determination of the people. Even someone as little “progressive” as Horacio Rodríguez Larreta has just tweeted: “There is, however, a principle that cannot be violated unilaterally: respect for the sovereignty of the States. It is a dangerous precedent. Even in the face of unjust, authoritarian and violent governments. The solution for Venezuela cannot be external imposition. It has to be democratic. It has to be Venezuelan. Let them decide in freedom. Free elections now.”
To which his former opponent in the Cambiemos presidential race, the now libertarian Patricia Bullrich, responded: “God, how lukewarm. How does it feel to coincide with Kirchnerism, Horacio?”
The former Buenos Aires mayor’s response was an image of Bullrich in his time as a Montonera, national and popular, with this addition: “Perhaps you can explain it to me better, Pato.”
Chapeau.
That the open intervention of the United States in the internal politics of another country deserves a majority silence, and even several applauses, is still a sign of the times that Trump, Milei and other faces of the new right embody so well, and that they have no qualms about proclaiming the law of the jungle, that of the strongest, the lion. The law of fait accompli and zero diplomacy.
If Pastor Niemöller were alive, he would perhaps feel a chilling déjà vu.
You may also be interested
