Present day imperialism has all the characteristics, tendencies and contradictions which were discovered and developed with an extraordinary clarity by Lenin in 1915: concentration of production, greater role of monopolies in the world economy, the role of banks, the world-wide hegemony of finance capital in the economy, the superiority of capital export to commodity export, the division of world among capitalist alliances, and the tendency of re-division of the world by big powers.
Capital accumulation has reached a period of mega mergers because of the dominant conditions. This is a manifestation of concentration and centralisation of capital and production. On the other hand, poverty of the workers across the world has been on an unprecedented increase.
According to the 1992 figures, 200 capitalist monopolies represent 29.8 per cent of the world gross product, therefore keeping the world economy under their control. Of these monopolies 60 were American and 54 were Japanese. In the last 30 years, world gross product has increased by eight fold, and 358 millionaire families own more wealth than those countries where more than 5 per cent of the world population live (UN Humanitarian Development Report). The process of concentration of capital led to the mergers worth of 100 billion dollars in a quarter of 1995. A short while ago we have witnessed the German Daimler-Benz taking over the American Chrysler. The British owned BP has taken over Shell, a British-Dutch partnership, resulting in a decrease of the numbers of the big “sisters”.
Capitalist accumulation reflects, on one hand, the concentration and centralisation of production and capital, and on the other, an increasing exploitation of millions of labourers, a soaring unemployment and starvation of greater sections of humanity.
Absolute poverty cripples 1.3 billion of the world population, condemning them to less than one dollar a day. 15 per cent of the world population shares 79 per cent of the total wealth created in the world, leaving the rest with a mere 21 per cent. According to the ILO reports, more than half of the job contracts in Latin America do not have any security. “1.2 billion of the work force of the world are unemployed, 800 million of them being qualified workers or people with experience in a profession.” (UNESCO, 1994)
This situation, as an expression of the process of capitalist accumulation, proves clearly the sharpening of the antagonism between labour and capital. With its drive to maximise profits, capital intensifies its exploitation of the workers, leading to an increase in unemployment and poverty.
However, on the other hand, the process of socialisation of production across the world creates the most important material grounds for a new stage in the development of humanity. This is an ongoing process in the imperialist epoch. This tendency is clearly manifested by the process of monopolisation, as a product of concentration of production and capital experienced by world capitalism. Monopoli-sation, while signifying the property concentrating in fewer hands, ripens at the same time the conditions for the superseding of the capitalist system and its being replaced by a new type of distribution of social wealth in a way that enables a harmony, through socialisation of production, between the social ownership of production and its use. In this way, imperialism creates the material basis of a new epoch for humanity, as well as the objective and subjective conditions for the proletariat and the peoples of the world to disperse the capital front and take power into their hands.
Immense capitalist accumulation and concentration manifests itself most evidently in the excessive growth of banks, in the mergers and take-overs of financial institutions, and in the webs of speculative capital growing like mushrooms in every part of the world.
The hegemony of banks and finance capital expresses itself in the fact that 60 per cent of capital across the world is devoted not to productive investments but to financial speculations. In general terms, international money, exchange and shares markets are 19 times bigger than the commodity trade across the world. These are, among other things, short term investments which lead to a decrease of industrial profit and which hinder productive investments, thus causing stagnation. This situation also manifests the parasitic character of a section of capital owners which is completely alienated to production. This section socially turns into cancer cells and acquires some characteristics which could shake the foundations of the imperialist nation.
Imperialist policies protect speculative finance capital vis-a-vis industrial capital which is faced with limitations of realisation mainly due to the shrinkage in the world markets. Profits from speculative investments are added to industrial profits, resulting in an increasing exploitation of labour. Facts prove that the Multilateral Agreements on Investment (MAI) promoted by the OECD is an expression of the efforts of finance capital to restructure the capital market as a mechanism in order to guarantee the valuable investments especially in the speculative market.
With its drive to maximise profits, finance capital, which is the main axis of the capitalist contradictions in the imperialist stage, seems to be a force able to draw the world economy into an unprecedented crisis. It determines not only the policies in the field of economy but also in the social fields, diplomacy, etc. Recent financial disasters, the ones known as the “tequila effect”, Asian crisis, the crisis of Moscow Stock Exchange, show, among other things, the effects of the volatility of finance capital which is, under the present conditions, superior to industrial capital in the world economy. This category, which is analysed in a detailed way by Lenin, is one of the most important determinants of the present world-wide crisis.
Despite the contradictions between the financial giants and imperialist countries themselves, mainly between the Japanese, German, French and US imperialism, for the control of world financial markets, the IMF, WB and WTO are the instruments of international finance capital.
The characteristics inherent to imperialism, especially capital export fiercely seeking for economic areas, show that uneven development leads to leaps which consequently indicate a change in the combination of capital and in the rates of profit.
Last few decades have manifested this evidently. After the Second World War, the US has emerged as a locomotive of the world capitalism with its immense capital. This capital is big enough to invade the whole world. Moreover, because its territories were not affected by the war, its economy was in good state.
In the last few decades, capital export by imperialist countries has reached every corner of the world, influencing the growth of productive forces, usurping the surplus value created by millions of workers, and natural resources and raw materials on unprecedented scales.
Capital export is being realised through the establishment of new enterprises, taking over the existing ones or through direct investments based on customs exemptions and other mechanisms.
In terms of direct investments, big monopolies of the most industrialised countries give the priority to their own imperialist countries. This provides them with competition advantages stemming from the high level of organic combination of capital, which, in return, results in a more complicated competition between monopolies internationally. At this stage, many advocates of imperialism and globalisation have produced some new terms such as "multinational" or "supranational". They argue that nation-states are replaced by a new supranational super structure, and that the world is governed by this structure. By this argument they deny the fact that each finance capital has a national centre. Furthermore, the investments in these imperialist countries control immense domestic markets where the realisation of surplus value is highly guaranteed, thus the level of turn of capital reaches a desired level. Direct investments based on all this deepens the crisis caused by overproduction. Competition, the increase in the organic combination of capital and the rate of production are at such high levels that this makes it inevitable to seek new markets, and encourages the export to underdeveloped regions with a high capacity of consumption. This, in return, leads to an unjust competition with the industries of the underdeveloped countries -based mainly on damping- and to a deepening process of de-industrialisation of these countries.
Big monopolies making direct investments also make dependent on themselves the economies promising high competition advantages. What is meant here is, among other things, cheap labour and raw materials which can be found in highly populated countries, with labour markets and with restructured capital. However, the main concern here is the manufacturing industry which requires a great number of work force, just a few of which is qualified. However, it does not need a permanent place in these countries. It can be easily moved to another place, if it is promised better advantages there. In the meantime, as in the case of Singapore and Malesia, some new economies have developed, representing a significant portion of the gross world product.
Other countries, mainly Brazil, Argentina, Mexico and China, have a tradition of industry as well as the conditions explained before. In terms of the first three, it is a result of the old import-substitution policies, while for the latter it is the economy with a sound base in heavy industry. For other countries, it is because of the magnitude of their markets. These economies at present are of great importance in terms of the direct investments of big capitalist monopolies.
With a world-wide crisis, foreign debts have become the primary lever of the realisation of the process of internationalisation for finance capital. This tendency is a result of the limitation of direct investments by the crisis and the decline of big enterprises in favour of foreign debt, which is a mechanism for transferring net capital to the big metropolis of the present day capitalism.
Foreign debts of states are also a guarantee for a risk-free and timely return of the investments and the accumulated interests of these debts. This is especially the case if the economic and social measures implemented are designed to protect the ability of paying back the debts and getting new credits. For this reason there is a close link between the growth of foreign debt and the economic and political interventions which do not only secure high instalments but also the fast growth of foreign debts. Credits are given provided that a social policy which guarantees the submission of the conditions for the reproduction of labour to the general interests of finance capital is followed.
After the Second World War, the US has become the biggest imperialist power whose leadership was symbolised with the Marshall Plan. It has also become a country of debts, a status which becomes more fixed because of the capital import to meet the 190 billion dollars trade deficit and financial deficit. None of the 20 biggest banks of the world in 1990 was American. Despite this, the US remains to be the strongest economic power which represents the 25 per cent of the world gross product.
Another form of capital export, which is probably the most significant form of the last few years, is the speculative form of investment, which is characterised by fast moving bonds and short term investments, which we have mentioned before.
The uneven development of capitalism becomes sharper in the imperialist stage; it is a development with leaps, which lies in the organic conditions of capitalist accumulation. Imperialism -international capitalism- is going through a stage characterised by the pressure of scientific-technological revolution on uneven development and the equalisation of this development. Both situations lead to the sharpening of inter-imperialist contradictions, to the re-division of spheres of influence or the reinstatement of the “balance” of the old status-quo and the emergence of a new balance of power.
Under the present conditions imperialist dogfight manifests itself in trade wars, competition for markets and in limited/regional wars incited by imperialist powers through direct or indirect intervention. These wars come onto the agenda more often to the extent that one rival acquires greater spheres of influence or weakens the other in the fight for world hegemony.
A concrete example of this was the tension between Japan and the US in 1995-96 in the “arrangement” of their trade relations. However, in general terms, the fight for world markets has resulted in the emergence of three big economic blocs: NAFTA led by the US, the EU led by Germany, and the Pacific Bloc led by Japan. Undoubtedly, there are others like Russia and China who have the potential to play a significant role in the fight for hegemony, which requires the formation of certain alliances.
There are various areas of inter-imperialist conflict for spheres of influence and for the weakening of the rivals. Former Yugoslavia was an expression of this process. The Balkans, including Greece, Kosovo, Albania and Montenegro, is a region of grave instability and conflict. Belgium, France and the US are lighting a fire in Congo, Liberia and Burundi. Same is also true in Afghanistan with the participation of Russia and the US. All this proves that every piece of land where one imperialist power loses strength, immediately becomes the subject for the struggle of the others to control it. In this way begins the suffocation of the national sovereignty of dependent countries, with the emergence of harmony or conflict between different imperialist powers, and the inter-imperialist contradictions becoming more evident as a strategic auxiliary force of revolution.
The world-wide capitalist crisis sharpens the contradictions between certain imperialist powers. There is a struggle for world hegemony, independently of the fact that this belonging to the US imperialism for a while longer. The process of coming to the same level under the conditions of the existence of uneven development results in the sharpening of the conflict for spheres of influence.
“The law of uneven development in the imperialist stage, the development of some countries in leaps compared to the others, the withdrawal of some countries from the world markets by the others, the periodic re-division of the already divided world through conflicts and wars, the sharpening of the conflicts in the imperialist camp, the weakening of the world capitalist front and the possibility of this front being split by the proletariat of individual countries, all this indicates the possibility of the victory of socialism in individual countries.” (Stalin, Works, Vol.9, p.92)
Serious contradictions are emerging within the Group of Eight (G8). Whether in alliance with others or not, each imperialist power persists in realising its own interests. However, this does not destroy the grounds for a consensus on the following issues: increasing the exploitation of labourers on a world scale; constraining the independence efforts of the dependent, colonial or semi-colonial nations (however, an imperialist power may “support” the independence movement if it believes that it would weaken its rivals in the area in its favour); and setting common strategies for the process of concentration and centralisation of production and capital.
The uneven development and development in leaps are results of the tendency of levelling. The roots of this question lie in the conditions of our epoch where world capitalism is going through a new stage of development of its scientific and technological revolution -this is where we find the organic elements which hasten uneven development.
In the meantime, we must point out that the suggestion of uni-polar world which considers the North American imperialism as an unbeatable super power is wrong, as is the case with the theories of the end of history and ideologies and the indisputable superiority of capitalism to socialism. It is also wrong to place the question of revolution as a strategically secondary question.
Globalisation initiates a new stage in the development of scientific-technological revolution. This contains a leap in the organic combination of capital. The growth of organic combination inevitably results in the decrease of the rate of profit, which in turn leads to the development of opposite tendencies trying to brake this decrease with an increase in the exploitation of labour, export of capital, etc. For this reason, globalisation accommodates the supporting of ideas related with such counter measures, such as the concept of free market, the principle of competition as an alternative of the development of nations, the liberalisation of capital investments, etc.
Following is the facts which show that this is a new situation (even though the main objectives -functions- of scientific-technological advance remain the same under the conditions of capitalism in general and imperialism in particular):
- A qualitative change in the use of energy sources for production process, which is manifested in the processes enabling material creation and saving of energy;
- A qualitative change in the development of tools of work, robots being the primarily important factor, as they contain the development of technological sub-processes like cybernetic;
- Fundamental changes in the process of labour, which are manifested in the theories and implementations designed to increase productivity and thus the exploitation of labour.
Globalisation also requires changes in the cultural processes. With it goes the implementation of the premise of capitalism creating an object for the subject and a subject for the object. The cultural processes directed by imperialism undermine all values and bring to fore the ones which paralyse revolutionary and national consciousness.
Globalisation will definitely prepare the conditions which will facilitate the process of capital accumulation and of the centralisation and concentration of production and capital. Competition power, which is a product of scientific and technological advance that has taken place mainly in the most advanced countries in capitalist terms, therefore remains in the hands of big monopolies creating favourable conditions for themselves in order to achieve their aim of maximising their profits. Therefore, mega-mergers on one hand, and increasing poverty of a great majority of the population on the other, are accompanied by the fact that the world as a whole is subject to the world market in this particular historical situation. As long as they are in the service of monopolies, the existing web of relations in the world, as well as the production places and cultural productions, deny national boundaries and the interests of the peoples of the world.
Imperialist globalisation, which is an expression of a qualitative leap in the development of organic combination of capital, also depend on the tendency of the average rate of profit to fall. An explicit example of this is the fall of the rate of profit in the Group of Seven, which dropped to 21 per cent in 1965 and to 11 in 1982. As a result of neoliberal policies the rate of profit rose to 17 per cent in 1991. This leads to an increase in finance capital export which determines the high level of capitalist development on the part of the receiving country. Increasing finance capital export demands an international division of labour, which is desired by imperialist countries.
Globalisation -with the meaning of a process leading to a new division of labour- needs new fields for the reproduction of the labour force which is much cheaper than those in the imperialist countries. Therefore, it requires an increase of exploitation of workers on the world scale, as well as rooting in the exploitation of dependent countries. It is because of this characteristic that globalisation is a lever for the increasing impoverishment of the majority of countries and for the protection of finance capital. The motive for maximising profits under imperialist conditions requires not only cheap labour but also cheap raw materials. In other words, globalisation consolidates the plunder of semi-colonial countries. The WTO outlines regulations in favour of imperialist countries. The lifting of customs barriers with the aim of arranging markets “freely” has a cynical meaning, because at present, the imperialists put barriers in their own countries but force weak countries to lift theirs completely.
These conditions summarising various characteristics of the general tendency of capitalism and imperialism are obviously in favour of monopolies, which have the conditions to centralise the growth of the organic combination of capital, to compete with monopoly prices, to enlarge their markets and to get maximum profit. Imperialists are alleviating their crisis by putting the burden onto satellite countries which are being plundered more harshly every time. The monopolists are succeeding in centralising and concentrating capital and production more and more. In the meantime, we see a greater impoverishment and exploitation of the great majority of the world population. In the final analysis, the greatest profit is being extracted through poverty and plunder.
Globalisation maintains the relations between the monopolies and imperialist countries on one hand, and the dependent, oppressed and labourers on the other. It puts forward the theory of inter-dependency according to which national sovereignty is an outdated question which hinders the advance and material development of nations and therefore should be replaced by “functional sovereignty”. It is inter-dependency which brings back “investments for development” in the most efficient and profitable way, and which unifies economic interests in the best way possible! According to these suggestions, states do not need their own armed forces which must be transformed into national brigades and/or police forces; national boundaries must be opened for the free trade of the monopolies; and industry must be moved into the countries with most suitable conditions for profit. Legal and political norms and constitutions must be adjusted to new conditions, making it possible for the continuation of governments, a demand of the MAI.
In order to achieve all this, political reforms are in the making in the form of constitutional reforms and/or new constitutions, which can guarantee foreign investments, privatisation, casualisation, decentralisation, withdrawal of the state from health and education, and election reforms restricting or completely taking away the rights of the minority.
This historical situation cannot move forward without revealing contradictions. On the contrary, the drive for maximum profit for the monopolies and imperialist countries is ever sharpening the general contradictions, making them more critical. The workers who feel the attacks of capital on their shoulders and in their stomachs have two alternatives: to organise themselves for the struggle or submit to the wage slavery. It is already a life and death issue because of the high level of exploitation and poverty. Objective conditions are becoming more evident, forcing the workers and the peoples of the world to seek an alternative against the attacks of capital. The standardisation process of capital, especially of finance capital, lead to the tendency towards unity on the part of the workers on a global scale. This struggle brings on to the agenda once again the historical contradiction between the mode of production which is based on the exploitation of man by man and the socialist alternative. Capital’s attacks leave only the alternative for a radical change which will bring about new forms of appropriation and new social relations based on solidarity. This is the only way for the productive forces to unchain themselves from the chains of capitalism which is on its highest stage.
On the other hand, globalisation rises on the hegemony of imperialist countries on peoples and dependant nations, and sharpens inter-imperialist contradictions.
Neoliberalism, as the policy of finance capital, is carried out under the direction of the IMF. So far, it has been used as a prop for an economic and social policy which is designed to:
- utilise opposite tendencies
breaking the fall of the rate of average profit;
- guarantee the realisation of capitalist accumulation process in a period when
the tendency of crisis of the bourgeois regime has become dominant;
- expand the economic arena for the investments of finance capital both in the
productive and speculative fields.
In short, neoliberalism tries to develop the tendencies which would enable monopolies to get maximum profits. For example, the intensification of destruction of the peoples of the world and the plundering of raw materials; the intensification of the exploitation of labour force; and the expansion of the foreign markets for finance capital in the form of foreign debt, direct investments, speculation, etc. Neoliberalism is the economic policy of the finance capital under the present conditions of monopolist capitalism where the recessive tendency is dominant. Despite the differences in its application in line with the specific conditions in different countries, it is a global economic policy.
Neoliberalism continues to promote a policy of rearranging and casualising the working conditions, and attacking collective bargaining, the right to strike and unionise, etc.
Privatisation of public enterprises are continuing full speed. They have been in state ownership traditionally because of the huge amount of investment they require or because they are socially strategic sectors. Privatising them means to turn them into sectors which would expand the investment possibilities of finance capital on the world scale. This leads to the hand-over of strategically important sectors to finance capital on the part of the weak countries. Everything is done for the interest of finance capital.
Neoliberalism, intensification of the exploitation of the workers, increasing poverty, privatisation and the rearrangement of the investment mechanisms of capital are all one and the same thing. They all are parts of the policy in favour of finance capital.
As an ideology of imperialism which is trying to legitimise and finance the international division of labour and the internationalisation of capital, globalisation has turned into a primary factor for the development of capitalism in the world. This ideology, which is presented as an achievement of the present moment, is based on the capitalist tendencies of imperialism whose aim is to realise the process of accumulation even in the crisis conditions.
Imperialist globalisation has brought about dependency and the ignorance of dependent countries about their national sovereignty. These are meaningful conclusions on the part of finance capital with its ambition to maximise profit. Contrary to the imperialist claims, globalisation does not allow a high level of welfare for colonies, semi-colonies or dependent countries. On the contrary, it sharpens the contradictions between the imperialist countries and the weaker ones. It deepens the disorders of capitalism on the world scale, and consolidates the uneven development which affects especially the colonial, semi-colonial and dependent countries.
As a result of the general crisis of imperialism, a recessive tendency has developed since the end of the 60s. Every crisis is becoming deeper than the previous one and affecting the capitalist system as a whole. This process is called the “domino effect’, which sweeps through every country, but at different levels. For example, the US has been showing signs of a relative economic development recently; however, this is not in line with the description of this economy being the “locomotive” of the world economic growth. This is because firstly there is an economic recession in other imperialist countries, mainly in Japan. Secondly, the growth of the US economy was merely 3 per cent of its GDP in 1999, which is a weak sign in terms of supporting the global economic growth. On the other hand, the economic growth in the US has no sign of continuity, which makes the situation unstable. This explains the situation in Japan as well as the grave decline of the Brazilian economy. In addition to the fact that the signs of development are limited with the US, we see a decline in the economic growth in Latin America, which, according to the 1999 figures of the UNCTAD, dropped from 5.4 per cent in 1997 to 2 per cent in 1998; the forecast for the following year is 1 per cent. To keep the 1997 pace, the economic growth must have been a record 10 per cent for a continuous few years.
The recession tendency of the last 30 years is an obvious evidence of a very long trend. Overcoming this requires the destruction of such a great amount of capital that would result in qualitative political changes in various countries of the world. This would also change the balance of power between various imperialist blocs. It is the most dangerous and deepest process for capital in the course of globalisation and a single world market. On the other hand, these conditions pave the way for a crisis of neoliberal and “globalisation” policy, the starting point of which is not the deterioration of the crisis but to create more suitable conditions for the sharpening of the process of the centralisation and concentration of capital and production. This is a policy which promised the creation of a better welfare after all those pains that the people had to go through.
The explanation of the present financial crisis can be found in the general laws of capitalism as well as the characteristics and tendencies of imperialism which were pointed out by Lenin: the general crisis of capitalism, the role of finance capital in the world economy, inter-imperialist contradictions, etc. We are talking about a deterioration with a Marxist-Leninist understanding based on the validity of the thesis that the main tendency of capitalism is to realise maximum profit, for which what is done is this: “To exploit the great majority of people of a certain country, to drive them to bankruptcy and impoverishment, to take the peoples of especially underdeveloped countries under an imperialist yoke, to transfer systematically the resources of these countries into imperialist countries, and to militarise the national economy in order to maximise profit through wars if necessary.” (Stalin, Economic Problems of Socialism)
Japan has become a centre for the accumulation of finance capital and invested more than 400 million dollars in US state bonds. Japanese economy constitutes 18.5 per cent of the world economy. In recent months we have witnessed a 19 per cent drop in the Japanese industry, which is a result of the crisis. This example clearly proves the following Leninist thesis: “Capitalism is developing in an ever high speed. This development has become ever more uneven which shows itself in the decay of the richest countries in terms of capital.” (Lenin, Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism) Today’s Japan has become a decaying nation.
In alliance with France, Germany has become the boss of the EU. The “German miracle” after the World War II led to an extraordinary growth in its economy. It has also become a major capital exporting country. Using the privileges presented by the EU, which constitutes 50 per cent of the world GNP, and the plans created by the Maastricht, Germany acts in harmony with the agreement between the EU and the Union of South East Asian Countries. Despite this, the unemployment rate in Germany has been around 12.5 per cent since February 1997, “a rate which has not been seen since Hitler, and according to the analysts, it has a tendency to increase in spite of the adjustments made in the budget”. (Espaciaos newspaper, no.8, August 1998)
The world-wide crisis of the capitalists, the general crisis of imperialism, manifests itself in different forms. Present conditions give the opportunity to imperialist countries to hide the fact that they put all the burden of the crisis onto the shoulders of the workers and peoples of the dependent and semi-colonial countries: an unprecedented poverty, hunger, unemployment, etc. This results in the sharpening of their general crisis.
The crisis manifests itself also in local wars and the sharpening of the conflict to gain spheres for the monopolies and their national positions.
The characterisation of the present situation of the world must be based on the general description of imperialism being the highest stage of capitalism and a transitional period. “...Capitalism must be described as a transitional period or, in fact, a moribund capitalism.” (Lenin, ibid., s.162) Independently of the blows that the proletariat have suffered in the past decades, revolutionary possibilities are developing tied with the perspective of socialist construction.
The anti-communist ideological attack carried out by the advocates of the bourgeoisie, the imperialists, different currents of revisionism and the traitors of our cause have gained grounds in a long period. The rout of revisionism and the idea that this would be binding for socialism and the international communist movement have played a significant role in the prolongation of this period. This attack leads to scepticism, hesitation, confusion, lack of courage and erosion of values in public opinion as well as in the revolutionary sectors. There is no doubt that there are enough facts to consolidate Marxism-Leninism. This is the case not only for the scientific fastidiousness of Marxist-Leninist theses in terms of the analysis of capitalism and imperialism, but also for the fact that socialism is the only real alternative more than even in terms of the elimination of wickedness caused by capitalism.
For what has been said so far, the Marxist-Leninist theses on the general dynamic of capitalism and the theses of Lenin on the highest stage of capitalism still remain valid. Lenin’s approach to revolutionary possibilities also maintains its validity. It is not enough to have good analysis about the international situation or imperialism. It is an obligation for the world communists and revolutionaries to set forth correct tasks for the passage of the peoples and the proletariat of the world from a revolutionary process.
We live in the age of proletarian revolutions. The workers and peoples of the world led by the communists who undertake the task of preparing the revolution constitute sufficient argument for this. In various stages of the development of imperialism it has been proven that revolutionary possibilities exist in the countries which constitute the weakest link of imperialism and where the capitalist front can be broken. This fact also proves once again that imperialism is the epoch of proletarian revolutions.
If the present conditions are ripening the objective conditions of revolution -a result of the capitalist crisis in the world- and revolutionary possibilities are becoming facts, then it means that there is a responsibility on the shoulders of Marxist-Leninists to follow a policy which will make the workers and peoples of the world victorious over capital. Therefore, we must undertake this task of being in the beginning of a process which will clearly set out the policy which forces the revolutionary vanguard to play a leading role for the workers and peoples of the world.
We must not evaluate the break out of revolution in this or that capitalist country as a general thing or as a result of the general law of development of imperialism. As a main part of general crisis, economic crisis, turns into the primary sign of a political crisis which is already taking shape. Instability is a characteristic of imperialism, which is the case especially in dependent countries. We see such cases in Latin American countries such as Venezuela, Ecuador, Colombia, and Indonesia of Asia, etc.
The masses in all capitalist countries are becoming significantly re-mobilised as a result of the crisis, exploitation, poverty, etc. However, this mobilisation of masses requires a concrete direction to revolution.
We are also assisting the development of national liberation movements such as Puerto Rico, former Soviet countries, Kosovo, etc., which motivate the intervention of various imperialist countries. Inter-imperialist contradictions, which manifest themselves in the formation of different economic blocs designed to protect the hegemony in the economic markets, deepen instability further more. With the aspects explained so far these conditions show how deep the contradictions in the imperialist epoch are.
We see a sharpening of the question of control over the markets, a chronic question of over-production and unemployment, and the development of a tendency of disintegration of the internal balance of the world capitalist system which leads to the emergence of enemy groupings between capitalist countries. This proves once again that some elements of the general crisis of capitalism deepen and continue to ripen, giving way to the emergence of conditions for a revolutionary solution in this or that country.
These conditions demand from the communists to set out their tasks in line with the tendencies that lead to the outbreak of revolution in one chain of imperialism. If everything shows the ripening of the general crisis of capitalism, if there are signs of revolution in the world, then it is necessary for us to make a definition of the tasks of the international communist movement. The International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations has the assertion to become the revolutionary focal point for the peoples of the world and the leading force which organises struggles and presents a revolutionary perspective to them. Each M-L party and organisation has the understanding and responsibility of the central international task of organising and actualising the revolution in its own country.
It is a very important task to develop a general revolutionary line as part of the definition of political situation for the communists of the imperialist countries and of the colonial, semi-colonial and dependent countries. This would give us the opportunity to define clearly the framework of the process of formation of a Communist International, in order to place ideological, theoretical and political parameters in terms of the international communist movement to take shape. It would give us the opportunity to leave to one side secondary questions. Furthermore, it would enable us to influence those parties and organisations which call themselves Marxist-Leninist although they represent the ideological and political sections who are in contradiction with the proletariat and who have distanced from the Marxist-Leninist theory. It would give us the opportunity to promote the tasks and initiatives which would enable the international communist movement to become the spokesperson of the world working class movement. An international communist movement which would unite and lead the struggles in the world and overcome their shortcomings.
A tactical and strategic line must be developed to respond to the discontent which is fed by the tendency of unification within the sectors under the predominance of finance capital, and which leads to the emergence of a desire for change among the oppressed and the exploited of the world. This can only be done by the communists and revolutionaries undertaking their leading role.
If the present conditions demand an alternative and if socialism is the way forward, then we, as communists, must put onto the agenda our proposals to the peoples of the world, after the 150 year-old Communist Manifesto. If we are to be a reference to the oppressed and exploited people, then it is a primary task for us to set out a programme for the present day. This programme of the communists would be the basis for the unity of the international workers’ movement in their struggle against capital, for the defence and recognition of national sovereignty and anti-imperialist stance of all oppressed and exploited people, and for the achievement of democracy for all nations.
An anti-imperialist consciousness has been emerging among various nations. Ever intensifying attacks of capital and the imperialist yoke on dependent countries create the grounds for the formation of an anti-imperialist front. The struggle needs proposals for the unity of various social and political sectors.
Communist proposals must take into consideration the political demands of the working class and the peoples of the world. Objective conditions point to the days of revolution, while subjective conditions reflect the desire for change. The leading forces must not keep distant from their historical responsibilities. Therefore, we must carry on with the example of Marx and Engels when they showed a socialist future in those dark days, and present ourselves as the leadership which will achieve it. In the epoch of imperialism Lenin analysed the new epoch and especially the question of how we would undergo the epoch of proletarian revolutions. With great knowledge and courage he led the Russian people up to the revolution. It is a task for the Marxist-Leninists today to show the necessary talent and power to lead the proletariat and the peoples, to seize power with them, and to build socialism.
Caracas, November 1999
M-L Communist Party of Ecuador (PCMLE)
Red Flag Party of Venezuela (Bandera Roja)