The global system of inequality
Against globalisation or against imperialism? Against neo-liberalism or against capitalism?
Assemblea Nazionale Anticapitalista, Italy
Contribution to the International Communist Seminar
"The World Socialist Revolution in the Conditions of Imperialist Globalization"
Brussels, 2-4 May 2001
In these days
we assist to a wide use, or abuse, of the terms" globalisation" and
"neo-liberalism", apparently economic concepts used in order to indicate
a big variety of phenomena: economic, social, political, cultural, psychological
and military, which affect directly or indirectly the individual interests,
as well as the national communities and the whole humanity. But, using those
terms, we rarely reflect upon their concrete definition and, even less, we deepen
the search of the conditions that created them. What nowadays is called
globalisation is nothing but a developed phase of expansion of the capitalist
economic-financial relationships to a worldwide level. This expansion
is a complex and conflicting process, with an objective character, which is
developing outside our will, like all the mechanisms inherent in the production
and reproduction of the relationships of the capitalist exploitation. The
"mondialisation" of the capitalist economic relationships, that has
been carried out firstly through the exportation of the capitals outside
the national economic-productive aspects, where they were originally accumulated,
is in fact an "ancient" process that only passed trough different
phases. The other inborn aspect of imperialist expansion, the polarisation,
is in other words the exploitation and the domination of the system’s periphery
by the centre, and is not a new fact, as Capitalism assumed since its origins
an international dimension. The necessity to expand of the capitalist system,
is inborn to its existence; in the XVIII and XIX centuries it had the colonialist
shape, in the XX century it assumes the imperialist one: they are only the
shape and the functions of that world-wide dimension, those that
underwent through transformations, passing through different phases. We
could say that the end of the first phase of the "mondialisation"
coincides with the explosion of the First World War that abruptly put an end
to the first period of the worldwide capitalist expansion. The essential elements,
the generative causes and the general lines of developing process that lead
capitalism to its advanced, imperialist phase, have been revealed and analysed
in detail by Lenin, who supplied us –in this way – the fundamental means for
the scientific understanding of the system’s working mechanisms of the contemporary
age. Remembering the five fundamental aspects that allowed Lenin to define scientifically
the imperialism is a necessary step. Above all today, when, with the use of
"post-modern" terms, some political forces try to mask their abandonment
–or never existed- of a revolutionary perspective.
These
are the characteristics that Lenin indicated in the spring of 1916 as the base
of the imperialist system, and which, with clear evidence, we can find today,
in a moment of full development of the so called "globalised" contemporary
imperialism. But let’s see it in order. Before the First World War there was
a period of great development of the Foreign Direct Investments (FDI), in other
words of the capitals exportation, that caught up the 9% of the world’s Gross
Domestic Product (GDP). In
the entire age that goes from the First, until the end of the Second World War,
which clearly was an age of great economic, social and political convulsions,
this process of the "mondialisation" of imperialist economic relations
that, as all the material processes, proceeds with a "spiral" movement
and never in "straight line", is appreciably slowed down due to the
influence of various factors.
Firstly, the Bolshevik Revolution brought into question the worldwide dominion of Capital, preventing the imperialist powers from the access to the enormous low cost work force of Russia. Also the substitution between Great Britain and the USA (as the most hegemonic power of the system), will temporary condition the development of Capitalism in international terms, as USA were not in that moment – differently from Great Britain – a colonial power; this situation carried the American capitalists to privilege the capital’s expansion and concentration mainly in national terms.
In order to testify this slowing down, it’s enough to think that until fifteen years after the end of the Second World War (until 1960), the relationship between worldwide foreign investments and GDP, which in Lenin’s age was 9%, was equivalent only to 4,5 %. The phase of capitalist reconstruction of the post-war began, drawing profit from that favourable economic conjuncture after the wide war’s destruction of material values. It was a phase of extremely fast economic increase that lasted until the ’70. It was leaded by the great expansion of American industries, that based their profit on the development of industrial productions of great physical volume, great works of engineering, in the durable and not durable production of consumption’s articles and on the control and the exploitation of the sources of raw materials. At that moment starts a dizzy rise of the United States exports, whose main part is represented by the trading between the great North American enterprises and their own foreign branches, whose sales "in loco" begin to represent a bigger amount than the total exports of the United States (nearly 2 times and a half in 1966). It’s evidenced therefore that also in this phase the capital’s expansion to world-wide level went in parallel with the capitals’ concentration and to the wealth’s polarisation, while the "integration" of the periphery to the system was only a superficial element, also regarding only the trade flows. In the case of the European multinationals we will find a similar process, even if slower and highly differentiated between the different countries. Still minor dynamism can be found in the Japanese foreign branches in relation to the mother enterprises, even if they are among the largest of the world, but this phenomenon corresponds to the particular characteristic of development of the "eastern capitalism", which we cannot analyse here. In this phase of extraordinary economic boom, under the convergent pressures of the existence of a socialist system, of the consequent contractual force of the trade-union fights, of the parties of the western proletariat and of the successes of the anti-colonialist and anti-imperialist popular movements of the periphery, the capitalist dominant Keynesian doctrine managed to conciliate the economic development with the social progress in the North, by systematic support of the State to the imperialist strategies of the multinational enterprises, which included, in the South, the genocide wars or the support to criminal pro-imperialist dictatorships. The present capitals’ expansion forms
With the end of the post-war’s capitalist expansion period and the birth of a new capital’s overproduction crisis, we can now analyse those new transformations (changes in forms) which are usually described and synthesized with the terms "globalisation" and "neo-liberalism". The capital overproduction crisis born when the capitals accumulation, with a high organic composition, reaches wide proportions, thus causing the tendential fall of the profit’s rate, that means, for capitalists, a narrowing of the remunerative investments’ possibilities. The typical multinational enterprises of the XX century, based on the heavy industrial production (steel, cars etc.), immediately suffer for the crisis, because of the "already done" world markets division: the industrial increasing gets slower and profits starts to reduce.
This fact provoked, on world level, an enormous and speeded process of capitals and production centralization, with its epicentre in the USA: the last years’ average is of one capitalist enterprise absorbed by another one every hour. This insatiable capitalist greed follows precise selective criteria: or an enterprise in amongst the first three of its sector, or it’s in danger to be absorbed by a larger one. Generally, the smallest enterprises are acquired through stock’s passages, while the biggest join themselves through fusions. In parallel, the Capital tries to diversify its action’s fields, by investing in new sectors.
These phenomena show how it is being amplified a "globalised competition" whose dimensions and ferocity has never been seen before. On this crisis situation (capitalists only speak about "stagnation" period or "lowering of increase"), some economical and political factors intervened –both in national than in international level-causing a fabulous acceleration of the capitalistic economy’s globalisation. One factor is represented by the development of technologies, whose introduction in the capitalist production determined a real revolution in the productive forces.
A second factor is the liberalisation of the capital’s expansion outside the national borders, a really applied element of the "liberalist" imperialist doctrine. It’s well known, in fact, that the "free circulation" of goods has been always reduced and conditioned by many protectionist measures, as well as the "circulation" of the workforce. In every case, however, , the famous doctrine of the "free market" was applied with two weights and measures: State’s protection and public helps for the riches, market’s discipline for poors.
The big expansion of the financial capital, one of the most evident phenomena of this globalising phase of capital, was favourite, without any doubts, by the dismantling of the old financial system based on the Bretton Woods agreement, in 1973. Until that year, almost the 90% of the international capital transactions were based on investments or trade, and only 10% on speculation. In the last 15 years, thanks to the financial liberalisation and the introduction of fluctuant changes, the percentages have been inverted.
The big amount of exceeding capitals found a remunerative outlet in the financial speculation and, nowadays, almost the 95% of the international capital’s activity is concentrated on speculative operations. This fact leads to a huge capital’s accumulation and concentration with no correspondence with a real economic growth and, also, to an increasing of the gap between the north and the south of the system.
The privatisation of public companies is another element that gave the capital a wide remunerative investments’ field, not only because many public companies has been sold to private capitals at ridiculous prices, but also because new "economical" sectors have been opened to the market: public services, telecommunication, energy, health system, education, social security….All of these are now quoted in the stock exchange and the rights become privileges!
Another very important factor was the dissolution of the European socialist system that opened to the Capital an enormous market, transforming millions of people, till then unreachable, in potential consumers. The positive effects, for the big capital, were not only this, since, starting with the "Gorbachov’s age", also the precious petrol wealth of Siberia and Central Asia entered in the hunt’s field of the imperialist multinational corporations, as well as the scientific discoveries and the technological innovation the former USSR had reached in many sectors. Eastern Europe returns, in this way, to its ancient role of "service" and is now reduced to anew "Third World" with low cost workforce on disposal for imperialist companies.
The joined action of all these factors–the transformation of financial and economical mechanisms, the change in the bourgeoisie State’s model from a Keynesian assistential one to a reactionary and neo-liberal one as nowadays, the fall of a system which competed with capitalism for world’s hegemony- permitted to Capital a big acceleration of the process of concentration and world expansion (the so-called globalisation).
What we face today is an international production system organized and directed by the big multinationals companies. The biggest 500 world enterprises are becoming more and more independent, not only from the national workforce, but also from the national State. The multinational enterprises, through a deep concentration processes, are now global companies which can subdue entire States to their interests.
The profits of those 500 enterprises reach unthinkable values, equal to the internal product of various countries. Amongst them, a hierarchy exists, and the profits are more and more concentrated in the hands of a little minority: the first 10 concentrate the same profit realized by the further190 taken together. "Amongst the 19 biggest world enterprises, 6 are Japanese, 3 from USA and one is Britannic Dutch. The geographical distribution of the corporations reflect the usual power hierarchy of the world society: 435 of the biggest 500 –87%- owns to G7’s countries. 151 are from USA, 149 Japanese, 44 German, 40 French, 33 Britannic, 11 Italian and 5 Canadians. In the list of the world’s owners, from Latin America are present 2 Brazilian corporations, 2 Mexican and 1 from Venezuela; but it’s meaningful that those corporations owns, without exceptions, to the primary and tertiary sectors: three are petrol enterprises and two services (bank and telephones), showing in this way the inexistence of a Latin-American industrial potentiality."
This "new" power has, however, some limits. The capitalists’ obsession to get more and more profits and in a rapid way, aims to move the investments from the productive sphere to the financial one. The values in the stock exchanges loose their relation with the real values. In speculations, in facts, there’s who win and who loose, but no real weight is created, it’s also being concentrated in few hands.
The concentration and the savage speculation exposes the system to the risk of the "financial bubble" and the stock exchange’s cracks, which would cause the bankrupt of many enterprises, with the consequent economic contraction, loss of jobs, in a word a global depression.
Although this contradiction of the imperialist financial system, many people don’t believe in the possibility of a big depression, such as that of 1929. With no doubts, it’s easy to imagine that the world’s owners, thank to their knowledge of the instruments they’re using, are managing to avoid such a scenery.
In every case, in our opinion, it’s not important to establish if a terrible depression will happen or not. If it would happen, without an adequate preparation and organization of the proletarian forces aiming to overcome the actual exploiting global system, the result would be new brutal sufferings for the majority of mankind. In addiction to this, even if the capitalist can try to adequately run the crisis to avoid the worst, it doesn’t mean the system is more credible, as it is not able to limit an increasing unemployment (30% of the world’s active population), the exclusion of entire continents from development, a reduction of the economic growth also in the industrial countries, a recession situation that also involves an increasing part of the same bourgeois class.
Political, social and ideological domination of "globalisation"
The present offensive of neo-liberal doctrine, which had been abandoned after the Big Depression in 1929-30, is now the result of some important changes in social relations on world level. It’s the consequence of new strength’s relations, first of all on the concrete ground of production, that in the ‘80s have brutally moved toward the Capital and especially toward its present hegemonic faction, the financial one. This permitted an aggressive "anti-state" strategy, through a continuous attack to the workers conquests in social terms, a rigorous limitation of salaries, a high increasing of the structural unemployment. In few words, the national state was submitted, more and more, to the big international financial interests.
Even if the new ruling doctrine seems to weaken the role of the State compared with the power of the multinational enterprises, it is important to differentiate the argument referring to the states of the "centre" or to those of "periphery". The relationship between multinationals and State in the "centre" countries cannot be defined as "conflictual", but rather complementary. The multinationals proceed speedily; the State guarantees their movements and contains the social or political conflicts created by the reorganizations. A different situation exists in the dominated countries, which are the weaker rings in the planetary exploitation and in the dominating hierarchy. Here, the ruling class political structure is really weakened, in its sovereignty, by the impositions of the international power’s centres.
These impositions are decided in the centres that the owners of the world concentrate the political, military, economical power on international level: the executive economic centres– World Bank, IMF, OCSE and WTO -, from the general decision central – G7 or G8 with Russia-, from the general military headquarter – NATO- and from the international intermediation’s organism represented by the Security Council of UN.
Notwithstanding the growing economic independence of multinational corporations, the military and political power continues to be the most important form of domination of the system. In order to impose the interests of multinational capitals, they still need the political and military strength of the national states. The State’s role is essential, it guarantees the dominant class from the "insurgent" manifestations of the opposite class and then the national State is still the seat and centre of the class struggle for power.
We have to consider these elements in the critic we do to "globalisation" and neo-liberalism. Of course, it’s a positive fact the growing wave of protests against "globalisation", but the revolutionary forces cannot hide that the main fight’s forms continue to be "national", as the power’s conquests continue to be "national".
The global exclusion
In social terms, the neo-liberal policies exacerbate the effects of private’s appropriation of social work’s results, as they lead to a more and more unequal distribution of the national product. Also in the imperialist countries, it’s increasing the wealth’s distribution inequality, the unemployment’s rate, the number of precarious workers with no social rights. The question of salary and employment is falsely linked (by capitalists) to the problem of productivity, in the attempt to have people to believe that the workers’ condition of precariousness or unemployment is due to a lack of competitiveness on international level. On the contrary, every productivity’s increasing is strictly linked to a profit’s growth for capitalists. The productivity’s increasing reduces the production’s costs, which the owners are always trying to lower as they weight on profits, through that mechanism called by Marx "the constant increasing of the relative plus value’s appropriation".
The creation and diffusion, on world level, of the flexible worker is the necessary consequence, on social level, of the transformations in the economic level and, at the same time, one of the principal tasks of imperialist propaganda. This flexibility means the capacity to adapt to every situation, even unemployment, without creating problems for profit’s realization.
Workers’ precariousness in all its forms, is not a transient phenomenon to be overcome inside capitalist’s system, on the contrary it’s structural and benefits the big capitalists. The under-employed or unemployed population, called "the reserves’ army" by Marx, plays a crucial role for capital.
First of all, it is a constant pressing to lower the employed workers’ salaries, second, it’s a human store on capitalists disposal depending on the work-force request’s fluctuations. The bourgeoisie doesn’t care of this precarious population’s problems, what they care is only to maintain a functional proportion between employed and unemployed population. The capitalists’ cynicism is so high that they have established a unemployment’s minimum dimension called "natural unemployment’s rate", under which they cannot go, if they don’t want to negatively condition the profit’s rate. On the other side, the precarious population cannot reach too high proportions, if capitalists don’t want to put in a danger the social and political stability of the system.
Nevertheless, with the enormous world expansion of capital in its neo-liberal form, -which produced a very big growth of the precarious population- the proportion is skipped, thus creating a disequilibrium that dangerously affects the system’s stability. At the moment, the situation is kept under control by using the old Malthus’ theory of demographic control, by the workforce’s migrations, or by the never-ending propaganda of the bourgeoisie’s intellectuals who, as they’re not able to explain scientifically the massive unemployment, are trying to persuade that the "fault" is of the same workers (not adequate, lazy, too guaranteed)
Intellectuals, imperialist propaganda, the educational system, play a very delicate role. On a hand they have to "distribute" to the "human capital" some knowledge, necessary for working; on the other hand, they have to move careful, because giving the oppressed the adequate intellectual’s instruments could show them the causes of their oppressed situation…. And this would be another dangerous scenery for the system’s stability.
Mass homologation and local resistance
The cultural homologation, has a very important rule, in the battle to impose and conserve a domino-model that is intolerable for the 80% of humanity and has important contradictions also for the remaining 20%.
The ideological paradigm used from the dominating class to involve and approve the entire humanity, aren't so different (in the substance) from the classic ones of the bourgeois ideologies. The individualism exaltation, sadly described in the bourgeois slogan "homo homini lupus" (the man is a wolf between men), the exasperate competition, spoken as a "natural" society condition, a society showed like an arena where is possible only "everyone fight everyone".
In that contest, the collective interest and the solidarity haven't any value! The men shall move only for fear or for personal gratification given from the structures of the leading class. The ideological constant, in the globalized era, only resized the State rule, there is the market mystification and also of his free laws. The homologation in the market-religion is a needed-condition to conquer integration in the system, but more to avoid to be excluded. An exclusion that could mean a job loss, but could mean an identities loss.
The fact to live that situation in conjunction with other millions of humans, push the workers to ask for a society where there will be space for all. It happens mostly where "the excluded" has adequate instruments to make a deep criticism to the capitalist exploiting system.
The globalized system, has largely amplified that exclusion, it has to prevent this problem which can put in argument his legality, specially on ideological plan.
The decomposition, the un-solidarity between the "old" and the "new" excluded, became a new objective in the job of bourgeois ideological and informative apparatus. They want to un-humanize more the social relation, want to create a war between excluded to get the few available places. A war where racial, cultural, religious elements are used to transform the rage for exclusion in desire to exclude others. In the context of globalization that binomial integration/exclusion exist also in cultural and ideological sphere. The economic integration that pass for a capital exclusion process, can exist only excluding entire zones inside nation or excluding entire nation. Can happen that the capital regionalisation process in Europe, therefore the European Union, complete in economic field, passing trough some events like: the liberalization of the capital movement (1990), the creation of an unified market (1992) and an unified currency(1999), while in politics and social terms it's hindered by some local, protectionist and separating tendencies.
The globalization of economy and the integration for some regional blocks, produce resistance in local or separating tendencies. Even if imperialism wants to use that phenomenon, for its interest (politics, geo-strategic and military), the reasons, in ideological-cultural field, are inside the non identification for entire people in a global market and their search for a more concrete, more human, and sometimes more ancient society.
Historically, bourgeois national-State had hardly integrated people with so different cultural identities, to do this they often used the violence. The "global market" wants to homologate millions of people like simply "homo-economicus" in an abstractly society. The result, often, is that men who don't want to lose their identity, search it in reason extra economic, like languages, ethnic, cultural, religious... The decreasing identification between people and bourgeois national-State, produced by globalization, doesn't represent a way to build a process of real unity between peoples, but amplify the "ancient" separating or localist tendencies.
The imperialistic ideas who wants that the identification in a total-market-society can raise spontaneously in the earth's people, is supported by the imperialistic monopolization of mass media, and also by every kind of cultural manifestation like cinema, TV, music, painting, sport, mode etc.
The multinationals of mass media and the imperialistic propaganda center play the same songs, and all the people of the world have to dance on it. The expansion of this one-kind-to-think is make to move men and women like market's object, and to impose to masses consumistic needing.
In that contest the "globalized culture" is becoming multimedial, exceeding his previous forms based just on writing. This step make easier to create an abstract society and to impose needing to all the different nationals societies.
But using these technologies to compare the "two worlds", the north and the south, we can appreciate the all-ideological operation to build this "new" virtual market (the New Economy). How can they speak about "globalized cyberspace" if the 80% of humanity hasn't never used a telephone? If only the 2 % can use Internet?
The numbers of personal computers in USA are more of the ones in the remaining of the planet. The propaganda who speak about "universal services", optical cables, UMTS, playstation and DVD, has the same impact with the majority of humanity, hungry and underdeveloped, like McDonalds, food for dog and cats with special taste or low calories foods!
The impacting data on polarization effects, data that globalization amplifies continuously, alone doesn't are enough to understand their causes, and for it bourgeois propaganda uses it in demagogic mode. The globalization, understand as interdependencies between societies with a different develop degree, potentially can be a first step to strengthen common values in all the humanity. If this strengthening isn't moved by collective interest of workers and people of all over the world, with all their cultural differences, that process doesn't generate any cultural development.
When we have relations based on oppression and exploitation, the "cultural globalization" can only humiliate tradition, languages and identities of minorities, of people and of the nation who hasn't a hegemonic rule inside an homologation that is destroying one of the main richness of the human develop: the diversity.
The day after... Seattle.
What prevents from an historical development, which could be the answer to the whole humanity’s needs, results to be the multinational enterprises, the capitalist Nations, the different international institutions of the economical political and military capitalist power.
In the last twenty years, the imperialistic system has undergone a fast worldwide expansion phase, produced essentially by the transformation in the economy-production and in the technological fields and favored by the change of the international power relations. This condition has produced a climate of euphoria and triumph of the imperialistic propaganda, in front of which for a long period the critics of the opposition "voices" have become feeble and thin. In the last years, however, the paralyzing effect that the collapse of the social system and the fast increase of the neo-liberalism have had on the international proletariat and on his organizations, has begun to be reabsorbed and rationalized. In the "Global Village" more and more are rising strongly those contradictions that the apology of the globalized system declared disappeared and resolved for ever and, above all, new attempts to overcome the capitalist’s barbarity.
The aggravation of the worldwide economic crisis, the increase of the competition between the USA imperialistic pole and the European one, the military struggles that gushed out yet and those that are supposed to gush out in the next future, the immeasurable increase of the gap between the central countries and the peripheral ones, the rise of the imperialistic movements in the South-side, the overbearing imposition of the imperialistic "recipes" for the worldwide crises (the Structural Adjustment’s Program), the attack to all of the working class’ conquests in the imperialistic countries… all these mentioned facts show that the capitalist’s economy globalization is giving a dizzy acceleration to all of the main contradictions, pushing them to a critical point.
It is in fact undeniable that the1999’s events, the NATO war against Yugoslavia, the workmen’s manifestations and the young people ones against WTO in Seattle, have brought on the defendants desk a capitalist system that produces for the largest part of the humanity only hunger, poverty and war "globally"-wise!
We must say that for the gotha of the worldwide capitalism, one of the elements that has awakened more alarm after the "Seattle Battle", has been the direct intervention of the imperialistic countries’ working class, above all the American one, next to the head of the big movement composed by the sweated men of the planet. This all happened just in the city-symbol of the American working class, where in the 1930 was constituted what had been named "Seattle Soviet".
This movement’s leadership, till now, is own of those forces that are opposite to the devastating effects of the globalization and that have opened a way for the birth of an international motion against the globalization and the neo-liberalism. In reality, it is impossible to oppose the globalization the way it is, as it is an objective phenomenon independent from the men’s will. What is it possible to do, is to oppose the neo-liberalist politics, but this could mean to find oneself fighting next those which would like are birth of the middle class social state of exploitation. A coherent critic, straight to pass over the globalized and neo-liberalist worldwide order, can support these movements but can’t stop to show the eventually bad sides of their working form.
It is not enough criticizing neo-liberalist’s forms that imperialistic system changes depending on its historical and social conditions. As it isn’t also enough criticizing only the American hegemony, if this could mean to have the opportunistic illusion that the system could work differently incase of a (improbably) reorganization of the imperialistic forces that could equilibrate the power hierarchy between the imperialistic poles.
The political limits of the movement’s direction against the globalization (directed to a "reform" of the capitalism and not to surpass it), that has expressed itself from Seattle on, don’t diminish this event’s importance. Getting the vindications of the Center workers and those of the populations and of the Periphery’s nations together with the fights for the ambient that have a simply critic to the effects of the exploitation, opens a way to the creation of a big worldwide anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist movement that could propose again the international proletariat as subject of a revolutionary transformation.
The mobilization of the masses unmasks the crisis of the international relationships between both imperialistic poles (USA, EU, Japan) than North and South side of the world, that have sided in opposite positions for all the points concerned in the economic worldwide agenda.
The gravity of the crisis, on the other hand, will show, always more, how much is inadequate the actual direction of the anti-globalization fight that – from the syndicalism corporative’s directions of the imperialistic nations through the "European Left" until the movements for the defense of the ambient – draws up in favor of the solution of a "Regulated Capitalism", placing itself objectively (and often consciously) on the ground of a strategic agreement with the imperialistic capital.
While the globalization demonstrates the validity of Lenin’s thesis on imperialism, seen as superior step of the capitalism that inaugurates his historical agony just from inside the imperialism (European and American one), the vindications are started for a "regulation" of the capital’s international fluxes (Tobintax), for the defense of the "human" capitalism against the savage one, for the "democratic" reform of the imperialistic institutes (Worldbank, IMF and WTO) until the fight of the excluded and dispatched people (it doesn’t matter to which social class they belong) against the "guaranteed" people of the neo-liberalism (neither for them matters the belonging social class).
The conscience of the proletariat of "North" and the one of the oppressed proletariat of "South", the sole subjects of a radical transformation, can’t remain extraneous to the critic of the current reality, the exploitation, neither to the working class fight, to the social appropriation of the production’s means, to the need of a distribution of the dominant class power.
The worldwide dramatic consequences on the working class, of all the different forms assumed by the capitalist exploitation during his expansion, aren’t able to demonstrate the need of passing from the critic of the form to the critic of the meaning, in this case we could say from the anti-liberalism fight to the unification in the anti-capitalistic fight, from the solidarity against the ill-omened effects of the globalization to the common anti-imperialistic fight.
The way of the historical progress demonstrates that the deep contradictions have always caused heavy periods of crisis and, at the same time, the matter laws show how the "revolutionary" work of the dialectic is pushing the crises to a passage to a superior form. Today the power relations inside this fight between the "old" and the "new" seem completely in favor of the big capital, but this is caused only by a subjective limit.
The dialectical surpass becomes possible only when the men of the international working class – the only real artificers of the history – will be able to interpret coherently the reality, when they will equip and prepare themselves in order to advance expeditiously at the right moment!
Inserting these themes in the next "working agenda" of the movement against the globalization is a necessary passage to open new and important prospectives, to bring again in the center of the international working class fight the historical necessity to surpass the actual "global" system of worldwide exploitation, the Capitalism, through the building of a more correct model of real "globalization" of the resources, of the knowledge and of the development for the world populations: the Socialism.
Contribution to the International Communist Seminar
"The World Socialist Revolution in the Conditions of Imperialist Globalization"
Brussels, 2-4 May 2001
Notes