(Part
I: Some considerations on the objective conditions)
One of the most important features of the current world capitalist crisis is that it has been developing on the basis of a policy for the economic, political and social levels which, paradoxically, is presented as a paradigm capable of guaranteeing the realisation of the new developments of humanity. Neo-liberalism, accompanied by political, ideological and philosophical concepts, is presented as the only possible policy in the current conditions of world development, even though it has been the catalyst for the most perverse evils of this regime of production. Therefore it is necessary to locate the current conditions of capitalism in the context created by neoliberal policies, which have been used by the most conspicuous instruments of finance capital: the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank (WB), and the World Trade Organisation (WTO, formerly GATT) to satisfy capital’s voracious appetite.
In general, the historical development of the bourgeois regime, which is writing a new and unique chapter in its phase of decomposition and the transition to socialism, has been determined by this policy. This is a question which has been posed by the objective conditions which arise from the capitalist economy, and more particularly those which are developing in the conditions of the crisis, which by its nature is structural and global, and which in turn deepens its general character.
The neo-liberal economic policy seeks to facilitate the process of concentration and centralisation of capital and production, a process which in times of crisis like the present is greatly increased. To accelerate this objective process, neo-liberalism deepens one of essential contradictions of the laws of motion of capitalism: that which exists between the social character of production and the private character of distribution of the social product, a circumstance which is of a global character, and which makes itself more evident in times when the levels of production of commodities have reached such a magnitude, in terms of volume and variety, that they indicate a new stage in the development of the scientific and technological revolution.
This contradiction in the development of capitalism is a fundamental element in the dynamic of the class struggle in all the capitalist countries, in particular in the nations which are dependent and subjugated by finance capital. While, in an international scale, this is expressed in the deepening of contradictions on the one hand between the imperialist powers, and between the dependent and neo-colonial nations and the imperialist powers on the other. The global character of the crisis and of this policy means that the analysis of the international situation, and of the neo-liberal paradigm upon the basis of which its economic, social, political, cultural and philosophical evolution is legitimised, is an unavoidable prerequisite for defining a general line for communists.
In the first instance, we have to locate neo-liberalism as an international product whose central axis is the defence of the interests of finance capital. To be more concrete, it is a question of a response on the part of world capitalism to the consequences of the bourgeois dynamic which embraces the entire planet, because it has had to be implanted in almost all the countries of the world, keeping its realisation in the hands of the blocs dominated by each neo-colonial or imperialist state, in connivance with finance capital and its most conspicuous organisations, the IMF, the WB and the WTO. The application of this policy is unequal, due to the specificities of each nation, the contradictions which it generates - since the real objectives in many cases push in the opposite direction to the one predicted by the theory - and the responses of the popular movement in each country. Now then, neither the contradictions and problems of an economic or political character which this produces for capitalism, nor the sharpening of class contradictions have been sufficient to preclude the implementation of this neo-liberal policy, with its consequent acceleration in the changes in the process of accumulation of capital, based on the increased exploitation of labour, the introduction of new forms of organisation of the production process and the imposition of new standards of consumption.
Neo-liberalism is the economic policy of international finance capital in this period, directed to guaranteeing capitalist accumulation and the process of expanded reproduction in conditions of crisis. This statement flows from the coherence that the neo-liberal policies maintain with respect to the necessities and the objectives of finance capital, and which is expressed in the search for a greater economic space where the growing mass of capital can be placed, which in turn leads to a major offensive against the workers in order to increase the levels of exploitation and reduction in the value of labour power, and which together put a brake on the fall in the average rate of profit on an international level. All of this is manifested, on the side of capital, in the new levels of expanded accumulation, in the favourable sales of the large-scale international firms and all their subsidiaries, in the monopolistic associations and the absorption of some monopolies by others; while, on the side of labour, we can locate the most complete expression of neo-liberalism in the alarming growth in impoverishment.
As a rule, the result of these effects on macro economic equilibrium is a breakdown, deepening the problems which they are meant to attack. The balance of payments is increasingly in deficit in the countries where this neo-liberal schema is implemented, the budget deficit has turned into a chronic problem, for the United States included, while monetary problems today affect not only the currencies of the dependent nations but also the principal currency of the international market: the dollar.
In the same way, when this recipe of measures is applied, other problems, which the apologists for neo-liberalism say it will solve, are deepened. The liberalisation of the foreign exchange market, a mechanism which is supposed to reduce inflation and increase competitiveness, has made the economies of the weak nations more dependent on the most important currencies in the world market, above all with respect to the dollar, such that the imperialist nations attain higher levels of control over their foreign market, increasing the prices of imported products and turning inflation into a chronic problem, while they lower the prices of traditional export goods, deepening the role of these things as comparative advantage. Privatisation, which was supposed to make state enterprises and public services more efficient, has been converted into an auction of state enterprises and the undermining of fundamental human rights such as education and health, making public services more expensive and elitist. The liberalisation of the external market, through the elimination of protectionist barriers, has drastically deepened the inequality in the relations of exchange, thus eliminating any possibility of raising competitiveness in the international market which does not follow the path of realising comparative advantage, in the case of the dependent nations, while for the imperialist nations such a rise is based in the increase in the organic composition of capital. In its turn, external debt is continuing to grow, propped up precisely by this policy, despite being one of the principal problems for the dependent and neo-colonial countries.
For its part, the states have become strengthened as instruments guaranteeing the capitalist order, whose stability is affected by the rise in social conflicts linked to the deepening of the grave national and social problems resulting from neo-liberal policies. This is why, on the side of the neo-liberal economic offensive, the fundamental contradiction on a global scale, that between capitalism and socialism, is being resolved in favour of capitalism, even if this is a temporary and circumstantial question. The revolutionary forces, on an international level, have suffered a long period of defeats, of dispersion, of the adoption of defensive positions, in conditions unfavourable to making advances, a situation which today is passing through its last stages, giving way to a new period given the current conditions, which is opening renewed possibilities for the development of the historical vanguard of the peoples of the world.
But the implementation of neo-liberalism has experienced important setbacks, very much despite the situation that the communist and revolutionary movements is passing through on a world scale. On the one hand, we can see that the contradictory character of this policy leads to a deepening of the difficulties and disequilibria which it is meant to address, such that it is rapidly seen as inefficient in terms of producing solutions which are favourable to social development and achieving the objectives which it promotes, so that “the cure is more harmful than the illness.” This process is to be seen mainly in the dependent nations, since to convert these into important factors for accumulation -as receptacles for capital, sources of cheap raw materials, markets for final goods with a high technological component and artificially high prices, among other aspects- the neo-liberal formulae lead to a deepening of the capitalist crisis, when they are precisely meant to be a policy which has as its real basic objective the slowing down at all costs the fall in the average rate of profit on a global scale. On the other hand, as a consequence of the above, neo-liberalism stimulates the class struggle and political instability, as it is a policy which intensifies the rapacious and savage character of capitalist exploitation, expressed in the levels of poverty of the workers and people of the world, who see themselves forced to convert themselves into points of resistance to the implementation of these measures.
Therefore we conclude that it is not a question of incoherence, as some critics of neo-liberalism claim, but on the contrary the contradictory character of this policy means that what is said is one thing and the objectives which underlie these measures which are being implemented are another thing altogether.
The application of IMF policy shows common consequences: reduction in the pace of economic growth and the rate of investment, up to the point of an absolute reduction; worsening of the level of unemployment and underemployment; maintaining or aggravating the rate of increase of prices in general; fall in real wages and other real incomes; deepening of monetary depreciation; redistribution of capital and profits in favour of those sectors linked to foreign trade; financial strangulation and bankruptcy for small and medium sized firms; deterioration in basic social services provided by the state and an increase in their prices; progressive denationalisation of the economy; and, finally, a massive increase in external debt.
This is the context in which have arisen postmodernism, globalisation and all the theses which serve as alienating messages, whose material and objective basis is a global reality where finance capital dominates in a brutal fashion. This is a context which is strengthened since there is no solid resistance to neo-liberal policies which is based on a radical distinct order, such as in the days when the socialist bloc was a real hope for the people of the world, with important benefits for the workers, with amazing developments in science, culture and sport. In the current situation, on the contrary, the free market is an abstraction which is seeking to strengthen itself through the implantation of ethical, cultural and philosophical values, with all the limitations that are there preventing the vast majority of the planet from having access to them.
Nonetheless, the postmodernist and neo-liberal apologia for the market, presenting it as a triumphant power in the face of socialism, cannot provide a response to the global problems of this period. The postmodernist and neo-liberal argument to problems like the hunger of thousands of millions of human beings, the imperialist wars of robbery, the “humanitarian” interventions which only create greater dependency and subjugation for the countries that have been intervened in, etc.., is that these problems form an anti-democratic political reorganisation. They seek to weaken any vestiges of the neo-colonial states, to make the labour market more flexible and to facilitate the entry of foreign investment and the export goods of the capitalist transnationals. Meanwhile the imperialist nations are strengthening their positions, each time seeking to secure better conditions for themselves in the global dispute.
Taken together, all these aspects show us clearly that this policy has been converted into the main lever for securing higher profits on capital invested in international production and usury, such that the export of capital reaches an unusual level of development, very much despite the crisis. This is what permits Michel Camdessus, Managing Director of the IMF, to affirm that: “the net inflow of private capitals to the developing countries has gone from the level of $10bn per year on average in the 1970s, to more than $100bn per year in the first half of the 1990s, and $166bn in the past year,” referring to 1996.
Neoliberalism is a synthesis of approaches which guarantee the widening of the sphere of influence of finance capital. It is, furthermore, a matter of a response by monopoly capitalism, of finance capital, to a concrete situation at the root of which the limitations which have been created (in the market, in the areas of investment and the development of the organic composition of capital) are of such a magnitude that they demand radical solutions, which inevitably is placing many countries in the position of facing a dilemma of choosing between the perpetuation of this regime or a radical solution to the problems which it is aggravating.
The neoliberal perspective is not restricted to economic matters in a precise way. On the contrary, it is linked to a combination of categories and concepts which impinge social, political and cultural questions as well as those which are eminently economic. This perspective does not impinge economic reality in order to influence it as part of a process of transformation, but rather is an expression of the needs of capital. Its theoretical bases are the product of finance capital’s intention to deepen the tendencies which guarantee capital accumulation in this period.
The concepts highlighted by the neoliberals who place themselves more in the philosophical, ideological and cultural fields, corresponding to imperialist bourgeois ideology, are those which refer to the problem of historical, economic and social development, inscribed within a philosophical position which is metaphysical, sceptical and conservative. For example, the concept that the highest, not to say the only, stage of human development is capitalism, as is the case also with Adam Smith’s “natural order”. In its turn, “the end of history” has as its basis the temporary defeat which socialism has suffered on a world scale, when the restoration of capitalism in the majority of countries which had reached socialism in its different developments, the coming to power of revisionism in those states and their subsequent defeat and overthrow with the fall of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the Soviet Union, even if they claim it is some philosophical aspects of the Hegelian “dialectic”. This philosophical exercises are no more than a part of the intellectual rhetoric whose general objective is to establish, in the framework of an absolute scepticism, that the market rules over those process which dare to not recognise it, returning with a material forces which is impossible to impede, at the risk of suffering the consequences which are manifested in scientific and technological backwardness, the erratic performance of macroeconomic variables, etc..
In general, the historical context is propitious for a rebirth of irrationalism, nihilism and scepticism, consolidating the possibilities for the development and realisation of neoliberalism. The most important aspect of international politics during the last few years, summed up in the fall of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the USSR, has been converted into a “real” base which serves neoliberalism in its argument that there is no possibility of social development outside the framework of economic and political liberalism. This reflects the fact that it is a part of a process of reaccommodation of humanity to market logic in its search for the global domination..
These claims do not signify that neoliberalism has become the only bourgeois and imperialist option for the development of economic policies which serve the interests of capital. However, in the current conditions of the general crisis of capitalism, this is the economic policy which best suits the development of tendencies and counter-tendencies which favour capitalist accumulation, and in particular the accumulation of finance capital. The superstition of neoliberalism, its loss of validity, is subject in the first instance to a change in the objective conditions, which means if capitalism can overcome its present crisis, a question which without doubt will arise from the realisation, up to the final consequences, of the innate tendencies of imperialism, from the most general, like the process of the destruction of capital, and its most concrete expression: the redivision of the world, which could lead to a more specific tendency, namely the development of the organic composition of capital. While neoliberalism continues to be imposed on the whole capitalist order, even if it is presented in various ways (globalisation, internationalisation, etc.., categories which in reality form part of this general policy), or if it is accompanied by speeches which seek to hide its essence, expressed on many occasions by governments which claim to differentiate its specific realisation in a given country, in order not to lose the support which sectors of the population have given them.
The fundamental premise which explains the survival of capitalism is without doubt the expanded reproduction of capital, which is vital for the development of this regime of production. The market has to develop parallel to this process and in a corresponding way - and more than this its development has to go in correlation with the rhythm of production and accumulation, and if it does not then the crisis of overproduction will appear. This tendency is the result of the limit on production which is not accompanied by a proportional growth in the demand in the market, due to the tendency of the rise in the organic composition, which in turn means proportionally less living labour in the industrial product - and the fall in the rate of profit. From this comes the attempt to devalue labour power as the principal mechanism for slowing down this fall. The demands of accumulation for the development of the market, and the inherent contradictions of this, acquire a supreme character and demand urgent solutions - even extreme solutions - in order to guarantee investment, since without that the process will be interrupted with the consequent collapse of the entire system: without investment-capitalisation, there is no accumulation.
Now then, the global crisis of capitalism, which has been developing in an increasingly rapid manner since the 1970s, enormously reduces the possibilities for investment in general, but more particularly productive investment, from which arises the tendency to favour investment in the area of speculation and international usury, with foreign debt as its primary support. This explains the way in which the international speculative market and foreign debt have accelerated over the past decades, through which the relations of economic dependency on global finance capital of the neo-colonial and dependent states have been strengthened.
We can observe the best proof of the development of this tendency towards speculative investments in the facts that for the year of 1993, 60 per cent of global capital was bound up in financial speculation. This shows that crises, which imply a process of massive destruction of capital, are also the period in which monetary interests enrich themselves at the expense of industrial interests.
These questions become consequences of capitalist crises and matters for the overcoming of the crises themselves in capitalist terms.
The IMF and neoliberal policies are designed precisely to open up spaces for productive and unproductive investments of finance capital on a global scale in the current circumstances. The conditions in which the capitalist world is developing have made the implementation of this policy a matter of urgency, since the demand for economic spaces for the profitable investment of capital is dependent on the level of accumulation that has been reached on a global scale, which has reached an extremely high level, while on the other hand a level of social demand has not been created in the world market which corresponds to such levels of accumulation.
In general, this neoliberal economic policy has permitted the widening of the possibilities for the investment of capital. The IMF has been at the forefront, and has played a role of primary importance, above all through the pressures it exercises on nations, in particular the less developed ones, for them to implement the specific measures which facilitate investments coming from the imperialist countries. The IMF programmes include the adoption of specific measures to give incentives to the investment of foreign capital, the lifting of restrictions on the entry of foreign capital, the increase in the proportion of profits which can be repatriated for the latter or the elimination of the control which at times the state exercises in this regard, the establishment and the extension of free zones and “tax havens” and superexploitation of the domestic working class, the exemption of taxes on profits and tariffs in general, and finally an entire body of legislation to favour foreign direct investment. In these conditions the tendency towards the export of capital finds greater possibilities for being realised.
In general, the measures and orientations of the IMF, from its foundation in 1945, basically have to do with the placement of finance capital in the form of state credits or even programmes which guarantee the maintenance of credit capacity in a country which seeks the help of this international organisation. The letters of intent, the control of the measures contained within them, the permanent observation on the part of the IMF, the World Bank etc.. of the course of economic policies of the countries that have been “helped”, form a part of this offensive which in its turn deepens the relations of economic dependency. This is the context in which the sovereignty of nations which receive capital tends to be violated. The result of this policy has been translated into the growth of internal and external public debt of all the countries of the world, including the imperialist nations themselves. On the other hand, direct investments carried out by the imperialist nations in the less developed nations have reached a significative point.
This situation also leads to the deepening of the tendency towards parasitism and the shareholding sector, that is of individuals who live off cutting coupons, completely alienated from participation in any business, and whose profession is idleness. The exploitation of capital accentuates further still this complete divorce of the shareholding sector from production, putting a seal of parasitism on the entire country.
Finance capital, in order to extend the possibilities for the export of capital, promotes and demands the privatisation of state enterprises and public services under the slogan of the markets superiority of efficiency compared to the bureaucratism of the state. Put in more precise terms, this means demanding the transition of state areas which can facilitate private business putting into place mechanisms which are beneficial to the realisation of the process of extension of the financial arena.
Privatisation, on the other hand, becomes an important mechanism for making the labour market more flexible and for the creation of the material conditions for the reproduction of the capitalist regime in the current circumstances, in which it is sought to adapt consumption to the low levels of production due to the crisis.
In the dependent countries, life expectancy is 43 years, while in the United State, Japan, France and Great Britain life expectancy at birth is more than 70 year. In addition, in the underdeveloped countries 50 per cent of deaths are due to transmitted diseases, in contrast to 25 per cent in the developed countries. Each day 7 million people die because of tuberculosis, and each hour 10,000 new cases are discovered. Hepatitis B, avoidable through vaccination, causes a million deaths a year. 12 million children under 5 die each year in the dependent countries; a child dies every 8 seconds in the world; 3 million children die of diarrhoea; 1.2 million of measles; a million of malaria and 500,000 of neonatal tetanus. These are the problems and the dramas of “triumphant” capitalist development.
The concentration of impoverishment of the great majority, on the one hand, and the concentration of riches on the other, is manifested in an even way in the more developed countries and the dependent and neo-colonial countries.
Nonetheless, poverty is also reaching high levels in the biggest industrial power in the world, the United States, where there are 36 million poor people, which is 14% of the population of this nation, whereas in 1970 it was only 11%. The same is taking place in western Europe, where the level of poverty has already gone beyond 12% of the population. The neoliberal policies have also led to negative consequences in the more developed countries, creating a dual, dislocated society, where dualism is in fact segregation, “economic apartheid” in full force in a society which is definitively and cruelly “at twin speed”. A society where the different sectors of the population live in fact on two different levels which are getting further away from each other each year. Dualism between the rich and the poor, of course, but also between the great universities and an education system under attack; dualism between ultramodern hospital and clinics and a health infrastructure as costly as it is obsolete, etc..
At the international level, this dualism is manifested in short in the imperialist countries having an advanced development, while at the other extreme we can see how the overwhelming majority of countries of the world experience to an exaggerated degree all the great ills that the capitalist system generates, made worse today through neoliberalism. In addition, this dualism is expressed within the imperialist countries themselves and, also, dualism is developing within the nations dependent on finance capital.
On the other hand, neoliberalism is leaving a clear imprint with regard to employment. Unemployment is reaching a considerable level, and is being maintained over a long period. Wages are lagging behind prices and the distribution of income is deteriorating in an accelerated fashion. And it cannot be otherwise, since this is the logic of capitalism and the orientation of neoliberalism, which finds in the low cost of labour power the “ideal” comparative advantage for attracting capital, something which is achieved through increasing the level of unemployment such that the general movement of wages is regulated by the expansion and contradictions of the reserve army of labour.
It is for this reason that alongside the high levels of poverty that have been reached on an international level there are high levels of unemployment, above all in the countries that are less developed in capitalist terms.
The necessity for capital to reduce the price of labour power, in order to slow down the fall in the rate of profits, is what leads to these levels of poverty and unemployment, converting these dramatic human conditions into a very important mechanism for the extension and the deepening of the capitalist regime.
In the final analysis, the export of finance capital determines economic policies at a global level and the evolution of the international division of labour. Both this determination and the development of the defined economic orientations strengthen some of the counter-tendencies which soften the impact of the fall in the rate of profit. However, competition leads to the inexorable, even though limited, development of the technical composition of capital, such that the neoliberal policies seek to complement both contradictory developments in favour of capital, which is translated into higher levels of accumulation and an increase in class contradictions.
An increase in the organic composition of capital has been evident above all in the last few years, when the scientific and technical revolution has led to new developments in the imperialist nations, expressed in the application of computer technology and robotics to the production process. In the same way, the application of these innovations has led to the advance of new schemes in the organisation of the production process which seek to increase labour productivity.
The principal expression of the advance in the organic composition of capital in the current circumstances is industrial restructuring, which is presented as a qualitative leap in the organic composition, as a new phase in the scientific and technical revolution which provokes readjustments in industrial plant, both in terms of the use of new technologies and in the organisation of the labour process.
In global terms, industrial restructuring is a process which has been generalised on a global scale, having as its lever for its realisation the IMF’s orientation, which facilitates the export of finance capital, in the form of direct investments, which are determinant in the introduction of technological elements in industry. Now then, the differential way that the consequences of these economic policies are expressed in the different countries is principally a product of three factors, namely: the degree of development of labour power, the levels of accumulation of constant capital, and the size of the internal market. This unequal development between countries is also reproduced within each country.
The most important elements of this new phase of development of the industrial revolution are very much present in the branches of microelectronics, biotechnology and new materials, the first of these branches being the most dynamic factor in the changes which have been implemented in the production process, which has had an impact on the labour process in global terms on a world scale.
As regards to the organic composition of capital, this is reaching a higher level of development on a global scale through increased productive investment. Now then, due to the fact that this tendency leads to a fall in the rate of profit in the imperialist countries, it acts as an incentive to the export of capital, which reduces the economic space in the international scene to the point where there is no correspondence between the capacity of depressed economies to absorb products and the deepening of the competition between the imperialist countries.
Capitalist competition acts as an incentive to the application of technological innovations which displace labour power. This produces a development in the productive forces in general, but only a limited one. On the other hand, the tendency of the rate of profit to fall leads to the displacement of capitals in search of new advantages -above all comparative advantages- translating these into new exports of finance capital towards the markets which facilitate them, which offer a high level of flexibility in labour mobility and which have an internal market of some significance.
The neoliberal policies are deepening on a world scale the globalisation of economies, affecting productive activity and the conditions for the realisation of the social product in a significant way nationally and internationally. Globalisation is part of the offensive of finance capital, with specific expressions in the case of each country, according to the degree of industrial development, the role which they place in the industrial division of labour and the size of their markets. In the same way, globalisation is linked to industrial restructuring, the extension of the capitalist world market, the trade accords established by the WTO and, in general, to the current conditions of capitalist development through profound inter-imperialist contradictions.
Globalisation in this period has been made more urgent due to the contraction of the market and the increase pace of obsolescence which result from industrial restructuring.
The objective basis for globalisation is in the increase in the productivity of labour and capitalist competition, which in turn put pressure on for changes in production and consumption goods, which means the increase in the pace of obsolescence, which puts pressure on both capitalist producers, who are embarked on merciless competition, and on consumers.
We cannot forget that the current conditions of capitalist development have had as one of their most complete products the hunger of a billion human beings on the planet, a tragedy which barely allows this section of the world’s population to occupy themselves with problems that are as subordinate as that of the obsolescence of their goods when they lack even the minimum to survive, and the goods that satisfy these necessities do not go out of fashion, but are simply vital.
Globalisation is realised in a very unequal way and its fullness is attained basically in the development and the strengthening of a dual capitalist society, a dualism between rich countries and poor countries, a dualism within the poor countries, between the native rich and poor, but also a dualism between the rich and the poor in the countries which are more developed in capitalist terms, something which has developed at a dizzy pace, and which is proof that currently problems like hunger and poverty are not exclusively problems which affect the less developed countries in capitalist terms but are beginning to be seen in an alarming way in the richest countries of the planet.
The objectives of globalisation are expressed in the spheres of production and circulation of capital. On the one hand, we find the relation between the penetration of capital and its productive forms, and on the other hand globalisation, which has as a determinant the search for comparative advantages, such as cheap labour power and primary products. Therefore we can state that globalisation is inscribed in the boundless growth of production and the relative and absolute contraction of social demand.
Neoliberalism is becoming a factor which propels, facilitates and creates the conditions for the realisation of globalisation in the sphere of production, and that it is a policy which pursues both the cheapening of the price of labour power and the extension of the economic space open to capitalist investment. In this way, neoliberalism and globalisation form a part of the same intention and the same interests.
Globalisation fights for national barriers to be broken down and for the penetration of capital to be permitted on a liberal basis, without customs barriers which make products more expensive, and so promoting terms of trade favourable to the industrialised countries of the world. It is for this reason that the dependent and neo-colonial countries are seeing themselves subject to an offensive aimed at undermining national sovereignty and the character of peoples to the maximum degree possible.
Commercial relations and the terms of trade are converted into an important lever for capitalist expansion, favouring the countries with a greater level of industrial development. The development of industrial restructuring leads to the incorporation of a lesser quantity of living labour in the production of commodities, thus resulting in more commodities but less value, such that as capitalist competition develops, the organic composition of capital rises and possibilities are opened for selling the product at a lower price than your competitor.
In conditions of imperialism, this question is interfered with in favour of supply, making the unequal terms of trade worse, such that the monopolies manipulate prices, always driving them up above their value, taking advantage of the control which they exercise over the market. This circumstance impedes whatever sign of the competitive capacity of the less developed countries, due to the fact that the value of the commodities they produce will always be higher than in the industrialised countries, due to the unequal development realised in the organic composition of capital. This is what leads the more industrialised countries to apply pressure for the opening up of markets on the basis of the elimination of protectionist barriers of their products, apart from blackmailing the weaker nations, imposing unfavourable terms of trade in exchange for the opening of their interior markets.
The triad of the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO form part of the same strategy, being instruments at the service of international finance capital. The WTO complements the relations between the dominant countries and the dominated countries in commercial respects, having as its objective to guarantee the relations of exchange in favour of the imperialist nations, on the basis of economic liberalism.
In summary, the imperialist countries are achieving their aims of the liberalisation of trade and services, of reduction in agricultural subsidies, and of making no concessions to the developing countries in terms of their interests.
The neoliberal economic policy has accelerated the extension of the economic aspect through productive and speculative investment, having as its basis a greater exploitation of labour power on a world scale. But, at the same time, this policy has deepened the processes which lead to an increased decomposition of capitalism and which open new prospects for international development.
On the one hand, neoliberalism is based on inter-imperialist collaboration. But, on the other hand, it has deepened the contradictions between the imperialist nations. The first tendency, dominant until the 1980s, has been displaced in this period by constant and growing conflicts.
Since the world had gone through a long period in which the dominant tendency was inter-imperialist collaboration, the idea was that the international situation did not offer possibilities for revolutionary politics. This idea was supported by the fall of the revisionist bloc. In the new conditions, when the dominant trend in inter-imperialist relations is contradiction, the possibilities for national struggle to acquire a revolutionary character rest upon the ability to take advantage of these circumstances in particularly favourable conditions.
Inter-imperialist collaboration continues to exist in so far as it is a matter of agreeing among themselves for a greater exploitation of the peoples of the world and of the colonies and neo-colonies. This is also manifested in the formation of economic blocs which in a singular fashion obey the orders of the hegemonic imperialist power in each case, and struggle to conquer greater economic space. The first is expressed in drawing up common strategies for the exploitation of the peoples of the world, agreements for the extraction of primary products in these nations, improving the terms of trade to the benefit of the industrialised nations, the implementation of trade regulations which favour the imperialist nations, accords for the deepening of the monetary system to the benefit of finance capital, and, finally, facilitating the process of export of finance capital.
Finance capital has a national support corresponding to its needs, including being able to count on its own internal and external market. Its own rearguard, an army responsible for its international development, all of which leads to the deepening of important contradictions. Up until now, this has not led to a degree of confrontation which is capable of impeding the process of articulation, co-operation and collaboration of capitals on an international level between the imperialist nations.
Because the export of finance capital is an international process, the tendency towards the extension of the market is deepened, a question which runs up against the process of recession and inter-imperialist competition for the domination of the world economy. All this means a further deepening of the contradictions between the imperialist nations, who find themselves prevented from being able to control their economic space and attempting to impinge on the “space of others”, on the countries which form part of an imperialist chain belonging to another power. The economic spaces which are in dispute, which today have been extended with the incorporation of the markets of Eastern Europe, and the spaces which are opening up in China and the former USSR, including those which represent “traditional” imperialist countries themselves. This circumstance acquires a great importance today, manifesting itself in all fields of international relations, as the bloc of imperialist countries present themselves in as homogeneous a way as in the recent past.
The deepening of inter-imperialist contradictions finds a determinant of the first order in the development of finance capital, in the scale of its unequal realisation and at the technological and industrial level. This situation is creating an international framework which, from a strictly economic point of view, is new. It is expressed in the fact that the capitalist world is no longer characterised by US hegemony in industrial and financial matters, but rather by the presence of various poles participating in the dispute in order to assume the leadership in these aspects.
This reality of competition has reached such a degree that it has become fairly evident that the metaphysical character of the claim that since the defeat suffered by the ex-USSR, the bipolar world in which the US and the USSR used to compete for international hegemony, has given way to a unipolar world under the hegemony of the former, with its military superiority, as shown by the Gulf War. In general terms it can be claimed that the CIS, led by Russia, continues to be an important factor in the current development of capitalism, not having lost all of its economic capacity and much less its military and geographical power. For this reason it is not out of line to claim that the CIS is one of the powers which are entering into the international dispute over economic spaces. But the countries which have moved against the world hegemony of the US to the greatest degree are Japan and Germany. This has been strengthened by the way in which these countries have emerged as the most developed through the process of uneven development.
These are the principal conditions in
which the international situation is currently developing. Covering up the
global character of the crisis and the policies of finance capital leads to
subjective and localised or regional conclusions which contribute nothing to the
development of an international revolutionary line, nor to a national line with
the perspective of seizing power. The unity of finance capital with regard to
maintaining imperialist domination is what makes it possible to unleash this
global offensive. Therefore, in the same way, we communists, as the expression
of the vanguard of the proletariat, must work on world scale to equip ourselves
with an international line whose first goal must be a unified response to this
policy of the sworn enemy of the peoples of the world.
Red Flag Party of Venezuela (Bandera Roja)