ON
MARKET GLOBALIZATION
by the Communist Party of Greece (Marxist-Leninist)
Trends and Contradictions
It is not necessary for someone to argue about
the process of a kind of market globalization, mainly of market. However,
there are different analyses about its characteristics and the consequences.
According to bourgeois economists, humanity is going through a new stage
of market globalization where borders are collapsing while countries and
peoples are being united.
A similar analysis is promoted by reformists.
Especially the reformist one has its own tradition. One century ago, the
theoreticians of the Second International claimed that humanity was entering
into a new stage of capitalism, which superseded the phase of imperialism,
called superimperialism. On the other hand, the formation of some monetary
unions and some coalitions of capitalist-imperialist countries presumably
supports analogous analyses. Our point of view is different. Of course,
there is a trend of globalization. This direction is on the basis of the
development of the productive forces. It is the trend of the expansion
of capital activity i.e. the expansionissm of imperialism that is enforced
by the trend of concentration and the formation of gigantic trusts with
multinational characteristics. However, what kind of globalization takes
place and which factors determine it?
The answer lies on the historical ground of the
formation of the capitalist system through the centuries, especially its
formation according to the national state model.
The path to the imperialist stage not only did
not cease this relation but on the contrary strengthened it, especially
if we reckon the path to the phase of State Monopoly Capitalism. Going
back to history we will see the strengthening of the role of the
state not the opposite.
The expansion of capital activity was combined
with political and military practices which only the state could implement.
The imperialist expansion is linked with political and military impositions
that only a powerful state can enforce. Competition, an inherent element
of the imperialist-expansionist trend, has never been subjected to the
“market laws” but was supported by political and military means. On the
basis of these characteristics, the system was dragged to two world wars.
For profit does not recognize colour or nationality but armies necessarily
do. Globalization always contradicts with countervailing trends and especially
with the existence of the capitalist state. Exactly here is the fundamental
contradiction of the system on this subject and this contradiction determines
the process of globalization.
Such an, always real, trend cannot be integrated
without the destruction of the bourgeois state. However, the existence
of the capitalist state is inherent to the existence of the bourgeoisie
which should transcend itself, something impossible.
We believe that these contradictions can be overcome
by the other social forces which are destined to play such a historical
role.
International Apportionment
Today, globalization and economic integration
are supposedly enforced, in a rapid way, on the ground of a global apportionment.
Bourgeois economists argue about monetary links, global capital market,
investments, and international system of transportation and information.
For us, it is one thing to acknowledge the existence of the global market,
but it is another with regard to the integration of the world economy.
Regarding the notion of “apportionment”, we believe it is an illusion.
What we see is the uneven development, the division to zones (with economic
and political criteria) and the division to states. These divisions exist
and are reproduced on the ground of superiority of someone over another.
The globalization trends coexist with trends of division and this contradiction
determines the characteristics of the process on this subject.
The famous “apportionment” is not based on “comparative
advantage” as bourgeois economists claim, or, at least, on the basis of
“healthy competition”, but on the basis of the power to impose. A relation
that has been created on the ground of a complicated historical process
(not simply an economic process) and is reproduced in the same way. When
economic measures are not enough, political pressures, blackmails, and
military interventions are used in order to impose the proper apportionment.
In that case, borders are destroyed and not only the economic ones. Of
course, these are the borders of the weak (or defeated) countries, in the
name of free trade, free market, etc.
Let us make some more remarks on the bourgeois
theories.
In this concrete frame, trends of concentration
and centralization are intensified with direction to the centre. Capital
concentration and capital market are under the control of a few specific
countries. The same countries make monetary links for their own advantage
(despite whatever contradictions).
This relation is reflected in the various international
organizations. We see that the East and the third world are not part of
that relation. Of course there are contradictions expressed in monetary
and stock speculations. Regarding investments (except for speculative purposes),
they take place in a manner which reproduces divisions and unevenness.
The most profitable and hi-tech companies remain in the centre while the
rest of the world is used for providing raw materials or as dumping ground
for dangerous wastes. It is clear that capital activities take place
not only through favourable economic terms but also with the help of Marine
divisions. The “freedom” of information is defined by the Western media
while the network of political links and control regulate transportation
and distribution of products. The American Bases and fleets, spread out
all over the world, express the most convincing argument for “apportionment”,
“globalization”, and “unity”.
Underer these terms, there is really a kind of
global market, but not unity. The relations which reproduce it have the
characteristic of uneven development, inherent to the nature of imperialism
and cannot change. At the same time, all these contradictions presuppose
the backing of a political and military power, i.e. the state. The strengthening
of the state itself reproduces these contradictions and leads to war.
Unions and Divisions
The process of the relations between West and
East is very interesting. The desire of the East to welcome Western investments
is obvious. Also obviuos is the intention of Western capital to penetrate
and control the Eastern market. However, this desirable unity is not developing
as it was expected.
This is not something new. There have been trends
of convergence even from the previous period. There were cases of cooperation
or business dealings under conditions of competition (Third world, weapons
trade, etc.). A trend which reached its zenith during perestroika. Despite
that, the dominant element remained the division to two different zones.
The core of the Western economy remained having as epicentre the US, EU
and Japan. Respectively in the East, the USSR was the centre and COMECON
the frame. What is remarkable today is that depite the “collapse of the
old divisions” the unification is not working.
Russia is not accepted in the club. Economic restrictions
against Russia have not been lifted completely; restrictions and exclusions
from international monetary organizations remain intact. The reactions
were almost hesterical when Cyprus decided to buy the Russian S-300 missiles.
The competition for oil in the Caucasus meant thousands of deaths. With
the exception of Germany, even the investments in the countries of East
Europe are limited.
The answer to this “economic” question is political.
Regarding Russia: despite its crumbling, Russia
remains a country with enormous capabilities. It is the only country which
can compete with the USA on the level of advanced technology as well as
on the strategic level. Therefore neither unity of any kind nor investments
can take place. On the other hand, the purpose of the loans that are given
to Russia is to delay the process of reorganization of Russian power.
As regards the other Eastern countries, there
are significant differences. On the one hand it is the level of relations
with Russia and on the other hand it is the question of domination and
in what conditions they are, politically and economically. These countries
used to have different characteristics from the third world countries.
They used to be countries with considerable infrastructure and high educational
level. At the same time they were linked with the former Soviet Union in
various economic and military ways. So, through the various “velvet revolutions”
a campaign started for the destruction of their economy, creating a “virgin”
field for Western capital while links with Russia started breaking. If
the problem was simply “economic”, it would have been solved. The security
of whatever investments is not guaranteed or in other words, it is a question
of stability of the absolute domination of the West in the area.
If these are the relations of West with East,
what are the relations inside the Western camp? The terms for the formation
of the new conditions are linked:
With the fact that the collapse of the Eastern
bloc lifted the reasons for the formation of the postwar alliance in the
West. For more than two decades, the capitalist system has suffered from
a constant crisis. Especially on the economic level, the US stopped being
the indisputable power it once was after World War II. Starting from the
economic level the rest of the imperialists urgently demand the redistribution
of roles. The most characteristic expression of this trend is the demand
of the other imperialists to change the balance inside the various international
monetary organizations where the USA have the right of a kind of veto.
Of course the Americans react and this is another indication for the intensification
of the contradictions between the imperialists.
These contradictions come out in every level:
- For the energy sources (oil). Look at the Gulf
War and the attempts of Europeans to make new deals with Iran, Iraq, and
Libya triggering American outrage;
- For the terms of production, transportation
and distribution of steel, agricultural products, high technology products,
etc. the various agreements, for example GATT, do not eliminate the contradictions
but verify the position and strength of each imperialist;
- For the control of the stock markets;
- In the weapons trade where the fierce competition
leads even to the murder of persons in high positions;
- In the media sector and generally in the cultural
sector for supporting the respective side;
- In the question of expansion to new markets
and zones of domination (e.g. Yugoslavia).
All the above do not lead to unification. Of course,
the basis of the alliance has not yet been broken. There is cooperation
in the expansion towards China and Eastern Europe where the factor called
Russia does not allow the final split. But even in the case of expansion
to the East, the contradictions are apparent. There are agreements between
the various powers but there is also the trend of returning back to the
specific interests using the “state-core”.
Up to now, the USA has the capability to create
crises and then to use them. Shifting the question to strategic-military
level, the balance is in favour of the Americans. Although this is a considerable
advantage for the USA, it indicates the weakness of America to impose its
total and indisputable hegemony. As much as they need to use the military
card so the gap with their “allies” is widening.
Peoples Have a Solution
It is obvious that the capitalist-imperialist
world suffers from a general and protracted crisis and, as history has
shown, cannot find a way out. Therefore the attack against the working
class and the peoples is getting more vicious. The imperialist powers,
led by the US, fight each other for the redivision of markets and zones
of influence. The collapse of the revisionist regimes brought new disputes
and released the most reactionary trends of the system, which meant the
increase of the barbaric attacks against the proletariat and the peoples
all over the world. The neoliberal line became dominant, having as its
main follower the social-democratic parties. The politics of exploitation
of the working class has eliminated, like a typhoon, almost every gain
of previous struggles. The robbery of the dependent countries by imperialism,
the exploitation and oppression of these peoples and the capital concentration
into the imperialist metropoles have increased. At the same time, the contradictions
between the imperialists are becoming acute and military interventions
take place almost every day.
The suffering of peoples by famine, misery, wars,
invasions, and massacres indicates the capitalist barbarism. For years,
the crisis has crawled through recessions and shocks but has always been
here. This incurable situation increases the contradictions and the crisis
leading to a total war involving everyone.
Capitalists claim the absolute domination over
the working class and the peoples; imperialists claim the world and the
West wants to dominate the East. The USA claims global hegemony while peoples
are preparing themselves for their own response.
It is clear that people all over the world, especially
in the zones of storms, intensify their struggle. Besides the veteran revolutionary
armed movements, new ones have been set up creating an optimistic revolutionary
mood. The people’s struggles of today have a very different quality from
the previous ones which were developed and was influenced, firstly by the
socialist bloc, and then by Mao’s China. In other words, the struggles
of today temporarily statrt under negative conditions and with the revolutionary
and communist theories distorted by revisionism.
Despite that, they continue with a dynamic and
decisive way writing their own history. They rely on themselves and the
future inevitably belongs to them. Through their fighting, they carry on
denouncing the bourgeois parties and build a revolutionary consciousness
with correct politics. They increase their knowledge and experience in
order to play in the future a significant role. We live in the area of
the revolutionary transformations of peoples’ struggles as well as in the
phase of reorganization and strngthening of the communist movements. From
a general point of view, such a transformation is still in the beginning
but is already in the direction of strengthening the masses which will
bring the big social changes.
The revolutionary processes inside the working
masses will bring a qualitative change with consequences on everything.
We can be sure that the dawn of the new century
will show that the 21st century belongs to the communists and peoples of
the world. Such an assumption is not simply our wish but it reflects the
analysis of the current crisis and the insoluble problems of capitalism.
It is supported by the fact that the contardictions are getting worse and
the people are becoming more decisive. The people’s outcry is growing and
is being transformed into resistance and action. The communists and
Marxist-Leninists will be trained in these struggles, testing their capabilities
and weaknesses. The peoples in the zones of storms will illuminate the
future of humanity. #