CLASS 2: ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL INSTABILITY
Readings:
Economic and Political Instability: April 2006 Steering Committee Report (LRNA Newsletter May 2006)
The Global Economy and U.S. Policy Debates (LRNA Newsletter, February 2005)
The New American Empire (Rally article in PT, Vol. 26, No. 5 May 2003)
Discussion Points:
1. Today greater and greater surplus value is extracted from fewer and fewer workers on a global scale. The worker today is competing with a robot that is not paid wages -- so the tendency is for the value of labor power, and hence, the value of human life, to fall toward zero.
2. The state is becoming the means by which capital sustains itself on an increasingly shaky foundation. The point is that capitalism based on electronics cannot exist without the power of the state in a global financial system.
3. Wages are driven down, safety nets are being destroyed, regulatory oversight is being eliminated, tax systems dismantled and rebuilt around new priorities, and civil and criminal law systems are being tranformed in the direction of removing any government responsibility for the welfare of society and its citizens. These actions, essentially amounting to the reconstruction of society according to a new social order, remove any restraint on capital's ability to profit.
4. While world hegemony would rest on mutually beneficial alliances with other countries, the imperial state stands alone and above all. ... We would be wrong if we didn't see that globalization is absolutely tied to the new economy and the new economy cannot exist without it. The economic motion is toward globalization, but the political motion today is toward Empire. The two things are not incompatible.
5. The reality is that irreversible polarization has begun. By polarization we mean the breaking of the monolithic character of a process, and struggle becoming the dominant relationship.
6. As the economic process develops through its quantitative stages, it becomes more and more out of sync with the social institutions created to protect and develop it. Political instability is the disjoining of ht e economic process from it s social institutions. It is this disjoining that creates social destruction and finally political revolution to create institutions compatible with the new stage of the economy.
From RALLY, COMRADES! May 2003
The New American Empire
The American people are awakening from their political slumber. The deepening economic crisis and the growing threat of world war is cracking the ice and we again see the possibility of widespread revolutionary work amongst the masses. The tactical contradiction re-surfaces: Should the revolutionaries simply "fan the flames of social discontent?" Or should they adhere to a "line of march?"
Too often, "fanning the flames" means to zero in on the social or political targets that are visible and easily understood by the masses. While it is easy to mobilize large numbers with such agitation, they conclude that the problem is with a few individuals rather than with a system. For example, any examination will show that the political tendencies followed by the government today are historical and did not originate with George W. Bush.
At the same time, it is clear that the character of the people leading the administration is such that they could not pass up the opportunity to transform the plan for American world hegemony over globalization into a plan for Empire. Modern Empire is not concerned with direct colonies for primary exploitation. Its goal is undisputed world domination. While world hegemony would rest on mutually beneficial alliances with other countries, the imperial state stands alone and above all.
The tendency toward Empire has risen and retreated over the past 30 years. Not only is the political situation favorable to those espousing Empire, the leading personalities of the government are committed to it. It is important to understand that they are not a gang of opportunists. They are ideologues who somehow believe they are on a divine mission of Empire. Bush, a determined born again Christian, is strengthened by a circle of Christian fundamentalists and Zionists who in turn are strengthened by a whole body of pro-fascist think tanks, a super-rich gang of lobbyists and the reactionary wing of the Southern Christian church. A major aspect of this belief is that Greater Israel must become a reality by taking over all of Palestine and reducing the Arab states to the level of vassals. Not only has preparation for and the onslaught of war provided a cover for the slaughter of hundreds of Palestinians, but Israel's "protective fence" has been moved another 50 miles into Palestinian land with the purpose of moving in another 40,000 Israeli settlers.
All this is taking place within the context of globalization. We would be wrong if we didn't see that globalization is absolutely tied to the new economy and the new economy cannot exist without it. The economic motion is toward globalization, but the political motion today is toward Empire. The two things are not incompatible. Globalization can take place under a political system of allies and equal states or it can take place under vassal states, such as with Empire. We should not think categorically, saying either globalization or national interests or Empire. These things are all dialectically intertwined into one thing. It's impossible to pull out just one thread; they are entangled and interdependent upon one another. We have to visualize all these tendencies as part of the same process, all existing alongside, clashing, intertwining and developing with one another.
As an individual, President Bill Clinton visualized an America as top dog in the world, but not Empire. He saw the harmful economic consequences of that path. But the drive toward Empire is always there. In that sense, it's objective. With the destruction of the Soviet Union, the main blocks to American Empire were removed and these forces were released. It might not have happened today, or around Iraq. It might have been another 10 years of slowly loosening ties and slowly developing competition between the different areas of the world. Bush, however, has accelerated everything. If he's crazy, he's crazy along the line of march of history.
The move toward Empire demands that the U.S. deals with two major sources of resistance: China and the European Union (EU). On the one hand, China is rising like a giant with 7-8 percent per year economic growth and they are talking about increasing their workforce by a billion people in the next 10 years. They have to have a reliable source of energy for their industrial development. To achieve this, China has always courted the Muslim areas and population. Western China is part of the Middle East. China as a nation has strong ties to this area, not only in religion but in trade and culture. The U.S. has to stop China. The other source of resistance is the rise of the EU. The U.S. recognizes that if the EU should really get together, it can out-produce and out-fight the U.S. Yet Europe has no oil. To strangle Europe and China, Bush has to get hold of the oil resources.
The Bush gang thinks if they can gain control of Saudi oil and Iraqi oil -- which represent two-thirds of the world's oil resources -- they will have effective control over the rate of development of China and Europe. This is the reason Bush is taking the militant stand of "We fought this war and we're going to rebuild Iraq." Rebuilding Iraq means controlling their oil and putting the U.S. in the position to control everyone else's.
Under the tremendous pressure this generates in Europe, we're beginning to see fissures and divisions between the U.S. and Great Britain.
Of course the British agree with the U.S., but Europe is much more a market for Britain than the U.S. The U.S. is a great source of loans and investment, but Great Britain can't do anything without the European market.
The other piece is that oil reserves equal to Saudi Arabia and Iraq are in the Caspian Basin. During the Soviet Union era, large historically evolved groups were treated as nations and small groups of people who spoke a separate language or had a separate history were designated autonomous areas. Most of the Soviet investment went into building up these backward, mostly Muslim nations and areas rather than Russia proper. The result is well-educated and well-organized republics such as Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Georgia and Azerbaijan among others. These countries are sitting on top of or in close proximity to Caspian Basin oil.
When the U.S. talks in terms of blocking the oil in the Middle East, immediately France, China and Germany think in terms of the Caspian Basin. Russia has been saying some very harsh things about the U.S. Vladimir Putin is not a lackey of the U.S. He's a lackey of the Russian bourgeoisie. Right now the Russian bourgeoisie is in trouble. They've lost billions of dollars in oil and industrial contracts with Iraq. Iraq doesn't border the old Soviet Union, but Iran does and Iran is right next to Iraq. The Russians have influence in this area as well as Central Asia and have traded there over the last thousand years. The U.S. is a newcomer.
After the overthrow of the Soviet Union, the United States moved to establish its strength in the Caspian area. They practically bought up Georgia, a key Caspian country. Tiblis is the main oil exporting area for Russia, but it's in Georgia. The head of the Georgian government is bitterly anti-Russian and very pro-U.S. The whole war in Chechnya is nothing more than a reflection of this. The Russians are rapidly trying to resolve this problem. This is the meaning of the Chechnya struggle. The Russians still have to deal with the problem of the U.S.-influenced governments of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, among others in that area. We should not forget also that Afghanistan borders on all this area too and the U.S. has a large number of troops stationed there.
Just as the U.S. knows how to conduct coups around the world whenever they need to, the Russians know how to conduct coups when they need to as well. When bad goes to worse they'll do whatever is necessary because they are fighting for their national existence. We should look to see a wave of coups and civil wars around the Caspian area.
The question is will the U.S. allow the overthrow of these pro-American governments, and the installation of pro-Russian governments, allowing the balance of oil to shift toward China, Russia, Germany and France? This would probably means war. Proxy war to begin with, but eventually war between the big nations. Will this happen overnight? No. We're talking in terms of a long period of time.
A very serious situation is developing around the Middle East, Central Asia and the Caspian Basin area. It is the main aspect of international motion. The reality is that irreversible polarization has begun. By polarization we mean the breaking of the monolithic character of a process, and struggle becoming the dominant relationship.
Ever since the end of WWII, there have been all kinds of contradictory processes going on between the U.S. and the rest of the world. There was ideological polarization between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. It was not an economic polarization. Trade continued between the USSR and the West. They were tied together with a hundred economic and historic threads. Their differences were ideological -- either socialism or private property. But they were not polarized economically. They came close to it several times, but it never really happened.
The polarization developing today isn't ideological. These countries are all capitalist. Now, the tendency at least, is toward economic polarization and therefore the situation is very dangerous. Under these conditions old alliances are coming apart and new ones are taking their place. This is not a matter of crazy man Bush wrecking all the alliances that have made the U.S. strong. The Bush Administration doesn't want those alliances anymore. Empire doesn't deal with allies, Empire deals with vassal states. They don't want to be encumbered by alliances with anybody. They are not foolish. They are after something. When they break the alliances between the U.S., France and Germany and sour the good will with China -- it's for a purpose.
The headlong drive toward Empire was first met by strengthening the resistance of the various nations. National resistance wasn't strong enough. As the goals of the American offensive have become clear, potentially powerful regional blocs are coming about. There is the inevitable antithesis. There is no question that the Iraqi war has accelerated this process of Russia, Germany, Belgium France and China getting together. Right now they are all saying, "This is not an anti-American discussion, we love America, we're grateful to America," but they are getting themselves together.
Bush and his gang are openly saying the next invasion will be Iran. There is a lot of saber rattling going on about Syria. In the main, this is pushed by the Zionists, since Syria is the only remaining strong enemy of Israel. But Bush's "axis of evil" or their imperial line of march hardly includes Syria. Economically weak, militarily and politically isolated, Syria is bound to give in to a combination of threats and bribes.
The Empire builders are worried about North Korea. North Korea probably has rockets that can reach the U.S. with nuclear bombs. The North Korean pledge of total war if attacked is not to be taken lightly. It certainly has the ability to do terrible damage to South Korea and Japan if war should come. More importantly, China fully understands that the U.S. is attempting to surround her with military might. It is doubtful that China could remain neutral if North Korea is invaded.
Under such delicate and dangerous conditions, what are the tasks of the revolutionaries? While doing their mass work, they must tirelessly point out the material economic basis for the struggles going on throughout the world. They must constantly bring forth an understanding that the horrors of today are the pain of a new world in birth. It is either going to be the capitalists' world or ours. Such propaganda needs facts and analysis, not ideological arguments. While there is still time, the comrades must consciously practice and develop their skills by greater participation in the growing social response.