
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Thursday, November 26, 2009
The Caracas Commitment

The Caracas Commitment
Declaration from World Meeting of Left Parties, November 19-21, Caracas, Venezuela
Political parties and organizations from Latin America, the Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Oceania commemorate and celebrate the unity and solidarity that brought us together in Caracas, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, and from this libertarian city we would like to express our revolutionary rebelliousness. We are glad of and committed to the proud presence of the forces of change in a special moment of history. Likewise, we are proud to reaffirm our conviction to definitively sow, grow and win Socialism of the 21st century.
In this regard, we want to sign the Commitment of Caracas as a revolutionary guide for the challenges ahead of us. We have gathered with the aim of unifying criteria and giving concrete answers that allow us to defend our sovereignty, our social victories, and the freedom of our peoples in the face of the generalized crisis of the world capitalist system and the new threats spreading over our region and the whole world with the establishment and strengthening of military bases in the sister republics of Colombia, Panama, Aruba, Curacao, the Dutch Antilles, as well as the aggression against Ecuadorian territory, and the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.
We consider that the world capitalist system is going through one of its most severe crises, which has shaken its very foundations and brought with it consequences that jeopardize the survival of humanity. Likewise, capitalism and the logic of capital, destroys the environment and biodiversity, bringing with it consequences of climate change, global warming and the destruction of life.
One of the epicentres of the capitalist crisis is in the economic domain; this highlights the limitations of unbridled free markets ruled by private monopolies. In this situation, some governments have been asked to intervene to prevent the collapse of vital economic sectors, for instance, through the implementation of bailouts to bank institutions that amount to hundreds of billions of dollars. Said governments have been asked to stimulate their economies by increasing public expenditure in order to mitigate the recession and the private sector decline, which evidences the end of the supposedly irrefutable “truth” of neo-liberalism that of non-intervention of the State in economic affairs.
In this regard, it is very timely to promote an in-depth discussion on the economic crisis, the role of the State and the construction of a new financial architecture.
In summary, the capitalist crisis cannot be reduced simply to a financial crisis; it is a structural crisis of capital which combines the economic crisis, with an ecological crisis, a food crisis, and an energy crisis, which together represents a mortal threat to humanity and mother earth. Faced with this crisis, left-wing movements and parties see the defence of nature and the construction of an ecologically sustainable society as a fundamental axis of our struggle for a better world.
In recent years, progressive and left-wing movements of the Latin American region have accumulated forces, and stimulated transformations, throwing up leaders that today hold important government spaces. This has represented an important blow to the empire because the peoples have rebelled against the domination that has been imposed on them, and have left behind their fear to express their values and principles, showing the empire that we will not allow any more interference in our internal affairs, and that we are willing to defend our sovereignty.
This meeting is held at a historic time, characterized by a new imperialistic offensive against the peoples and governments of the region and of the world, a pretension supported by the oligarchies and ultraconservative right-wing, with the objective of recovering spaces lost as a consequence of the advancement of revolutionary process of liberation developing in Latin America. These are expressed through the creation of regional organizations such as ALBA, UNASUR, PETROCARIBE, Banco del Sur, the Sao Paulo Forum, COPPPAL, among others; where the main principles inspiring these processes are those of solidarity, complementarity, social priority over economic advantage, respect for self-determination of the peoples in open opposition to the policies of imperial domination. For these reasons, the right-wing forces in partnership with the empire have launched an offensive to combat the advance and development of the peoples’ struggles, especially those against the overexploitation of human beings, racist discrimination, cultural oppression, in defence of natural resources, of the land and territory from the perspective of the left and progressive movements and of world transformation.
We reflect on the fact that these events have led the U.S administration to set strategies to undermine, torpedo and destabilize the advancement of these processes of change and recuperation of sovereignty. To this end, the US has implemented policies expressed through an ideological and media offensive that aim to discredit the revolutionary and progressive governments of the region, labelling them as totalitarian governments, violators of human rights, with links to drug-trafficking operations, and terrorism; and also questioning the legitimacy of their origin. This is the reason for the relentless fury with which all the empire’s means of propaganda and its agents inside our own countries continuously attack the experiences in Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and Paraguay, as with its maintenance of the blockade against revolutionary and independent Cuba.
Part of the strategy activated by the U.S. Empire is evidenced by the coup in Honduras, as well as in other destabilizing initiatives in Central America, attempting to impose the oligarchic interests that have already left hundreds of victims, while a disgusting wave of cynicism tries to cover up the dictatorship imposed by the U.S. administration with a false veil of democracy. Along with this, it is developing a military offensive with the idea of maintaining political and military hegemony in the region, for which it is promoting new geopolitical allies, generating destabilization and disturbing peace in the region and globally through military intimidation, with the help of its allies in the internal oligarchies, who are shown to be complicit in the actions taken by the empire, giving away their sovereignty, and opening spaces for the empire’s actions.
We consider that this new offensive is specifically expressed through two important events that took place this year in the continent: The coup in Honduras, and the installation of military bases in Colombia and Panama, as well as the strengthening of the already existing ones in our region. The coup in Honduras is nothing but a display of hypocrisy by the empire, a way to intimidate the rest of the governments in the region. It is a test-laboratory that aims to set a precedent that can be applied as a new coup model and a way to encourage the right to plot against the transformational and independent processes.
We denounce the military agreement between the Colombian government and the United States administration strengthens the U.S.’s military strategy, whose contents are expressed in the so-called “White Book”. This confirms that the development of the agreement will guarantee a projection of continental and intercontinental military power, the strengthening of transportation capability and air mobility to guarantee the improvement of its action capability, in order to provide the right conditions to have access to energy sources. It also consolidates its political partnership with the regional oligarchy for the control of Colombian territory and its projection in the Andes and in the rest of South America. All this scaffolding and consolidation of military architecture entails a serious threat for peace in the region and the world.
The installation of military bases in the region and their interrelation with the different bases spread throughout the world is not only confined to the military sphere, but rather forms part of the establishment of a general policy of domination and expansion directed by the U.S. These bases constitute strategic points to dominate all the countries in Central and Latin America and the rest of the world.
The treaty for the installation of military bases in Colombia is preceded by Plan Colombia, which was already an example of U.S. interference in the affairs of Colombia and the region using the fight against drug trafficking and terrorism as an excuse. However, it has been shown that drug trafficking levels have increased in Colombia; therefore, the plan is no longer justified given that no favourable results have been obtained since its implementation, that would justify a new treaty with the U.S.
Today, the global strategy headed by the U.S. concerning drug trafficking is a complete failure. Its results are summarised by a rapid processes of accumulation of illegal capital, increased consumption of drugs and exacerbation of criminality, whose victims are the peoples of Latin America, especially the Colombian people. This strategy should be revisited and modified, and should be oriented towards a different logic that focuses on drug consumption as a public health issue. In Colombia, drug trafficking has assumed the form of paramilitarism, and turned into a political project the scope of which and persons responsible should be investigated so that the truth is known, so that justice prevails and the terror of the civilian population ceases.
We, the peoples of the world, declare that we will not give up the spaces we have managed to conquer after years of struggle and resistance; and we commit ourselves to regain those which have been taken from us. Therefore, we need to defend the processes of change and the unfolding revolutions since they are based on sovereign decisions made by the peoples.
AGREEMENTS
1. MOBILIZATION AND CONDEMNATION OF U.S. MILITARY BASES
1.1. To organize global protests against the U.S. military bases from December 12th to 17th, 2009. Various leftwing parties and social movements will promote forums, concerts, protest marches and any other creative activity within the context of this event.
1.2. To establish a global mobilization front for the political denouncement of the U.S. military bases. This group will be made up by social leaders, left-wing parties, lawmakers, artists, among others, who will visit different countries with the aim of raising awareness in forums, press conferences and news and above all in gatherings with each country’s peoples.
1.3. To organize students, young people, workers and women in order to establish a common agenda of vigilance and to denounce against the military bases throughout the world.
1.4. To organize a global legal forum to challenge the installation of the U.S. military bases. This forum is conceived as a space for the condemnation of illegalities committed against the sovereignty and self-determination of the peoples and the imposition of a hegemonic imperialist model.
1.5. To organise a global trial against paramilitarism in Colombia bringing testimonies and evidence to international bodies of justice.
1.6. To promote a global trial against George Bush for crimes against humanity, as the person principally responsible for the genocide against the peoples of Iraq and Afghanistan.
1.7. To promote a campaign for the creation of constitutional and legal provisions in all of our countries against the installation of military bases and deployment of nuclear weapons of mass destruction.
1.8. To promote, from the different social organizations and movements of the countries present in this meeting, a political solution for the Colombian conflict.
1.9. To organise solidarity with the Colombian people against the imperial aggression that the military bases entail in Colombian territory.
2. INSTALLATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF A PLATFORM OF JOINT ACTION BY LEFT-WING PARTIES OF THE WORLD
2.1. To establish a space of articulation of progressive and left-wing organizations and parties that allows for coordinating policies against the aggression towards the peoples, the condemnation of the aggressions against governments elected democratically, the installation of military bases, the violation of sovereignty and against xenophobia, the defence of immigrants’ rights, peace, and the environment, and peasant, labour, indigenous and afro-descendent movements.
2.2. To set up a Temporary Executive Secretariat (TES) that allows for the coordination of a common working agenda, policy making, and follow-up on the agreements reached within the framework of this international encounter. Said Secretariat undertakes to inform about relevant events in the world, and to define specific action plans: statements, declarations, condemnations, mobilizations, observations and other issues that may be decided.
2.3. To set up an agenda of permanent ideological debate on the fundamental aspects of the process of construction of socialism.
2.4. To prepare common working agendas with participation from Latin America, Europe, Africa, Asia and Oceania.
2.5. To organize solidarity of the people’s of the world with the Bolivarian revolution and President Hugo Chávez, in response to the constant imperial attacks.
2.6. To commemorate the centenary of Clara Zetkin’s proposal to celebrate March 8th as the International Day of Women. The parties undertake to celebrate this day insofar as possible.
2.7. To summon a meeting to be held in Caracas in April 2010 in commemoration of the bicentenary of our Latin American and Caribbean independences.
3. ORGANIZATION OF A WORLD MOVEMENT OF MILITANTS FOR A CULTURE OF PEACE
3.1. To promote the establishment of peace bases, by peace supporters, who will coordinate actions and denouncements against interventionism and war sponsored by imperialism through activities such as: forums, cultural events, and debates to promote the ethical behaviour of anti-violence, full participation in social life, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, acknowledgement of the cultural identities of our peoples and strengthening the framework of integration. This space seeks to raise awareness among all citizens in rejection of all forms of domination, internal or external intervention, and to reinforce the culture of peace. To struggle relentlessly for a world with no nuclear weapons, no weapons of mass destruction, no military bases, no foreign interference, and no economic blockades, as our peoples need peace and are absolutely entitled to attain development. Promote the American continent as a territory of peace, home to the construction of a free and sovereign world.
3.2. To organize a Peace Parliament as a political space to exchange common endeavours among the world’s progressive and left-wing parliamentarians, and to know the historical, economic, legal, political and environmental aspects key for the defence of peace. Hereby we recommend holding the first meeting in February 2010.
4. ARTILLERY OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION TO EMANCIPATE REVOLUTIONARY CONSCIOUSNESS
4.1. To discuss a public communication policy at an inter-regional level that aims to improve the media battle, and to convey the values of socialism among the peoples.
4.2. To promote the creation and consolidation of alternative and community communication media to break the media siege, promote an International Alternative Left-wing Media Coordination Office that creates links to provide for improved information exchange among our countries, in which Telesur and Radiosur can be spearheads for this action.
4.3. To create a website of all of the progressive and left-wing parties and movements in the world as a means to ensure permanent exchange and the development of an emancipating and alternative communication.
4.4. To promote a movement of artists, writers and filmmakers to promote and develop festivals of small, short and full-length films that reflects the advancement and the struggle of peoples in revolution.
4.5. To hold a meeting or international forum of alternative left-wing media.
5. MOBILIZE ALL POPULAR ORGANIZATIONS IN UNRESTRICTED SUPPORT FOR THE PEOPLE OF HONDURAS
5.1. To promote an international trial against the coup plotters in Honduras before the International Criminal Court for the abuses and crimes committed.
5.2. Refuse to recognize the illegal electoral process they aim to carry out in Honduras.
5.3. To carry out a world vigil on Election Day in Honduras in order to protest against the intention to legitimize the coup, coordinated by the permanent committee that emerges from this encounter.
5.4. To coordinate the actions of left-wing parties worldwide to curb the imperialist pretensions of using the coup in Honduras as a strategy against the Latin American and Caribbean progressive processes and governments.
5.5. To unite with the people of Honduras through a global solidarity movement for people’s resistance and for the pursuit of democratic and participatory paths that allow for the establishment of progressive governments committed to common welfare and social justice.
5.6. To undertake actions geared towards denouncing before multilateral bodies, and within the framework of international law, the abduction of José Manuel Zelaya, legitimate President of Honduras, that facilitated the rupture of constitutional order in Honduras. It is necessary to determine responsibility among those who participated directly in this crime, and even among those who allowed his aircraft to go in and out Costa Rica without trying to detain the kidnappers of the Honduran president.
6. SOLIDARITY WITH THE PEOPLES OF THE WORLD
6.1. The Left-wing Parties of the International Meeting of Caracas agree to demand the immediate liberation of the five Cuban heroes unfairly imprisoned in American jails. They are authentic anti-terrorist fighters that caused no harm to U.S. national security, whose work was oriented towards preventing the terrorist attacks prepared by the terrorist counterrevolution against Cuba. The Five Heroes were subject to a biased judicial process, condemned by broad sectors of humanity, and stigmatized by a conspiracy of silence by the mainstream media. Given the impossibility of winning justice via judicial means, we call upon all political left-wing parties of the world to increase actions for their immediate liberation. We call on President Obama to utilize his executive power and set these Five Heroes of Humanity free.
6.2. The International Meeting of Left-wing Parties resolutely demands the immediate and unconditional cessation of the criminal U.S. blockade that harmed the Cuban people so badly over the last fifty years. The blockade should come to an end right now in order to fulfil the will of the 187 countries that recently declared themselves against this act of genocide during the UN General Assembly.
6.3. To unite with the people of Haiti in the struggle for the return of President Jean Bertrand Aristide to his country.
6.4. We propose to study the possibility to grant a residence in Venezuela to Jean Bertrand Aristide, who was kidnapped and overthrown as Haiti’s president by U.S. imperialism.
6.5. We express the need to declare a permanent alert aimed at preventing any type of breach of the constitutional order that may hinder the process of democratic change underway in Paraguay.
6.6. We denounce the neoliberal privatizing advance in Mexico expressly in the case of the Electric Energy state-owned company, a heritage of the people, which aims through the massive firing of 45 000 workers to intimidate the union force, “Luz y Fuerza”, which constitutes another offensive of the Empire in Central and North America.
6.7. To declare our solidarity with the peoples of the world that have suffered and are still suffering imperial aggressions, especially, the 50 year-long genocidal blockade against Cuba; the threat against the people of Paraguay; the slaughter of the Palestinian people; the illegal occupation of part of the territory of the Republic of Western Sahara and the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan which today is expanding into Pakistan; the illegal sanctions imposed against Zimbabwe and the constant threat against Iran, among others.
Caracas, November 21st, 2009
DECLARATION OF SOLIDARITY WITH THE PEOPLE OF CUBA
The Left-wing Parties of the International Meeting of Caracas agree to demand the immediate liberation of the five Cuban heroes unfairly imprisoned in U.S. prisons. They are authentic anti-terrorist fighters that caused no harm to US national security, whose work was oriented towards preventing the terrorist attacks prepared by the terrorist counterrevolution against Cuba. The Five Heroes were subject to a biased judicial process, condemned by broad sectors of humanity, and stigmatized by a conspiracy of silence by the mainstream media.
Given the impossibility of winning justice via judicial means, we call upon all political left-wing parties of the world to increase actions for their immediate liberation. We call on President Obama to utilize his executive power and set these Five Heroes of Humanity free.
The International Meeting of Left-wing Parties resolutely demands the immediate and unconditional cessation of the criminal U.S. blockade that harmed the Cuban people so badly over the last fifty years. The blockade should come to an end right now in order to fulfil the will of the 187 countries that recently declared themselves against this act of genocide during the UN General Assembly.
Caracas, November 21st, 2009
SPECIAL DECLARATION ON THE COUP D’ÉTAT IN HONDURAS
We, left-wing parties of Latin America, Africa, Europe, Asia and Oceania, present in the international encounter of left-wing parties, reject the coup d’état against the constitutional government of citizen’s power of the President of Honduas Manuel Zelaya Rosales.
Cognizant of the situation of repression, persecution and murder against the Honduran people and the permanent military harassment against president Manuel Zelaya Rosales, which represents a breach of the rule of law in the sister nation of Honduras:
We support the actions of the national resistance front in its struggle to restore democracy.
We demand and support the sovereign right of the Honduran people to call for a national constituent assembly to establish direct democracy and to ensure the broadest political participation of the people in public affairs.
We denounce the United States intervention and its national and international reactionary right-wing allies and their connection with the coup, which hinders the construction of democracy in Honduras and in the world.
We condemn and repudiate the permanent violation of political and social human rights as well as the violation freedom of speech, promoted and perpetrated by the de facto powers, the Supreme Court of Justice, the National Congress of the Republic, the Ministry of Defence and Security since June 28, 2009.
We reiterate our demand to international governments and bodies, not to recognize the results of the general elections to be held on November 29, 2009 in Honduras, due to the lack of constitutional guarantees and the legal conditions necessary for a fair, transparent and reliable electoral process, the lack of reliable observers that can vouch for the results of this electoral process, which has already been rejected by most international governments, bodies and international public opinion.
To propose and promote an international trial against coup plotters and their accomplices in Honduras before the International Criminal Court, for the illegal actions, abuses and crimes they committed, while developing actions aimed at denouncing to the relevant bodies and in the framework of the international law, the violation of the rights and the kidnapping of the legitimate president of Honduras Manuel Zelaya Rosales, because it is necessary to establish the responsibility of those who participated directly and internally in the perpetration of this crime.
We urge national and international human rights organizations to support these measures, to carry on the campaign of denunciation and vigilance with permanent observers in face of the renewed human rights violations, particularly the persecution and sanction through the loss of jobs for political reasons against the members and supporters of the resistance and president Manuel Zelaya.
We repudiate and condemn the attacks against the diplomatic corps of the embassies of the Federative Republic of Brazil and the Republic of Argentina, and the embassies of the member countries of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of our America (ALBA); and express our solidarity with the heroic work of the staff of these diplomatic missions, who have been victims of harassment and hostility by the coup plotters.
We agree to establish coordination among left-wing parties of the world to exert pressure to oust the de facto government and for the restoration of the constitutional president and the right of the Honduran people to install a national constituent assembly that allows for deepening direct democracy.
We urge governments, international bodies and companies to maintain and intensify economic and commercial sanctions to business accomplices and supporters of the coup in Honduras, and to maintain an attitude of vigilance, to break all relations that recognize the coup plotters and the de facto government officers, as well as to take migration control measures that hinder the movement of people who have the purpose of voting in another country where elections are held with the aim of changing the results through the transfer of votes from one country to the other.
We agree not to recognize the international and national observers of the
electoral process who are aligned and conspire to attempt to give legitimacy to an
electoral process devoid of legality and legitimacy. We demand that rather than
observing an illegal and illegitimate process, the return of the state of democratic law and the constitutional government of citizen power Honduras President Manuel Zelaya Rosales is guaranteed.
Caracas, November 21st, 2009
SPECIAL DECISION
The international encounter of Left-wing Political parties held in Caracas on November 19, 20 and 21, 2009, recieved the proposal made by Commander Hugo Chavez Frias to convoke the V Socialist International as a space for socialist-oriented parties, movements and currents in which we can harmonize a common strategy for the struggle against imperialism, the overthrow of capitalism by socialism and solidarity based economic integration of a new type. We assessed that proposition in terms of its historical dimension which calls for a new spirit of internationalism and agreed, for the purpose of achieving it in the short term, to create a WORKING GROUP comprised of those socialist parties, currents and social movements who endorse the initiative, to prepare an agenda which defines the objectives, contents and mechanisms of this global revolutionary body. We call for an initial constitutive event for April 2010 in the City of Caracas. Furthermore, those parties, socialist currents and social movements who have not expressed themselves on this matter can subject this proposal to the examination of their legitimate directive bodies.
Caracas, November 21, 2009
Saturday, November 7, 2009
The last revolutionary
The last revolutionaryFidel Castro has survived 600 assassination attempts to become the world symbol of anti-capitalism. His sister has just confessed she used to spy on him, the US embargo stands, and his health is failing, yet still he endures.
On 11 February 1981, President Ronald Reagan wrote in his diary that "intelligence reports say Castro is very worried about me . . . I'm very worried that we can't come up with something to justify his worrying." Reagan's concern has been the concern of all US presidents since Fidel Castro took power in Cuba in 1959, and set about establishing a communist state just 90 miles across the water from Miami. In response to the emergence of Castro, the US sent the CIA in to Cuba and put in place a trade embargo. So began one of the longest political stalemates of modern history.
It is remarkable today how little between the two countries has changed - as recent events remind us. First, Juanita Castro, the estranged sister of Fidel and Raúl, revealed that she herself had been a CIA spy before fleeing to Mexico in 1964. Then, on 28 October, the UN General Assembly in New York took its 18th consecutive annual vote to highlight international opposition to the US embargo, a vote that Washington chose once again to ignore. Some suspected that Juanita's revelations may have been timed to influence the vote, because it was feared that President Obama's promise to extend the hand of friendship to America's old enemies might make him the first US president to change policy on Cuba.
For now, that seems unlikely. But if Cuban relations with the US finally begin to thaw during the Obama presidency, Fidel Castro - if he lives to see it - will have overcome every US attempt to destroy him.
When Juanita defected in 1964, she took 21 suitcases with her. It is unlikely she would have had so many to take today. Fifty years of sanctions have impoverished Cuba, a country that under the acting president, Raúl Castro, remains defiantly socialist 20 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. A half-century of Fidel Castro's personal rule has left a profound mark. It was in 1953 that Fidel Castro - a 26-year-old lawyer from a landowning family - first came to the wider attention of the island his revolution would later engulf. Stalin had just died and the first colour television sets were about to go on sale in the US. On 26 July he masterminded an attack on the Moncada Barracks, one of the military installations of the dictator Fulgencio Batista, situated in Castro's home town of Santiago de Cuba.
The attack failed, but Cubans were astounded by the audacity of what amounted to an attempted coup carried out by men with pea-shooter rifles and mock military uniforms. Castro's final speech to the court, before being sentenced to 15 years in prison for his part in the failed coup, was to become his working political platform: a programme of economic and social empowerment, threaded into the historical struggle of Cubans for independence from foreign powers.
With the speech worked up under the title of its ringing final line - "Condemn me, it does not matter, history will absolve me!" - it is the sentiment as much as the substance of this document that has been the most consistent element of Castro's political philosophy since he came to power in 1959.
As peritonitis forced him to hand the presidency to his brother Raúl in February 2008, Fidel Castro, who is 83, is no longer his country's official leader. But little of substance is decided in Cuba without his being consulted and he remains the most controversial politician in postwar Latin America, the inspiration if not the figurehead for a new wave of leftist Latin leaders: Lula in Brazil, the Kirchners in Argentina, Tabaré Vázquez in Uruguay and Evo Morales in Bolivia. Loathed by many but adored by many more, Castro has embodied more than any other George Bernard Shaw's maxim that "the secret to success is to offend the greatest number of people". He has survived more than 600 assassination attempts by the CIA to become the consummate world symbol of anti-capitalism.
“President of the Council of State, President of the Council of Ministers, Commander-in-Chief of the Army and First Secretary of the Communist Party of Cuba" - Castro's full title at the height of his authority reveals the full sweep of his powers. A modern version of the 19th-century caudillo, he has ruled his country "like a large family", as one biographer generously puts it. In reality, Cuba is a country that, like his own family, has endured painful splits on his behalf.
Castro has long attempted to keep his personal and political lives distinct. He met his second wife, Dalia Soto del Valle, in 1961, but Cubans have heard little of her since; they live in a secured enclave outside Havana. What Cubans have heard about, like the rest of the world, is the literacy campaign Castro was working on when he met her. This campaign is perhaps Castro's greatest single achievement, representing the very best that the Cuban Revolution could achieve: the revolt was always a social movement far broader than simply guerrilleros with beards and green fatigues.This and other large-scale social programmes, such as urban reforms to boost home ownership in the cities, and land redistribution in the countryside, for a while made the Cuban Revolution, and Castro with it, the inspiration of the European and American left. In 1960, Allen Ginsberg welcomed Castro to New York in a springy-haired embrace. The same year, Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir visited Cuba to witness the change. "For the first time we were witnessing happiness that had been attained by violence," they declared.
Such is the paradox of Castro, however, that just as his literacy campaign was being rolled out across the country, a film showing Cubans out on the town in Havana prompted the imposition of severe state censorship. Castro's Words to the Intellectuals were delivered in the summer of 1961 in the auditorium of the national library, which was decked out more like a courtroom than a place of scholarship. That day Castro set out a formula which has been used ever since to censor writers and intellectuals: "Within the revolution everything. Without the revolution, nothing."
The revolution continued to harden throughout the early 1960s, as a more stringent party line was established in workplaces and Committees for the Defence of the Revolution were set up to report on "unrevolutionary" behaviour. As a result, many western intellectuals (including Sartre and de Beauvoir) rejected the Cuban Revolution. Castro argued then, and has continued to do so, that they turned away because they did not understand the reality of Cuba or of Cubans, just as they did not understand Latin America in general. Castro, by contrast, has always believed that he has an inimitable capacity for understanding his people. For him, telling the Cuban intellectuals what to write was no different from teaching the peasants how to read: both were useful to the extent they served society.
The Colombian writer Gabriel GarcÃa Márquez, winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1982, has written of his friend Castro's "love of the word" as being one of his most noble characteristics. But Márquez is nearer to the truth when he says that "one thing is certain: wherever he may be, however and with whomever, Fidel Castro is there to win". For Castro, words are weapons, "arrows stuck in the rough hide of reality", as Susan Sontag put it. And he is invariably careful to match his words with actions. When, during a speech in 1960, Castro revoked the Mutual Aid Treaty signed between Cuba and the US in 1952, he literally tore up the treaty in front of a crowd. A careful strategist as much as he is a performer, he did so safe in the knowledge that by then US-Cuban relations were broken beyond repair.
Castro went on to expropriate nearly all US-owned land and utilities in Cuba, precipitating the disastrous backlash overseen by John F Kennedy at the Bay of Pigs in 1961, when more than 1,000 CIA-trained mercenary troops (exiled Cubans) were defeated by the Cuban army. The Bay of Pigs debacle was also prompted by Kennedy's fears that Cuba was becoming a communist state in America's own backyard. But it was not yet obvious - least of all to the Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev - that Castro would make his revolution along Soviet lines.
In fact, the great problem shaping the revolution in the early 1960s was that Cuba's relations with the US were severed before Castro had the full support of the Soviet Union. This became painfully clear to the Cubans in the resolution to the missile crisis of October 1962 when Khrushchev and Kennedy agreed on peace terms that Castro believed left Cuba's independence compromised. In the months that followed, Castro challenged Khrushchev in a way no other socialist leader would have done.
Over the following years his attempts to smuggle arms to myriad guerrilla movements in Latin America (he even provided secret training camps for them in the Cuban countryside) further antagonised the Soviets because of the way that it appeared - at the time of the Sino-Soviet split - to follow the approach of Chairman Mao more than Khrushchev.
It took the west even longer than Khrushchev to understand that Castro rejected Cuba's position as a Soviet client state. From the beginning of the revolution, he envisaged Cuba as an independent nation before it was a part of the communist fraternity. His vision (like that of Che Guevara) was of a solidarity of the small, of alliances with other would-be revolutionary nations. He exercised this directly with Algeria before the overthrow of that country's leftist leader Ahmed Ben Bella in 1965, and again in 1975 when he sent troops to the newly independent Angola, under the socialist MPLA, to help combat an invasion by the then apartheid South Africa.
Unlike most other revolutionary leaders, Castro has been able to adapt and reinvent himself to suit different circumstances. He led his country through a kind of perestroika avant la lettre in the 1980s. In 1995, at the height of the economic troubles that befell Cuba after the break-up of the Soviet Union, he appeared at the UN General Assembly wearing a dark suit and tie rather than the military fatigues of the previous three decades. It was the clearest possible statement that Cuba was now open to the world for business.
Yet Castro has never relinquished his commitment to revolutionary internationalism. By the mid-1980s, he had begun exporting doctors and health professionals around the world, particularly to beleaguered countries such as Haiti, East Timor and black South Africa. Today there are still more than 40,000 Cuban medical personnel working in different countries, more than the G8 countries combined provide. The greatest number of them work in Venezuela, where, since 2005, President Hugo Chávez has returned the favour by providing Cuba with oil.
The Castro-Chávez axis is undoubtedly Cuba's most important international alliance. Chávez allows Castro to keep the socialist flame alight in Cuba. Since the fall of Soviet communism, Castro's refusal to abide more fully by the rules of the international system has frustrated western leaders who have quietly hoped that Cuba would go the route of Vietnam and implement a form of soft socialism with markets. Today, the global financial crisis puts a different spin on Cuba's commitment to a fully socialist economy: even the London-based New Economics Foundation recognises Cuba as an example of how to survive through the "triple-crunch" of credit, climate and energy crises.
The country is obviously no socialist utopia. Through the long years since the revolution, the disaffected have attempted to escape across the Florida Straits to the US. In 1980, around 125,000 Cubans took to the waters from the Cuban port of Mariel, when, angered by Jimmy Carter's attempt to encourage asylum-seekers at Havana's embassies, Fidel opened the exit for five months, ensuring that anyone he didn't want around had every opportunity to use it.
So, Castro has survived because of his ruthlessness. But perhaps the greater reason for his survival is the sheer adversity that Cuba has had to confront and Castro's efforts to overcome it. We all know about the damage that Hurricane Katrina inflicted on the southern United States in 2005; but the three storms that ripped through Cuba last summer caused an estimated $10bn of damage, yet have been largely forgotten by the wider world. Castro has responded effectively to such disasters, in stark contrast to the way that George W Bush reacted to Hurricane Katrina, for example. In addition, Cubans under Castro have rid their island of many infectious diseases, avoided the development of the slums that have blighted cities across mainland Latin America and - for all its flaws - have entrenched an active network of participatory organisations.
Seeking over the years to go even further than this, Castro has unleashed a veritable plague of schemes on his people. Among his most ambitious projects were his plans, soon after coming to power, to drain the swamps of Ciénaga de Zapata on the southern coast and turn them into prime agricultural land. In that instance, his careful investigation of the scheme afforded him an acute understanding of the area where the Bay of Pigs invasion took place, and was one reason for the subsequent Cuban victory there.
But perhaps Cuba's most unlikely achievement has also grown out of another Castro obsession: a world-renowned biotechnology industry that has so far produced vaccines against Hepatitis B, meningitis and certain forms of cancer, and continues to work on developing an effective HIV vaccine.These realities undermine a common misrepresentation of Castro's rule as unchanging and absolute. This is how he has long been portrayed by his supporters and enemies alike. Cuban exiles in Miami concentrate on the cult of Castro's personality, in the hope that 50 years of Cuban socialism will be erased at the same time as Fidel, while those defending the revolution from Havana like to portray the leaders and party members as the sole agents of change. Little is said about how Castro's grip on power has, at times, been under significant domestic pressure. This was most spectacularly witnessed in 1994, when he was forced to appear before crowds that had begun to riot in the poorest districts of Centro Habana. But what is misunderstood, too, is just how popular Cuba's variant of socialism is among ordinary Cubans.
If Fidel Castro is one of modern history's great political survivors, it is an achievement that he must ultimately share with his people. Because of him and the revolution, they enjoy substantial rights to health and education, a vibrant culture and remarkably solid communities. But thanks also to Castro, they have been given very little room to breathe outside the officially sanctioned life.
As for Castro himself, the aged and ailing guerrilla fights on. He has a new slogan, too: “A better world is possible." Time will tell if the terms of that world are something that he, his brother Raúl and Barack Obama will be able to agree on.
Simon Reid-Henry is director of the Centre for Global Security and Development at Queen Mary, University of London, and the author of "Fidel and Che: a Revolutionary Friendship", published by Sceptre (£8.99)
The revolutionary road
Fidel’s defining moments
1926: Castro is born in MayarÃ, Oriente Province, eastern Cuba. Attends local Jesuit schools in Santiago de Cuba before studying at Belén, the elite high school in Havana.
1945: Enrols in the faculty of law at the University of Havana. Travels to Bogotá in Colombia in 1948 (paid for by Argentina's Juan Perón) to protest against the first meeting of the US-supported Organisation of American States. Takes part in the Bogotazo, the riots widely seen as the beginning of Colombia's slide into civil war.
1953: Having tried the life of a lawyer, Castro embarks on his revolutionary career, masterminding an audacious attack on a military barracks in Santiago de Cuba. He is sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment at the notorious Isle of Pines penitentiary.
1955: Castro and his fellow rebels are released from prison under an amnesty agreement. He immediately begins agitating for change and within months is forced to flee to Mexico. Soon afterwards, he meets Ernesto ("Che") Guevara and puts together a rebel army in exile.
1959: After two years of fighting in the Sierra Maestra Mountains of Cuba, the rebel army marches victorious into Havana. Many are shocked at the executions that follow and large numbers of the Cuban middle and upper classes leave for the United States.
1962: Castro's turn to the Soviet Union, after being pushed away by Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy, precipitates the Cuban missile crisis. A nuclear confrontation is narrowly avoided with a last-minute deal between Nikita Khrushchev and Kennedy. It leaves Cuba officially a Soviet satellite state, but feeling more vulnerable to US attack than before.
1970: Emulating the spirit of his recently slain comrade Che Guevara, Castro goads all Cubans to help produce the largest sugar harvest (the island's staple crop) the island has ever achieved. It fails calamitously, disrupting industrial development throughout the economy.
1976: Castro consolidates Cuba's incorporation into the Soviet bloc by passing a new socialist constitution, modelled on the Soviet bloc countries. Amended in the early 1990s to allow for foreign investment, it was affirmed as irrevocable in a controversial vote in 2002.
1986: Castro begins what is known in Cuba as the process of rectification, abandoning the Soviet reform model before the collapse of communism and recentralising parts of the economy, while opening the system up to internal review and revitalisation.
1989: Castro orders the execution of General Arnaldo Ochoa, a comrade from the revolutionary war, and one of Cuba's most respected senior military officers. Ochoa, along with three other prominent military figures, was accused of corruption and drug trafficking. Despite considerable dispute about the accusations levelled at Ochoa, no appeal was countenanced. Rumour has it Ochoa asked not to be blindfolded and gave the order to fire himself.
1990: With the fall of the Soviet Union, Cuba loses 80 per cent of its export markets and suffers a major economic decline. By August, Castro declares the "Special Period in Time of Peace": a period of austerity measures and rationing to help ensure the survival of his regime. The country begins to promote tourism and biotechnology alongside sugar as part of a national industrial survival strategy.
1998: In a move that grabs headlines around the world, Castro welcomes Pope John Paul II to Cuba, despite having marginalised the Catholic Church in the 1960s and tolerated discrimination against practising believers until the early 1990s.
1999: Castro once again stirs up tense relations between Cuba and the Cuban-exile community in the United States by insisting that the young rafter ElÃan González, whose mother died in their attempt to flee Cuba for the US by boat, must be returned to his father in Cuba. An international legal wrangle, mirroring one Castro himself had fought in the 1950s over his own son, is eventually settled when US immigration authorities, acting on behalf of the Supreme Court, seize ElÃan and return him to Cuba.
2003: In what becomes known as Black Spring, Castro has 75 dissidents imprisoned, including 29 journalists, precipitating sanctions from the European Union.
2007: Taken ill with peritonitis, an infection caused by cavities in the abdominal wall.
2008: At the age of 81, having not appeared in public for well over a year, Castro cedes power to his brother Raúl in February.
2009: Castro makes a reappearance on video in August, talking to a group of students and looking healthier. On 27 October the World Health Organisation director, Margaret Chan, after meeting with the Cuban leader, reports him to be "very dynamic".
Monday, September 21, 2009
Peace without Borders Concert in Cuba



Havana, Sep 20 (Prensa Latina) The Revolution Square is expected to become a seething mass of people Sunday afternoon, with peace and music as leitmotiv for a unique five-hour concert by Colombian Juanes and 14 other artists, who will perform for 11 million Cubans. Its identity seal is "Peace without Borders," the name of this Juanes' project first materialized on the Colombian border in 2008 and now in Havana.For his dream to become a reality, Juanes had to face aggressions and strong criticism from the most recalcitrant sectors in Miami.It is a dream that beat fear to emerge stronger. This way to Cuba has helped me understand many things. There will be a Juanes before and after this concert. The Juanes after Cuba is the one I want to be, he told Prensa Latina.The enormous perimeter of the Revolution Square, linked to the history and life of Cubans, is an enviable open-air scene, with 12 cameras on different brackets to facilitate better images and a sort of dialogue between artists and audience, with music as a communicating bridge.A sound test was carried out on Saturday, with musicians expressing satisfaction for the hard work done by technicians, engineers and specialists from several countries, including a US technician, who has been in charge of mounting a giant screen for the audience to be able to follow details of the concert from any angle of the Square.I think we have to be there, and not only in Cuba, but also in Ecuador, Mexico, everywhere, always remembering that we can no longer let them divide us, stressed Juanes.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
High Tech, Low Pay

_01.jpg)
How changes in capitalist cycle
have impacted workers
Following are excerpts from a new introduction to the book “High Tech, Low Pay.” This ground-breaking work by Sam Marcy, written in 1986 during the early stages of capitalist restructuring, has long been out of print but will soon be reissued. Fred Goldstein, author of “Low-Wage Capitalism: Colossus with Feet of Clay,” wrote the introduction for the new book.
The workers & the business cycle
One of Marcy’s concerns was to show how the capitalist business cycle put limits upon what the workers could get and what they would have to give up, so long as they accepted the traditional capital-labor relationship. This problem becomes extremely aggravated during the downturn part of the cycle or the “bust” part of the boom-and-bust, which he took up in Chapter 3.
When Marcy wrote this book, the working class had recently lived through the sharp recession of 1980-1982. Official unemployment reached a post-World War II high of 11 percent. The bosses used the recession to demand concessions and carry out restructuring. The unions were thrust onto the defensive. During a downturn, the bosses shrink production and there is high unemployment. Marcy showed that, at such times, if the labor leadership simply confines itself to bargaining for wages and conditions, concessions must necessarily follow. He wanted to signal to the more advanced workers in the labor movement that the next time the cycle turned down again, new strategies would be required to combat the bosses’ offensive.
Marcy’s concern has an urgent relevance in the midst of the current global capitalist crisis, when workers are on the defensive because of the severe rise in unemployment. But it is also timely in a deeper sense because, since he wrote, the capitalist business cycle has changed in general, making the situation even worse as far as the workers are concerned. The “boom” has weakened and the “bust” has dragged on and deepened.
Traditionally, during a capitalist boom the workers can regain some of the positions they lost during the previous bust phase. The bosses, in the race to take advantage of new profit opportunities presented by the capitalist revival, are in great need of expanding their workforce. The reserve army of unemployed contracts sharply. This reduces the competition among the workers, puts them in a stronger bargaining position, and leads to higher wages. At the same time it also leads to much higher profits for the bosses.
The era of ‘jobless recoveries’
As the scientific-technological revolution was progressing “at breakneck speed,” as Marcy put it, there occurred a change in the historic pattern of the business cycle. After the recession of 1990-1991, U.S. capitalism entered the era of “jobless recoveries.” For the first time, employment either continued to decline or remained flat long after the economy began to recover. Jobs were either being lost or remained flat for 18 months after the start of the economic upturn. Prior to that time, there had been a typical lag of one quarter, or three months, between the start of economic expansion and job recovery.
The divergence between economic growth and joblessness caused concern among bourgeois economists for a while. However, after the 1990-1991 recession came the collapse of the USSR and Eastern Europe. There followed a surge in investment abroad, a technology boom at home, and the longest period of economic expansion in U.S. history.
The economists promptly forgot about the jobless recovery of 1991-92. They declared the arrival of the “new economy” and the “end of history,” speculating about the end of the business cycle.
The hopes were that, after 75 years of being constrained by socialist revolution and national liberation struggles, the collapse of the material center of the socialist camp would somehow allow infinite expansion and enable the capitalists to overcome the inner contradictions of their system. But as Karl Marx wrote: “The real barrier of capitalist production is capital itself.” (“Capital,” Vol. 3)
The hopes of the bourgeoisie came crashing down in 2000 with the collapse of the technology bubble and the loss of jobs along with $5 trillion in paper wealth. The vast expansion of capital to every corner of the globe could not eradicate the contradictions inherent in the profit system. It took a speculative boom in technology, with hundreds of companies being created every week, to pump up the economy even with the overseas expansion. The capitalist downturn followed the boom, just as it had since 1825 when the first global downturn took place.
More important than the downturn itself was the nature of the second “jobless recovery” that followed. It turned out that the jobless recovery of 1991- 1992 had not been an anomaly but an ominous harbinger of things to come. During the first 27 months of the next recovery, from November 2001 to March 2004, there was a net loss of 594,000 jobs. It took more than five years for the job level to reach the point at which it had been before the downturn began. According to Stephen Roach, the chief economist of Morgan Stanley at the time, job growth by 2004 was 8 million less than growth in a “normal” recovery.
It is no accident that Marcy focused on the business cycle and its consequences for the workers. The question of the business cycle has been of great concern to the working class since Marx first subjected it to scientific analysis. The boom-and-bust cycle is an essential expression of the fundamental contradiction of the capitalist system. Historically, it has brought both opportunity for struggle as well as shock and disaster to the workers. Understanding it is key to preparing for the class struggle. Studying changes in the boom-and-bust cycle can reveal important underlying features of the evolution of capitalism that the workers need to be aware of.
Marx & Engels on the business cycle
As far back as 1847, in “Wage Labor and Capital,” Marx discussed the question of the workers and the business cycle. Referring to the upside or boom part of the cycle, the period of rapid growth in profits and capitalist accumulation, Marx wrote:
“Even the most favorable situation for the working class, the most rapid possible growth of capital, however much it may improve the material existence of the worker, does not remove the antagonism between his interests and the interests of the bourgeoisie, the interests of the capitalists. Profit and wages remain as before in inverse proportion.
“If capital is growing rapidly, wages may rise; the profit of capital rises incomparably more rapidly. The material position of the worker has improved, but at the cost of his social position. The social gulf that divides him from the capitalist has widened.
“Finally:
“To say that the most favorable condition for wage labor is the most rapid possible growth of productive capital is only to say that the more rapidly the working class increases and enlarges the power that is hostile to it, the more favorable will be the conditions under which it is allowed to labor anew at increasing bourgeois wealth, at enlarging the power of capital, content with forging for itself the golden chains by which the bourgeoisie drags it in its train.” [Emphasis added—Goldstein.]
Engels gave the classic description of the capitalist boom-and-bust cycle in his work “Socialism, Utopian and Scientific,” published in 1880.
“As a matter of fact, since 1825, when the first general crisis broke out, the whole industrial and commercial world ... [is] thrown out of joint once every ten years. Commerce is at a standstill, the markets are glutted, products accumulate, as multitudinous as they are unsalable, hard cash disappears, credit vanishes, factories are closed, the mass of the workers are in want of the means of subsistence, because they have produced too much of the means of subsistence; bankruptcy follows upon bankruptcy.... The stagnation lasts for years; productive forces and products are wasted and destroyed wholesale, until the accumulated mass of commodities finally filters off ... until production and exchange gradually begin to move again. Little by little the pace quickens. It becomes a trot. The industrial trot breaks into a canter, the canter in turn grows into the headlong gallop of a perfect steeplechase of industry, commercial credit, and speculation which finally, after breakneck leaps, ends up where it began—in the ditch of crisis. And over and over again.”
Thus it was Marx who gave a description of the situation of the workers as regards the capitalist business cycle of the time. The period of “rapid accumulation,” that is, the period of the vigorous boom of business following a downturn, has been the most favorable historically for the working class. And it was Engels who described how capitalism goes from crisis to boom to crisis, continuing in that cycle “over and over.”
Even before the 1990s the capitalist business cycle, described a century earlier by Engels, had changed in favor of capital. Marcy, in Chapter 3, focuses on the fact that capitalist recession lengthened in the post-World War II period and that “this is very important in relation to strike strategy, which had a lot to do with the duration of the capitalist economic crisis.” It raises the question of what workers can do if a recession turns out to be protracted and the bosses can hold out for a long time.
Following is the second part of an excerpt from the introduction by Fred Goldstein to an upcoming reprint of the ground-breaking work “High Tech, Low Pay” written by Sam Marcy in 1986 during the early stages of capitalist restructuring. Goldstein is the author of “Low-Wage Capitalism: Colossus With Feet of Clay.”
Even before the 1990s the capitalist business cycle, described a century earlier by Engels, had changed in favor of capital. Marcy, in Chapter 3, focuses on the fact that capitalist recession lengthened in the post-World War II period and that “this is very important in relation to strike strategy, which had a lot to do with the duration of the capitalist economic crisis.” It raises the question of what workers can do if a recession turns out to be protracted and the bosses can hold out for a long time.
Workers, ‘boom-and-bust’ and low-wage capitalism
The new era of low-wage capitalism, worldwide wage competition and slowing capitalist economic growth has put workers under pressure even during times of capitalist upturn. The booms have weakened, benefiting only the bosses, with not even relative gain for the workers.
The era of rapid accumulation, that is, rapid and tempestuous growth of capital investment, has been undercut by the growing productivity of labor and the speed with which markets become saturated. The relative labor shortage during the upturn is a thing of the past. Instead, there are jobless recoveries and the consequent eradication of the opportunity for the workers to make up lost wages by forcing increases on the bosses.
The “golden chains” Marx referred to are not so golden anymore. Marx spoke of workers getting higher wages during a boom while the capitalist got even higher profits. This meant that workers’ real wages went up, although their wages declined relative to the larger profit gains of the bosses. In the present era, these conditions no longer obtain.
For the last several decades, with a slight exception in the mid 1990s, workers’ real wages have gone down or stagnated even during the periods of expanded capitalist accumulation—during upturns. Because of off-shoring, outsourcing and wage competition with workers in low-wage areas, workers in the United States went into massive personal debt and worked extra jobs; whole families worked just to compensate for the wage decline. Not only did the relative wages of the workers decline, but their absolute standard of living plummeted—and this was before the crisis.
This makes Marcy’s work, his admonitions to the labor movement to develop new strategies to deal with protracted crisis, to engage in class-wide struggle, to break out of the traditional capital-labor relationship, more pressing than ever before.
Engels spoke of the continuous cycle of boom and bust. Certainly the cycle continues, but under conditions of structural changes to capitalism. Booms have become weaker and weaker over time. The classic booms that reemploy most of the workers laid off during the bust are a thing of the past. That is the meaning of the increasingly protracted jobless recoveries.
Solving a crisis by creating a bigger one
In fact, the immediate roots of the latest global capitalist crisis, which began in December 2007, can be traced back to the attempt by the financial authorities to overcome the jobless recovery of 2001-2004 and the weakness of the capitalist upturn.
The Federal Reserve System pumped hundreds of billions of dollars into the economy by lowering interest rates from 5.5 percent to 1 percent. Alan Green-span directed much of this credit toward creating an artificial housing boom. He publicly urged home buyers to take out adjustable-rate mortgages. The housing market regulators gave a pass to the most egregious, often racist, subprime mortgage-lending practices. The Securities and Exchange Commission synchronized its efforts with the Fed by deliberately closing its eyes to the burgeoning market in mortgage-backed securities, derivatives and other shady practices. The rating agencies Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s played their part by giving potentially toxic assets triple-A ratings.
Much of the credit made available went straight to stock market speculation and banking operations. Huge sums of fictitious capital, paper wealth with no underlying value, found their way through an unregulated conduit known as the shadow banking system—hedge funds, private equity funds and insurance companies—backed by the big Wall Street banks. This shadow system was used to evade even the minimal constraints on finance capital.
In the end, a crisis emerged in the overproduction of housing. The bubble burst, housing prices plummeted and masses of people lost their homes. Throughout the economy, production had outstripped consumption. Auto sales and construction collapsed. Record credit-card debt could not bridge the gap. Debts based on housing sales, credit cards, student loans and auto loans became bad debts. Banks were insolvent.
As Engels had predicted, hard cash disappeared, credit vanished, goods piled up, means of production were destroyed. And in the end the attempt to stem the original crisis by artificially creating a housing boom led to an even greater crisis that enveloped the globe at the speed of light.
Here is the third installment of excerpts from a new introduction to the ground-breaking work “High Tech, Low Pay.” The book, written by Sam Marcy during the early stages of capitalist restructuring and first published in 1986, has long been out of print and will soon be reissued. Fred Goldstein, who wrote this introduction, is author of “Low-Wage Capitalism: Colossus with Feet of Clay.”
Analyzing the present crisis
The meaning of the crisis and its ultimate direction are questions for the ruling class and for the working class, from diametrically opposed points of view. The bourgeoisie has no theoretical framework within which to begin to approach the question. Their system is anarchic. Even government intervention and some limited planning cannot eradicate the anarchy imposed on a system based on private profit.
The bosses operate in competition and in secrecy. Their economists can really only look backward over time at what has happened and hope to divine some pattern that can be used for the future. But they cannot, dare not, analyze the system; they can only describe its behavior in a pragmatic, strictly empirical fashion.
Marxists have a broad theoretical framework combined with powerful, scientific analytical tools at their disposal. These tools must be wielded on behalf of the struggle of the workers and therefore cannot be based upon wishful thinking or pure speculation.
The broad theoretical framework within which to analyze the present situation was laid out by Marx in 1857, in his Preface to “A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy”:
“In the social production of their life, men enter into definite relations that are indispensable and independent of their will, relations of production which correspond to a definite stage of development of their material productive forces. The sum total of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which rises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. ... At a certain stage of their development, the material productive forces of society come in conflict with existing relations of production, or—what is but a legal expression for the same thing—with the property relations within which they have been at work hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an epoch of social revolution. With the change in the economic foundation the entire immense superstructure is more or less rapidly transformed.”
This is Marx’s most general statement about the basis for the revolutionary transformation of society. In numerous places throughout his writings he applies this theory to the capitalist system. He describes how capitalism concentrates the proletariat into factories and workplaces, creating an increasingly complex division of labor in the productive process that involves more and varied types of labor from geographically diverse regions.
Marx showed how capitalism, by constantly revolutionizing the means of production under the internal compulsion of the system, socializes the productive forces—bringing workers everywhere into objective cooperation in the production of commodities. He scientifically demonstrated how this socialized production comes into conflict with private property, resulting in repetitive crises for the workers and, ultimately, for society in general.
The fundamental assertion implied by the paragraph quoted above is that sooner or later, capitalist property relations become a “fetter,” a brake on further development of the productive forces. Society cannot move forward any longer because of the stranglehold of private property. Revolution then ensues. The clash between socialized production and private ownership can only be resolved by socializing the ownership—that is, by bringing socialized ownership into harmony with socialized production and setting society on a new course of planned production for human need.
Marx was referring not just to the periodic crises and suffering brought about by capitalism. Nor does his point refer to capitalism holding back development that would be of great benefit to society—such as environmentally safe methods of production and green products. Nor is it a question of the enormous waste and gross inefficiency produced by capitalism. These are relative brakes on development.
Marx posits that at some point, capitalism inevitably becomes an absolute brake on the development of the productive forces, with a consequent crisis for the masses. Society is stymied by capitalist private property and cannot go on in the old way.
It is always helpful for clarity and educational purposes to discuss this fundamental premise put forward by Marx. It is the starting point of understanding Marxism. But it is only at rare historical moments that the discussion goes beyond making a general historical point and is raised in relation to imminent developments.
This question arose at the end of World War I when the economies of Europe had collapsed in the face of military devastation. There was revolutionary ferment in Germany, Hungary and other countries in the wake of the Bolshevik Revolution. Capitalism seemed to be on the ropes. World War I had signified the beginning of the historic crisis of the capitalist system.
The development of imperialism soon resulted in the complete division of the globe among the imperialist powers, as described by Lenin in 1916 in his book “Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism.” It meant that capitalism had outgrown the national state as a framework for development. Soon it came to pass that even imperialist expansion could not give capitalism sufficient room to grow by ordinary economic means. It had reached such an impasse that it could only resolve its contradictions through a devastating imperialist war.
The ruling classes in Europe survived these post-war revolutionary crises, only to soon be plunged into the Great Depression. It was during the world depression of the 1930s that the question of the absolute decline of capitalism was widely discussed in concrete terms pertaining to the immediate perspective of proletarian revolution.
For the entire decade, save for a brief period in the mid 1930s, capitalist society appeared to be in a downward spiral with no end in sight. Capitalism had reached a dead end. It seemed to fulfill Marx’s general prognosis that social revolution was on the agenda.
Capitalist property, private property in the means of production, the profit system itself, had become a “fetter” on the further development of the productive forces. Capitalism had brought about the socialization of the productive process on a world scale. Yet a small group of property owners, monopolists, owned and operated this global system for the narrow purposes of enriching themselves through exploitation and profit.
The Great Depression seemed to be the end of the line. Capitalism was unable to revive itself by economic means. In the mid thirties there was a slight upturn, but then world production continued to decline. Massive unemployment remained. The colonial countries staggered under the weight of the world depression, which struck them even more drastically than the imperialist countries.
In the present period it is once again helpful from a working-class point of view to revive this discussion in order to get an accurate estimate of the period, clarify a perspective and prepare for struggle.
Here is our fourth installment of excerpts from a new introduction to the ground-breaking work “High Tech, Low Pay.” The book, written by Sam Marcy during the early stages of capitalist restructuring and first published in 1986, has long been out of print and will soon be reissued. Fred Goldstein, who wrote this introduction, is author of “Low-Wage Capitalism: Colossus with Feet of Clay.”
Many comparisons are made between the present crisis and the Great Depression. But while the depression of the 1930s is fully known, the present crisis is in its early stages and has yet to be played out. Many specifics cannot be known at this point. It is best from a Marxist point of view, i.e., from a materialist standpoint, to focus on what can be studied right now.
What can be compared are the historic periods leading up to the depression of the 1930s and later to the present crisis, which began with the collapse of the housing bubble in 2007. These periods can be effectively compared.
From Civil War to Great Depression
In the first crisis, the economic forces that drove U.S. capitalism forward in the 70 years from the U.S. Civil War to the world depression of the 1930s had exhausted themselves. They were no longer able to stimulate any significant capitalist revival during the entire decade from 1929 to 1939. No economic means could bring back capitalist prosperity.
What were those forces? The Indigenous nations had finally been driven from all their lands. The so-called “frontier” had been occupied, including the half of Mexico that was annexed to become the Southwest of the United States. After the Civil War the African-American population of the South had again been subjugated, this time into a state of semi-slavery through the sharecropping system. The railroad boom had run its course. Imperialist expansion in the so-called Spanish-American War of 1898 had brought Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines into the U.S. empire, along with Samoa and Hawaii. U.S. businesses had pushed deeper into China and Latin America.
Profits rolled in from World War I and helped sustain the system for a period. There was rapid expansion of the auto industry, the electrification of the country and mass production of appliances. But by the late 1920s the expansion had led to overproduction. Massive credit and land speculation led to a crash in real estate and the stock market crash in 1929.
These were the forces that drove capitalism for 70 years after the Civil War. Once they were exhausted, the system went into a state of absolute decline and could only be revived by war preparations and, finally, World War II itself.
It took 15 million U.S. soldiers under arms and an emergency regime of total war production to alleviate mass unemployment in the U.S. It took the deaths of 50 million people or more and the destruction of factories, mines, ports, railroads, bridges and residential buildings throughout Europe and Asia to overcome the pre-war economic crisis and put capitalism back on its feet.
From World War II to 2007
A review of the situation leading up to the present crisis bears an ominous resemblance to that which preceded the Great Depression. Namely, the forces that have propelled U.S. capitalism and the development of the means of production to higher and higher levels throughout the last 70 years, since the beginning of World War II, have exhausted themselves. Artificial means employed to keep the system going are no longer sufficient to revive it in any significant way. This has led to a period of profound stagnation and perhaps to absolute decline.
In the period since World War II, U.S. capitalism has relied on various artificial methods to keep the system from collapsing. War and war preparation were a basic stimulant for decades during the post-war period. The Korean War, the Vietnam War, the military buildup during the Cold War—all served to generate capitalist production and profits, as the system could not rely on the civilian economy to automatically keep it going.
But by the end of the 1980s, even the $2 trillion Reagan military buildup in a “full-court press” to undermine the Soviet Union and the socialist camp was insufficient to sustain capitalist prosperity. The monstrous growth of the military-industrial complex has it limits as an economic stimulant.
Marcy dealt with the role of the military in bolstering the capitalist economy in Chapter 2. He showed how it fostered the scientific-technological revolution and shaped crucial sectors of the corporate economic structure to aid its design for world empire. At the same time, he showed how dependent even the largest corporations had become on the military.
The continuous development of the scientific-technological revolution, the restructuring of capitalist industry, the relentless anti-labor campaign of union-busting, the extraction of concessions, the destruction of benefits, the driving down of manufacturing wages and the steady expansion of the low-wage service economy—all enormously increased inequality in the national income in favor of capital and at the expense of the workers. All this served to bolster the profitability of the bosses and bankers. It gave the bosses a great infusion of surplus value, stolen from the workers, to ease the crisis of capital.
The collapse of the USSR and Eastern Europe in the 1990s and the opening up of China to capitalist investment gave imperialism a brief period of unprecedented global expansion. The monopolies seized this opportunity to create global networks of exploitation and vast super-profits as they engineered a worldwide wage competition among the international working class and promoted the vicious race to the bottom previously referred to. Driving down the value of labor is the time-tested method of capital for combating the declining rate of profit brought about by the growing cost allocated to constant capital (plant, equipment and raw materials) and the reduction in variable capital (wages).
Globalized production has now brought a worldwide epidemic of layoffs and mass unemployment.
Militarism, technological development and anti-labor attacks were not enough to save the banks and corporations. Huge injections of credit were required. The ruling class resorted to speculation, credit bubbles, mortgage schemes, exotic financial instruments and all manner of fraud to make profits based on trading in fictitious capital. To overcome the limitations on the profitability of industry, unlimited paper profits were conjured up.
Following is the fifth part of an excerpt from the introduction by Fred Goldstein to an upcoming reprint of the groundbreaking work “High Tech, Low Pay,” written by Sam Marcy in 1986 during the early stages of capitalist restructuring. Goldstein is the author of “Low-Wage Capitalism: Colossus with Feet of Clay.”
In the present crisis, none of these measures is available to restart the system in any significant way.
The two wars now underway in Iraq and Afghanistan are draining the coffers of U.S. imperialism. Overall militarization has largely been accomplished. New rounds of military development are technology intensive, such as laser-guided bombs, satellite-guided missiles, Predator drones, high-tech missile ships and fighter planes. Current imperialist wars are limited and heavily dependent on air power. The hundreds of billions of dollars spent annually on militarism are essential to the system, but, at best, military spending can only help to slow down the economic crisis. It cannot restart the capitalist economy and generate prosperity.
The two wars now underway in Iraq and Afghanistan are draining the coffers of U.S. imperialism. Overall militarization has largely been accomplished. New rounds of military development are technology intensive, such as laser-guided bombs, satellite-guided missiles, Predator drones, high-tech missile ships and fighter planes. Current imperialist wars are limited and heavily dependent on air power. The hundreds of billions of dollars spent annually on militarism are essential to the system, but, at best, military spending can only help to slow down the economic crisis. It cannot restart the capitalist economy and generate prosperity.
The long period of creating a regime of low-wage capitalism, with a working class in debt and living closer and closer to the poverty level, has intensified. As this trend deepens it only aggravates the crisis of overproduction by further reducing the buying power of the masses. Driving down wages any more will only intensify the contradictions of the system.
Further use of credit on a major scale is a vanishing option. Credit has been stretched to its limit as a mechanism for reviving capitalist accumulation. The government’s handout of trillions of dollars in financial bailouts to the banks and other financial institutions has stretched the credit option even beyond the limit.
Capitalism has reached a point where, even if the trillions of dollars that the ruling class is spending in an attempt to mitigate the crisis were to result in a revival, it would be weak and short-lived, leaving many millions unemployed as jobs continue to be lost even as capital accumulation expands. Capitalism is entering a period of permanent and deepening crisis for the masses.
In the present crisis the historic methods of reviving the profitability of capitalism, of restoring capitalist accumulation and prosperity, appear to have run their course, as they did leading up to the Great Depression. This is what has the ruling class running scared.
Marx’s proposition about the inevitability of social revolution, already quoted, bears repeating here. It was phrased in the most general way:
“At a certain stage of their development, the material productive forces of society come in conflict with existing relations of production or—what is but a legal expression for the same thing—with the property relations within which they have been at work hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an epoch of social revolution.”
This is a summary of the broad contours of history. The specifics can only be filled in by analyzing the concrete development of the productive forces of capitalism at each stage.
Sam Marcy in his foreword to this book gave an economic characterization of the period that pointed clearly in the direction of the present profound crisis of capitalism.
“The justification for each new social system as against its predecessor is that it raises society to a higher level. It has done so in each succeeding social order by raising the productivity of labor. The great achievement of capitalism was that it not only promoted a tempestuous development of the productive forces, of science and invention on an unheard of scale, but it raised the productivity of labor. Over a period of centuries it laid the basis for raising the material standards of society and the wage levels of the working class as a whole.
“The distinctive feature of this particular phase of capitalist development, the scientific-technological phase, is that while it enormously raises the productivity of labor, it for the first time simultaneously lowers the general wage patterns and demolishes the more high-skilled, high-paid workers. It enhances the general pauperization of the population.”
But Marcy looked beyond the crisis to the future of the struggle. He discussed the changing character of the working class from a revolutionary, optimistic point of view that was firmly rooted in a materialist analysis.
He spoke at that time of the fundamental trend arising out of the objective changes in the capitalist economy: the vast expansion of lower-paid workers and the decline of the higher-paid, which he regarded as one of the most significant and profound developments to emerge in the history of capitalism.
Its significance is ultimately political. It means that the lower-paid workers, the downtrodden and oppressed who can ill afford to be held down by a conservative labor leadership, will ultimately become the predominant voice in the labor movement and provide it with the militant and ultimately revolutionary energy to challenge capital. He showed that this transformation of the working class must ultimately have a political expression.
The consciousness of the workers is forced to catch up to their condition. A delay in this process is inevitable, but overcoming this lag is equally inevitable. Being ultimately determines consciousness. Historical circumstances have delayed this radical development among the workers. But Marcy’s projection of the pauperization of the working class has developed more fully since he wrote.
Following is the sixth and final part of an excerpt from the introduction by Fred Goldstein to an upcoming reprint of the ground-breaking work “High Tech, Low Pay,” which was written by Sam Marcy in 1986, during the early stages of capitalist restructuring. Goldstein is the author of “Low-Wage Capitalism: Colossus with Feet of Clay.”
The days when the conservative labor leadership has been able to hold the working class in check are numbered. Its base is shrinking with each round of concessions it makes to the bosses, with each sweetheart contract it signs. As Marcy noted, at the beginning of each crisis the workers are thrown back onto the defensive. But sooner or later they will cry “Enough is enough!” Then the tide will turn.
There is no bourgeois economist who can see ahead past one quarter. Yet Marcy’s analysis of 25 years ago, proceeding from Marxist theory, put a sharp focus on trends deep within the organism of capitalism and outlined the forces that have shaped the present.
The inevitable imbalance between production and consumption has finally led to a protracted and profound crisis of overproduction. This is certainly the worst crisis in the post-World War II era. As of June 2009, it has lasted the longest—19 months. The measures taken by the world capitalist class to overcome it are by far the greatest. It follows two previous jobless recoveries, the second far more pronounced than the first, which were only overcome by extraordinary, nonreproducible measures (expansion in the wake of the collapse of the USSR, massive bubble-creating measures in the dot-com and housing markets).
Even the most optimistic bourgeois economists concede that a recovery of capitalist production would still leave massive unemployment, as the system will be unable to reabsorb a large proportion of the workers laid off in the present crisis.
Furthermore, in the era of imperialism and the scientific-technological revolution, each round of new technological innovation by the ruling class makes it more and more difficult to start the capitalist system up again after a bust. The two most important reasons are that technology reduces the skills and buying power of the workers, while at the same time increasing productivity, thus insuring that production saturates the markets at a faster and faster rate.
The question that remains for the working class is whether or not quantity has turned into quality in the matter of the capitalist recovery—that is, whether or not the scientific-technological revolution and its effects, so profoundly analyzed by Marcy, have brought capitalism to the point where society will not be able to go forward. Has the profit system reached an impasse?
Because of the previous period of expansive globalization of capital, this crisis is the most far-reaching in terms of the numbers of workers affected. The world socialization of the production process has been brought to an extraordinarily high level. Private property is becoming a more and more intolerable brake internationally.
The ruling class is trying to shift this crisis entirely onto the backs of the workers and the oppressed, just as it did during the Great Depression.
Many are promoting the notion that crisis automatically leads to uprisings and the collapse of capitalism. This is sterile, abstract thinking, far removed from the reality of the working class. It fails to take into account the disintegrating forces exerted upon the workers by a capitalist crisis of unemployment. The workers become atomized and lose the sense of strength derived from being together on the job. Their sense of confidence and of their potential power is undermined by a crisis.
It takes great efforts by working-class leaders to find strategies and tactics to counteract the effects of the downturn, develop methods of resistance to every attack and take advantage of every upturn in the economic situation to push the struggle forward onto the offensive.
This was the principal purpose of “High Tech, Low Pay” and of much of Marcy’s life work, for that matter.
Marxism has no crystal ball. It does not dole out prescriptive formulas for how a major, global capitalist crisis of profound dimensions will play itself out.
Capitalism experienced a global economic collapse during the Great Depression. A decade of mass unemployment ensued that could not be overcome except by rearmament in the U.S. and Europe and ultimately war. Thus the manifestation of the absolute, general crisis of capitalism has been economic collapse. This variant must be taken seriously. But the possibility of a protracted period of weak and short-lived recoveries alongside growing and irreversible mass unemployment must also be considered. There could be a temporary delay in a sharp crisis as a result of massive financial manipulation and capitalist state intervention. However, that it could end either in collapse or war or both must also be considered.
The precise, immediate future cannot be known. What is known is that genuine working-class leaders must prepare for struggle and adapt to any eventuality to assist the workers in dealing with the crisis, whatever form it takes. Above all, the working class must rise to assume its historic destiny as the subject of history and lead the way out of the state of permanent crisis, into which capitalism has led humanity, towards a socialist future.
Workers World
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)



























