Fearful people and capitalism's basis of compromise

September 28 2008

After prolonged news on banking crisis, it is natural that some exploiters are now fearful, not just specifically about the economy but in a general way. Economic fears often lead to militarism. One is sowed and the other reaped. Conservative Anne Applebaum has expressed the new situation well by combining metaphors of war and economics as the bourgeoisie usually does:

"For if September 11, 2001 was the day that we had to reassess our ideas about America's role in world politics, September 15, 2008, the day Lehman Brothers went bankrupt, may well be remembered as the day we had to reassess our ideas about America's role in the world economy. It's that cataclysmic, that decisive, that irreversible."(1)

The rich and poor countries alike are now aware of the vulnerability of the international banking system. In any economic collapse, the rich countries have further to collapse. The Third World and Russia will suffer in a rich country depression, but the rich countries will suffer more and the relative power of the rich and poor countries will tend to even out.

Hardest hit will be small towns dependent on banking and insurance,(2) any country disproportionately dependent on banking and the dollar and small outposts of imperialism. To small outposts of imperialism used to thinking of themselves as independent and self-reliant with their own businesses, the re-division of surplus-value will come as a shock.

In truth, rich country capitalism has grounds for compromise to win away bourgeois sectors of the international united front. Industrial and post- industrial capitalism produce surplus that is the basis for political compromise, but it must be used and expanded to avoid the default logic of zero- sum struggle, which capitalism can lose prematurely with socialist revolution or militarist/demographic catastrophe.

The U.$. labor aristocracy is the reason that even if imperialists take up a scientific method, they can never be as flexible and apply as much science as the international proletariat. While a convenient ally for imperialists, the labor aristocracy lies to itself on the origins of economic surplus; although, it is aware in a one-dimensional, first-order way that the united $tates is rich while most other countries are not--a convenient launching point for national chauvinism. Time that could go into application of science to pressing issues goes into manipulating the labor aristocracy to stay in the imperialist-labor aristocracy class alliance dominating imperialism.

2008 saw some international muscle flexing against Amerikan imperialism. It reached the point where oil prices declined because of fears of a U.$. depression.(3) MIM also received increased death threats, including from moron sectors of the Democratic Party who cannot perceive that their pet issues of health care and abortion are not driving the changes in the air. Not to be outdone, others also join the fray.

The lessons of the past year or two are now broadly absorbed among international leaders. Oppressed nation leaders need to take care not to rely on politics inside the united $tates, because the difficulties for internationalism inside U.$. borders only increase with time. The number of people Obama's age who can serve as Bobby Kennedy imitations is few, fewer than in the 1960s. With the drift toward post-modernism in the colleges, the likelihood of Marxists arising with training in the labor theory of value declines. More identity politics, relativism and decadence is all we can expect inside U.$. imperialism--at best. This is not to deny that the imperialists and intellectuals are the most flexible sectors.

What we are talking about is called the "balance of subjective forces" and their geographic distribution. "Objectively," imperialism is ready for a major Depression clearing the way for proletarian struggle in the Third World to achieve new goals. Thanks to Deng Xiaoping's assistance in buying off Amerikans, the people prepared to contribute to proletarian struggle in the united $tates are fewer than ever. However, already, the oppressed nation leaders globally discuss among themselves the timing and prospects of struggle against U.$. imperialism.

It will be natural that the international united front against U.$. imperialism will wait out the Bush administration to see if it has any reform capacities. Then with a likely president Obama, the exploited camp is going to split, depending on how much reform has occurred.

In early 2009, some will favor taking the struggle up to the next level. Others will favor waiting to "give Obama a chance." The two factions will divide based on their perception of risk to capitalism as a system. The reformist- accommodationist faction will downplay advantages of the moment and hope deluded hopes about action from the u.$. government. The more radical faction of the bourgeoisie will push the struggle up a notch, with the calculation that even if the meltdown ends in socialism, chances for equal treatment are better than under U.$. neo-colonialism. That is to say there is a patriotic bourgeoisie of the non-imperialist countries resentful of its own treatment and the treatment of its countries by imperialism. The patriotic bourgeoisie will aim for thorough reform of imperialism but possibly wind up with revolution--and be willing to take that risk.

At any given moment, there is a faction of capitalists that benefits more from the dollar order and a faction that benefits less. There will always be those on the margin--those for instance who are 50% in favor of using the euro and 50% in favor of using the dollar. In ordinary times, economic factors may reinforce the dollar order. In times of crisis and economic re-assessment, those on the fence will move off.

Just as it was Nixon who pulled troops out of Vietnam, it is Obama who will pull troops from Iraq to save U.$. imperialism's strength. Withdrawal saves political difficulties, money and the armed forces. Our stupid public opinion-oriented pseudo-left is only too happy to let Obama focus on Iraq while passing on Afghanistan and other occupations. It boils down to that pseudo-left support for imperialism can be bought for a price. Because of the lack of internationalism in our pseudo-left, there was always the danger that its support would be purchased by the imperialists as a whole. To sum it up, the slogan could be "health care for Amerikans; they deserve it. Screw Palestine."

The international proletariat has a different priority. It wants to hit u.$. imperialism while it is tied down in Iraq, and before it even recovers from oil and financial crises, because over time, even the labor aristocracy learns a few tricks to adjust to new realities, even if it does not know the sources of those new realities. So around March 2009, the international proletariat is going to want to take struggle to a new level unless Bush managed to negotiate some hefty new arrangements for imperialism by then.

The means of a decisive struggle against U.$. imperialism are already at hand. That's what the U.$. banking collapse proves. The division will be with those bourgeois sectors not wanting to push the struggle too hard.

There will be those throwing sand in the face of the international proletariat about how the problems of the U.$. banking system are not that bad or not rooted in the causes MIM has indicated. The crisis is not about more or less regulation or even an absolute number of dollars and debts floating around. The international united front has learned that lesson this year.

The international proletariat will have one factor against it in that the new U.$. president will have new political capital with the Amerikkkan population. However, from the international proletariat's perspective, it will not matter who is president, because no president can sustain popularity in the face of hammer blows from the oppressed and the united front. "Middle forces" are not Ross Perot voters: they are capitalists from disadvantaged countries. They are creating the dynamic situation we are in.

To prevent a collapse of oil prices in an impending depression, the oil producers have to obtain the ability to cut production quickly. If demand declines from recession, then supply should decline as well to maintain price levels. The pro-Obama, pro-U.$. faction will favor leaving oil production up to give the Amerikans "a chance," instead of taking advantage of all the temporary difficulties u.$. imperialism created for itself.

MIM cannot determine all the reasons that exist when imperialists fail in their reform negotiations. It's not up to us. However, in moments of fear, everyone can picture those who freeze up. We have reached such a moment that makes the future more unpredictable. For an example, it is not just a question of McCain but also to what extent Republicans in the Congress wish to become ancient history. It is predictable that the international united front will suffer losses by March, 2009; however, it will also have improved knowledge of its position, not to mention experience gained from practical struggle. The international united front against U.$. imperialism is already deeper thanks to 2008. Now it is up to imperialists whether they want to cut the width of that united front or end up in the dustbin of history.

Notes:
1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/09/28/do2802.xml
2. http://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate/article/105861/Towns-That-Could- Be-Hit-Hardest-by-the-Financial-Crisis
3. "Crude oil prices declined on fears that the financial crisis that forced the sale of Bear Stearns Cos. (BSC) will widen to affect other companies." 17March2008, http://www.marketintelligencecenter.com/article.aspx?story=560346&s=5656