Post to the blog |
Edit your details |
Log in

Blog

From Regimes, to Production of Human Relations

Marie Lynam
28th December 2011 at 12:46
0 comments

I note that the left in general has retaken the notion of ‘regime’ as used by capitalism. But a regime is characterised by the particular relationship of a given ruling class with production - depending on the development of the productive forces. Libya and Irak were not Gaddafi’s or Saddam’s regimes. They were capitalist states in a process where capitalism - as a regime - had become historically incapable of building a new capitalist class. For a viable capitalist class to be born today, it needs to compete with the likes of the USA, or the EU. But the world has been carved out, already, precisely by the likes of the US and the EU. For development purposes, there was nowhere for the State of Iraq or Libya to go, but towards a transitional State no longer strictly capitalist and not yet a Workers State. J. Posadas characterised this as the Revolutionary State. The Revolutionary State highlights the total agony of capitalism, and its impotence. It must abandon corners of the world, because it can no longer reproduce itself overall, as a regime. It has only its military power to keep it on the scene. The corners and niches that it can no longer control are taken over by revolutionary humanity, in response to the need of the populations to continue to progress. These niches are utterly temporarily, as proven precisely by the fate of Iraq and Libya. But their fate under capitalist occupation itself is temporary. It depends on the military ability of world imperialism to maintain itself. One thing often forgotten is that military ability is dependent upon economic, social and cultural ability. Pure military ability is doomed, if it does not have a superior regime to offer.

The fate of the numerous countries today that leave capitalism without building Workers State (plenty of these in Latin America, including variants of this transition in Brazil and Argentina), depends on what Russia and China are going to do next.

Some of Revolutionary States (based on the existence of the Soviet Union and Cuba, like Mozambique, Ethiopia, Angola) were rolled back by capitalism when the USSR collapsed. The variant intermediate form that India had taken took a firm turn back into capitalism. But capitalism could not roll everything back, by a long chalk. Proof is Nepal, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua - and parts of Africa where capitalism has no other hope but to keep anarchy (Sudan, Congo, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Iv. Coast. On a world scale, the most capitalism can do for itself, is to keep Iraq, Haiti, Honduras, Afghanistan, Libya in anarchy. But this does not reproduce capitalism. It only helps it to stay on the scene, use its weapons and feed its monumentally speculative military economy.

Observe how China does not seem to end becoming capitalist. It does not become capitalist because there is no space for it in history to do so. Capitalism -controlled by the likes of the US and EU - leaves China no space. World capitalism as its stands presides over the world division of labour. It leaves no space for new-comers because it has not enough space for itself. It has carved out the world, sucked it, pillaged it, depleted it, causing billions to die. (Although it never misses a chance to accuse those who seek a way out of capitalism to create famines). Capitalism creates pockets of ‘growth’ in some parts of Africa or Asia, by investing some of their hot money, also called ‘overseas aid’, in one country or other. But capitalism needs another planet like Earth (see how it goes looking for one) to give some oxygen to its despicable regime of exploitation.

China goes on and on, and on and on, in a niche that is no longer the Workers State and not yet purely capitalist either. Such is the impasse world capitalism finds itself in. It is the historic impasse of capitalism. China has represented the opportunity for capitalism renew itself in history. Why can’t it manage it? This is why: In building the apparent prosperity of very few on the planet, capitalism has pillaged and exhausted the rest of the world. So much so that production and the ability to produce in capitalism are almost infinite, but the masses of the world cannot buy. What has brought ‘growth’ for a few capitalist countries has killed its markets. By the way, why should people BUY what they produce??

Inherent to a system of exploitation like capitalism is that it can conquer the world, but it cannot give it the means to buy. It has the military power, but it has not the means to reproduce its regime, unless it finds right away another 6 or 7 planets like Earth (and repeat its sordid story).

It would have been in the historic interest of capitalism to win China to capitalism. The most important single element that gives to China superiority over capitalism is its ability to command and control its economy.

Should the Chinese leadership - and the Chinese Communist leaders in particular - find the strength to maintain State control, they will have the ability to help defeat world capitalism. Should they give up, capitalism will throw itself upon China with all its military might and bomb it back to the Stone Age.

There is no reason to think capitalism is going to be allowed to inflict so much damage.
It is an exhausted regime, like all the regimes that went before it.
And like all the previous regimes that went before it, capitalism will fight tooth and nail to stay on the historic stage. But its ability is not mysteriously stronger than that of all the previous regimes. It is greater, due to science and technology, but science and technology form part of the ability of humanity, not just of capitalism.
Like all the previous regimes that came before it, capitalism will be overpowered, as it overpowered feudalism.

This time, the world economy that capitalism has already socialised and centralised will unify, because each of its part needs the other parts, because no part of it can exist without the others. And what holds all the parts of the world economy together is the uncontainable determination of humanity to return the seal of its creative-artistic humanity into everyone of its actions, today known as ‘work’.

Capitalism has lost the authority to determine that the progress of humanity should be defined by the economy, production and productivity. This is the significance of the Occupation Movements. People are already measuring progress in terms of the economy, the production and the productivity of the human relations.

Marie

Tags: for schools of politics and culture in the lrc (1)