By Liz Burbank
Simulposted with The Digest
Readers know the mainstream media casts the monetary symptoms of this long-brewing, deep structural crisis of U.S. finance capital finally erupting into public view, as the whole story. The news comes as an unfathomable shock to most people because this crisis has been disguised for years as isolated phenomena, bursting housing bubbles, downturns, etc., camouflaging its systemic roots and nature, with surface symptoms. Making sense of this deep crisis of capital is critical. It signals rare revolutionary opportunities as well as deepening dangers.
The digest over the years has examined how, in deep crises, capitalism reveals the essence of its liberal democracy by institutionalizing increased centralization and consolidation of bourgeois rule into state capitalism, e.g. ‘national socialism’.
Since its barbaric beginnings amerikan fascism has been standard operating procedure against nations and peoples of color —- genocide and slavery are pillars of amerikan capitalism, driven by its ideological engine, racism. As the current U.S. crisis deepened all the chickens started coming home to roost and amerikan fascism spread under the aegis of counter-terrorism and national security — garbed for popular consumption in anti-Arab, Muslim, immigrant psywarfare.
Politically fascism was legitimized and legalized with made-in-usa 911 pretext for an imperialist world war AKA ‘war on terror’, ‘the patriot act’ and ensuing infrastructure ’security’ by terror, torture and ‘preemptive’ war —- giving the state limitless freedom against countries and people obstructing its state terrorist war for expanded u.s. world supremacy. As usual, the think-tank strategists and political executors forgot to include in their white supremacist calculations a few billion people — our real allies — soon to fuck up their neatly laid plans. In their supreme arrogance they also ‘forgot’ their imperialist propaganda manipulations also contradicted reality.
The systematic separation of capitalist politics and economics, essential to maintaining public ignorance and patriotic loyalty: politics is thus conveniently reduced to electoral politics with the illusion of choice, control and change, while economics, deliberately separated, is reduced to ‘our backyard’ quotidian — or matters beyond comprehension and control — except to vote for new faces to carry out the same capitalist agenda posited as ‘change’ and ’solutions’.
But there are some refreshing analytical antidotes: Unlike WSJ, NYT etc. professional capitalist apologists, Henry K. Liu, a capitalist critic and chairman of a New York-based private investment group, and F.William Engdahl, anti-imperialist historian, researcher and author, are political — economists whose analyses frame world events generally, and economics specifically, in a political context necessary to understanding ….anything. While not identifying themselves as Marxists, neither are blinded by the congenital anti-Marxist credentials necessary for official propagandists, pundits and apologists to conceal the political-economic dynamic, to exonerate capitalism as ‘the best of all possible worlds’ by pretending it’s just bad politicians and policies so it’s all up to us.
Nothing from mainstream ‘news’ will tell us the meaning of the current moves: massive privatizing of profits by nationalizing/’socializing’ capital’s debt. Translation: working and oppressed peoples in the ‘homeland’ now officially owe/own the bill for the global devastation and destruction that this predatory system produces in its rampage for maximum power and profits — in the name of ’stabilizing’ it, and pacifying us —- e.g. saving its ass to wreak even worse havoc. And they will certainly never tell us that U.S. capitalism’s political—economic—military juggernaut is driven by desperation, signaling strategic weakness and vulnerability, not strength. That’s where revolutionary possibilities lie.
An Arab proverb, “a mouth that prays, a hand that kills” sums it up.
Liu and Engdahl are fearlessly independent, critical analysts, informed by great historical knowledge including — as all genuine political-economy must —- Marx and Lenin’s analyses of the nature of capital, its relation to the state, its trajectory and the inherent contradictions underlying its demise. Both analysts grasp and explore the global breadth and depth of this crisis resulting in U.S. world domination whose temporary ‘fix’ can only be more of the same. Both reveal, contrary to bourgeois propaganda, that the ‘bailout’ nationalizing/’socializing’ the debt to privatize more profit is capitalist to the core.
Brief excerpts from both author’s works give a sense of why we don’t find their incisive and comprehensive analyses in mainstream media, and how they make sense of what’s happening. While respecting their integrity and valuing their analyses, the digest has fundamental political disagreements with critics who, like Liu, as free-market capitalists, believe that despite its monstrous genesis and history, capitalism can be salvaged by new ‘models’ and regulation. The problems are generated not by bad models and managers, but by the very nature of capital itself as Marx irrefutably analyzed in Capital.
Hopefully this whets your appetite to explore further, to understand how and why capitalism’s strategic vulnerability not only poses severe new dangers but rare historic opportunities for radical change. As Marx and other revolutionary leaders have said in so many words, political understanding is the basis for conscious political action to change the world.
Towards that end, and as an introduction, here a brief excerpt from Lenin’s still critically on-target pamphlet “Imperialism the Highest Stage of Capitalism” that Liu mentions, revealing the roots and nature of capital, and why this U.S. crisis today will have a massive global impact: imperialism is global capitalism, and through WW2 the U.S. became the world-dominant power:
“Imperialism the Highest Stage of Capitalism”
by V. I. Lenin
LCW vol.22, http://www.marxists.org/glossary/frame.htm
Lenin enumerated the following five features characteristic of the epoch of imperialism:
The epoch of imperialism opens when the expansion of colonialism has covered the globe and no new colonies can be acquired by the great powers except by taking them from each other, and the concentration of capital has grown to a point where finance capital becomes dominant over industrial capital. Lenin enumerated the following five features characteristic of the epoch of imperialism:
(1) the concentration of production and capital has developed to such a high stage that it has created monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life; (2) the merging of bank capital with industrial capital, and the creation on the basis of this “finance capital”, of a financial oligarchy; (3) the export of capital as distinguished from the export of commodities acquires exceptional importance; (4) the formation of international monopoly capitalist associations which share the world among themselves, and (5) the territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers is completed. Imperialism is capitalism at that stage of development at which the dominance of monopolies and finance capital is established; in which the export of capital has acquired pronounced importance; in which the division of the world among the international trusts has begun, in which the division of all territories of the globe among the biggest capitalist powers has been completed.
[Lenin, Imperialism the Highest Stage of Capitalism, LCW Volume 22, p. 266-7.]
“[Imperialism] is something quite different from the old free competition between manufacturers, scattered and out of touch with one another, and producing for an unknown market. Concentration [of production] has reached the point at which it is possible to make an approximate estimate of all sources of raw materials (for example, the iron ore deposits)… [throughout] the whole world. Not only are such estimates made, but these sources are captured by gigantic monopolist associations [now called multi-national conglomerates]. An approximate estimate of the capacity of markets is also made, and the associations “divide” them up amongst themselves by agreement. Skilled labor is monopolized, the best engineers are engaged; the means of transport are captured – railways in America, shipping companies in Europe and America. Capitalism in its imperialist stage leads directly to the most comprehensive socialization of production; it, so to speak, drags the capitalists, against their will and consciousness, into some sort of a new social order, a transitional one from complete free competition to complete socialization.
“Production becomes social, but appropriation remains private. The social means of production remain the private property of a few. The general framework of formally recognized free competition remains and the yoke of a few monopolists on the rest of the population becomes a hundred times heavier, more burdensome and intolerable.”
“The development of capitalism has arrived at a stage when, although commodity production still “reigns” and continues to be regarded as the basis of economic life, it has in reality been undermined and the bulk of the profits go to the “geniuses” of financial manipulation. At the basis of these manipulations and swindles lies socialized production; but the immense progress of mankind, which achieved this socialization, goes to benefit… the speculators.” (p. 206-207)
Monopoly, oligarchy, the striving for domination and not for freedom, the exploitation of an increasing number of small and weak nations by a handful of the richest or most powerful nations – all these have given rise to those distinctive characteristics of imperialism which compel us to define it as parasitic or decaying capitalism. … It would be a mistake to believe that this tendency to decay precludes the rapid growth of capitalism. It does not. In the epoch of imperialism, certain branches of industry, certain strata of bourgeoisie and certain countries betray… now one and now another of these tendencies. On the whole, capitalism is growing far more rapidly than before.”
Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, VI Lenin, Selected Works in one volume, p 260
(ch.7) Parasitism and the Decay of Capitalism…parasitism is characteristic of imperialism… the deepest economic foundation of imperialism is monopoly. This is capitalist monopoly, i.e., monopoly which has grown out of capitalism and which exists in the general environment of capitalism, commodity production and competition, in permanent and insoluble contradiction to this general environment. Nevertheless, like all monopoly, it inevitably engenders a tendency of stagnation and decay….Certainly, the possibility of reducing the cost of production and increasing profits by introducing technical improvements operates in the direction of change. But the tendency to stagnation and decay, which is characteristic of monopoly, continues to operate, and in some branches of industry, in some countries, for certain periods of time, it gains the upper hand…. imperialism is an immense accumulation of money capital in a few countries, amounting, as we have seen, to 100,000-50,000 million francs in securities. Hence the extraordinary growth of a class, or rather, of a stratum of rentiers, i.e., people who live by “clipping coupons”, who take no part in any enterprise whatever, whose profession is idleness. The export of capital, one of the most essential economic bases of imperialism, still more completely isolates the rentiers from production and sets the seal of parasitism on the whole country that lives by exploiting the labour of several overseas countries and colonies….
Imperialism….CH. 10… the bourgeoisie to an ever-increasing degree lives on the proceeds of capital exports and by “clipping coupons”. It would be a mistake to believe that this tendency to decay precludes the rapid growth of capitalism. It does not. In the epoch of imperialism, certain branches of industry, certain strata of the bourgeoisie and certain countries betray, to a greater or lesser degree, now one and now another of these tendencies. On the whole, capitalism is growing far more rapidly than before; but this growth is not only becoming more and more uneven in general, its unevenness also manifests itself, in particular, in the decay of the countries which are richest in capital….
….the tendency of imperialism to split the workers, to strengthen opportunism among them and to cause temporary decay in the working-class movement, revealed itself much earlier than the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries; for two important distinguishing features of imperialism were already observed in Great Britain in the middle of the nineteenth century—vast colonial possessions and a monopolist position in the world market. Marx and Engels traced this connection between opportunism in the working-class movement and the imperialist features of British capitalism systematically, during the course of several decades. For example, on October 7, 1858, Engels wrote to Marx: “The English proletariat is actually becoming more and more bourgeois, so that this most bourgeois of all nations is apparently aiming ultimately at the possession of a bourgeois aristocracy and a bourgeois proletariat alongside the bourgeoisie. For a nation which exploits the whole world this is of course to a certain extent justifiable.” Almost a quarter of a century later, in a letter dated August 11, 1881, Engels speaks of the “worst English trade unions which allow themselves to be led by men sold to, or at least paid by, the middle class”. In a letter to Kautsky, dated September 12, 1882, Engels wrote: “You ask me what the English workers think about colonial policy. Well, exactly the same as they think about politics in general. There is no workers’ party here, there are only Conservatives and Liberal-Radicals, and the workers gaily share the feast of England’s monopoly of the world market and the colonies.”  (Engels expressed similar ideas in the press in his preface to the second edition of The Condition of the Working Class in England, which appeared in 1892.)…
The distinctive feature of the present situation is the prevalence of such economic and political conditions that are bound to increase the irreconcilability between opportunism and the general and vital interests of the working-class movement: imperialism has grown from an embryo into the predominant system; capitalist monopolies occupy first place in economics and politics; the division of the world has been completed; on the other hand, instead of the undivided monopoly of Great Britain, we see a few imperialist powers contending for the right to share in this monopoly, and this struggle is characteristic of the whole period of the early twentieth century. Opportunism cannot now be completely triumphant in the working-class movement of one country for decades as it was in Britain in the second half of the nineteenth century; but in a number of countries it has grown ripe, overripe, and rotten, and has become completely merged with bourgeois policy in the form of “social-chauvinism”.