American Imperialism has tried to increase pressure on the North Korean Bureaucracy to make concessions towards them or face increased isolation and pressure. The North Korean Bureaucracy being based on a Workers' state will not tolerate the kind of concessions which Iraq was forced into to avoid Gulf War 2. This Bureaucracy in North Korea has made clear that it will fight rather than restore Capitalism.
The anti-war movement should oppose American or Japan shooting down a North Korean satalite! It is not clear whether Imperialism will shoot it down which might lead to North Korea miltiary attacking South Korea, which may lead to Imperialism bonbing North Korea. This could lead to increased tensions with the Russian and Chinese Workers' States raising the danger of World War 3. China's economic power could be utilised to stop Imperialism. The anti-war movement should start organsing against a shooting down of a North Korean satalite, which increases the pressure on Imperialism not to provoke North Korea into a war!
Sunday, 15 March 2009
Thornett breaks further on the nature of Capitalism in its epoch by going further revisionist on China! and adapts to Obama!
Thornett in a article in a spring 2009 edition of Socialist Outlook in analysing the global Capitalist crisis makes from a Leninist-Trotskyist point of view makes outrageous statements on how Captalism in China is responible for the rapid development in its' productive forces. This represents a break from the Leninist-Trotskyist programme of our epoch which starts from analysing correctly that Capitalism being in its' death agency and that Imperialism holds down Third World countries. It also represents a major break with the theory and strategy of Permanent Revolution which flows from this programme of our epoch, which correctly argues that Imperialist super-exploitation of the Colonies/Semi-Colonies can only be ended by overthrowing Capitalusm. Thornett is echoing revisionist positions assocated with the "State Capitalist" poltics of the British SWP.
China has always for the Trotskyist movement been seen outside of Russia as being the 2nd major test which confirms Permanent Revolution. Capitalism when Capitalism prevailed after the 1840s ot 1850s after the Opium Wars dismembered China. Until the Chinese Socialiat Revolution broke out tens of millions Chinese died of starvation. Despite the distortions of Stalinism the Chinese Communist Party leadership had out of self-preservaion carried aspects of our programme of Permanent Revolution in overthrowing Capitalism. They were still Stalinists who argued stages theory in other Third World countries. At the same time as welcoming the overthrow of Capiltalism a Political Revolution was necessary to establish the political rule of the Proletariat. Trotsky made the same analysis when Stalin was forced to wipe out the Kulaks which he critically supported while critcising the excesses of 5-year plans.
It is the predominance of the non-Capitalist productive relations which explains why China has massively developed. Even Bourgeois analysts have to admit its biggest economic development in history! Imperialism out of weakness started trading during with China during the late 1970s attempting to further isolate the Soviet Union and to see what inroads was possible with the balance of class forces. The Imperialists hoped the Capitalist elements in the Special Economic Zones created during the 1980s would strengthen themselves to eventually overthrow the Workers' State.
There are paraells with the rapid development of China in the last 30-plus years with the rapid industrialisation of the Soviet Union had occured duirng the 1930s. Elements of the Fourth Internatuional (FI) majority leadership argued this development was also happening in the Tiger Economies! This line was argued in International Viewpoint a month before those Tiger Economies collasped. China becuase it is a Workers' State still went forward with developing the necessary modern infrastucture for their ecomomy and innovating in new technologies. Capitalist States go through periodoric crises because of production being based on proift. A Workers' State by destroying profit being the predominant economic drive has an economy based on use value. In China like other Bureaucratised Workers' States the Bureaucrats distort production by only being mainly interested in economic developments which benefit them. It is not true as Thornett claims that the Soviet Union's development during the 1930s had limited impact on Capitalism. Imperialism traded with the Soviet Union during that period because without that the Depression would have been worse.
China as a transitonal society has been impacted on by Capitalist depression. This again confirms our Marxist analysis that Socialism cannot be built in a single country. There have been statsistics recently in the Bourgeois press show that 40% of Chnese GNP comes from domestic infrastructure projects and exports only accounted for 7%. It is these infrastructure projects predominantly nationalised is the basis of this 7% growth in Chnin's GDP this year.
Until the Capitalist depression Chinese exports played a supplemtary role to the main domestic drive. Thornett claims that Capitalist restoration is complete! If this is the case why is Imperialism complaining that certain Chinese Banks remain Nationalised and allocate investemnets in what Capitalist firms see as "unprofitable?
If as Thornett claims China is Capitalist the Imperialist banks would dominate their banking system and the majority of "non-Profitable" industries would be decimated. How do you explain the social reforms with free education and healthcare being brought into the countryside if Cnina is Capitalist?
Another difficult question for Thornett if Chinese 'Capitalism' is so sucessful why cannot it show the rest of World Capitalism the way forward? The Workers' State tendencies in China will be strengthend with the collapse of exports as Imperialism has less say in China. It is terrible that 20 Million workers have lost their jobs due to big export falls. The restoration of Capitalism woukd be worse with hundreds of millions of workers being made redundant. If Trotskyists are going to influence Chinese workers they have to recognise the gains of a Workers' State while attacking the Bureaucratic pillage and inroads of Capitalists. It is the contradiction between the rising workers aspirations which develop as the Workers' State goes forward and growing resentment with Bureaucratic pillage will lead to the Political Revolution with social consuqences.
Thornett downplays the importance of Cuba. If they develop oil they will not be "economically unimportanr" as Thorentt claims. Cuba is key to Latin America because the gains of that Workers' State is helping to deepen revolutionary upheavals on this continent. This is why Thornett was fundamentally wrong in calling for Fidel Castro's overthrow. There is a contradiction in Thorentt's article in saying Capitalism dominates the world and then he has to recognise that Cuba stands against this!
Thornett overplays the possible social reforms under Obama. He does not point out that the purpose of any reforms is to stop a workers party independent of the main Capitalist parties. He does not argue against voting for Obama in the 2008 American Presidential elections. Who did he support in those elections? John Lister in the Morning Star argued pincipled position against supporting Obama. Americn Trotskyists in the 1930s and 1940s opposed the New Deal and its conversion into a War Dea! His biggest adaptation to Obama is Thornett calling for critical support to the New Deal! In another example of the dialectics of history is Thorentt being ultra-left on the Labour Party to calling in a Opportunist fashion for Brown's "New Deal" being critically supported! When I have more time I will write a article on why and how American Trotskyists opposed the New Deal in New International upto May 1940 and Fourth Internatioal published snce then.
China has always for the Trotskyist movement been seen outside of Russia as being the 2nd major test which confirms Permanent Revolution. Capitalism when Capitalism prevailed after the 1840s ot 1850s after the Opium Wars dismembered China. Until the Chinese Socialiat Revolution broke out tens of millions Chinese died of starvation. Despite the distortions of Stalinism the Chinese Communist Party leadership had out of self-preservaion carried aspects of our programme of Permanent Revolution in overthrowing Capitalism. They were still Stalinists who argued stages theory in other Third World countries. At the same time as welcoming the overthrow of Capiltalism a Political Revolution was necessary to establish the political rule of the Proletariat. Trotsky made the same analysis when Stalin was forced to wipe out the Kulaks which he critically supported while critcising the excesses of 5-year plans.
It is the predominance of the non-Capitalist productive relations which explains why China has massively developed. Even Bourgeois analysts have to admit its biggest economic development in history! Imperialism out of weakness started trading during with China during the late 1970s attempting to further isolate the Soviet Union and to see what inroads was possible with the balance of class forces. The Imperialists hoped the Capitalist elements in the Special Economic Zones created during the 1980s would strengthen themselves to eventually overthrow the Workers' State.
There are paraells with the rapid development of China in the last 30-plus years with the rapid industrialisation of the Soviet Union had occured duirng the 1930s. Elements of the Fourth Internatuional (FI) majority leadership argued this development was also happening in the Tiger Economies! This line was argued in International Viewpoint a month before those Tiger Economies collasped. China becuase it is a Workers' State still went forward with developing the necessary modern infrastucture for their ecomomy and innovating in new technologies. Capitalist States go through periodoric crises because of production being based on proift. A Workers' State by destroying profit being the predominant economic drive has an economy based on use value. In China like other Bureaucratised Workers' States the Bureaucrats distort production by only being mainly interested in economic developments which benefit them. It is not true as Thornett claims that the Soviet Union's development during the 1930s had limited impact on Capitalism. Imperialism traded with the Soviet Union during that period because without that the Depression would have been worse.
China as a transitonal society has been impacted on by Capitalist depression. This again confirms our Marxist analysis that Socialism cannot be built in a single country. There have been statsistics recently in the Bourgeois press show that 40% of Chnese GNP comes from domestic infrastructure projects and exports only accounted for 7%. It is these infrastructure projects predominantly nationalised is the basis of this 7% growth in Chnin's GDP this year.
Until the Capitalist depression Chinese exports played a supplemtary role to the main domestic drive. Thornett claims that Capitalist restoration is complete! If this is the case why is Imperialism complaining that certain Chinese Banks remain Nationalised and allocate investemnets in what Capitalist firms see as "unprofitable?
If as Thornett claims China is Capitalist the Imperialist banks would dominate their banking system and the majority of "non-Profitable" industries would be decimated. How do you explain the social reforms with free education and healthcare being brought into the countryside if Cnina is Capitalist?
Another difficult question for Thornett if Chinese 'Capitalism' is so sucessful why cannot it show the rest of World Capitalism the way forward? The Workers' State tendencies in China will be strengthend with the collapse of exports as Imperialism has less say in China. It is terrible that 20 Million workers have lost their jobs due to big export falls. The restoration of Capitalism woukd be worse with hundreds of millions of workers being made redundant. If Trotskyists are going to influence Chinese workers they have to recognise the gains of a Workers' State while attacking the Bureaucratic pillage and inroads of Capitalists. It is the contradiction between the rising workers aspirations which develop as the Workers' State goes forward and growing resentment with Bureaucratic pillage will lead to the Political Revolution with social consuqences.
Thornett downplays the importance of Cuba. If they develop oil they will not be "economically unimportanr" as Thorentt claims. Cuba is key to Latin America because the gains of that Workers' State is helping to deepen revolutionary upheavals on this continent. This is why Thornett was fundamentally wrong in calling for Fidel Castro's overthrow. There is a contradiction in Thorentt's article in saying Capitalism dominates the world and then he has to recognise that Cuba stands against this!
Thornett overplays the possible social reforms under Obama. He does not point out that the purpose of any reforms is to stop a workers party independent of the main Capitalist parties. He does not argue against voting for Obama in the 2008 American Presidential elections. Who did he support in those elections? John Lister in the Morning Star argued pincipled position against supporting Obama. Americn Trotskyists in the 1930s and 1940s opposed the New Deal and its conversion into a War Dea! His biggest adaptation to Obama is Thornett calling for critical support to the New Deal! In another example of the dialectics of history is Thorentt being ultra-left on the Labour Party to calling in a Opportunist fashion for Brown's "New Deal" being critically supported! When I have more time I will write a article on why and how American Trotskyists opposed the New Deal in New International upto May 1940 and Fourth Internatioal published snce then.
Wednesday, 4 March 2009
Typo error on title of build instead of big
I missed building out of a possibity of building a big anti-war movement in Britain against intervention in Sudan.
Typo error missed big in massive anti-war movement
I missed out the word big when analysing the possibility of a massive anti-war movement emerging in Britain.
Imperialist ruliing classes split on China!
One aspect which I missed out in my statement on Sudanese crisis is that the Imperialist Bourgeoisies' could be split on how to handle China. There are dangers of adventurism by Imperialism due to severe Capitalist crisis. There are Capitalist firms losing out in Africa to China. There is other sections of these Imperialist Bourgeoisies' who depend on trade with China and the Chinese Bureaucracy are in a strong position to deepen America's financial crisis by withdrawing money to the US Treasury. This split in these ruling classes towards China could help a big anti-war movement as happened over Iraq.
Typo error on Imperialism/Colonialism
I meant to use the word Colonialsm rather than Imperialsm to describe the African masses fighting against Imperialist intervention in Sudan.
Dangerous Imperialist provoation by Imperialism against Sudan!
The material I have been reading around the indicment against Sudan's President shows this is a dangerous provocation which could escalate into a major war. Yestersday the UN Peacekeeper command in Darfur issued a statement stating that they are staying regardless despite tensions being increased with Sudan.
Could Imperialism attempting to provoke the Sudanese armed forces into attacking UN forces?, which could then be used as a pretext to bomb Sudan. Two main motivations for Imperialism to carry out an adventure against Sudan is to gain more oil and to try to weaken the Chinese Workers' State influene which is growing rapidly in Africa due to their huge infrastucture projects. Imperialism may go after Sudan thinking they are an easier miltiary target than counties such as Iran. The Chinese Workers' State intervening with their African infrastructure projects is a major threat to Imperialism becuase despite their Opportunist policy to prop up Bourgeois Natalionalist regimes are beginning to seriously weaken Imperialist super-exploitation of Africa. Imperialism may decide to gamble a war to weaken China because they rather go down with a fight than risk losing billions more which could aggravate the depression.
Trotskyists should support Sudan against Imperialism against an attempt to re-impose Colonialism if war breaks out. Those on the left who wrongly charaterise China as China "Imperialist" have a problem if the Chinese Workers' State is dragged into the Sudan war. Will they dump defence of Sudan if China arms them or goes to war with Imperialism in Sudan. Trotskyists would support China arming Sudan and if China intervenes miltiary to support assistance to a semi-Colony fighting Imperialism. The main tasks of Trotskyists would be to build up mass movements internationally to stop the war before China is drawn in miltiary which reduces the danger of a Third World War breaking out.
If Imperialism embarks on such an adventure it would be the worst mistake since war on Iraq launched in 2003. The Sudanese regime in the last few months has hinted that Darfur and southern Sudan civil war could reignite. Bourgeois Nationalists in Sudan have hugh influence in Chad and other neighbouring countries. Africa could explode in revolutionary upheavals against the attempt to re-impose Imperialism. If a war breaks out tensions could massively increase between China and Imperialism. There are dangers of regional wars in Afria escalating and if China is drawn in miltiary a Third World War cannot be ruled out.
The demands of the anti-war movement should be oppositon to any Western war against Sudan and immeadiate withdrawl of Western armed forces from the Sudanese region! If tensions escalate the biggest anti-war movement could be potentially built in Britain since 2003 opposed to Western intervention. If Imperialism mis-calculates this could lead to a deepening of world revolution against Imperialism and Capitalism.
Could Imperialism attempting to provoke the Sudanese armed forces into attacking UN forces?, which could then be used as a pretext to bomb Sudan. Two main motivations for Imperialism to carry out an adventure against Sudan is to gain more oil and to try to weaken the Chinese Workers' State influene which is growing rapidly in Africa due to their huge infrastucture projects. Imperialism may go after Sudan thinking they are an easier miltiary target than counties such as Iran. The Chinese Workers' State intervening with their African infrastructure projects is a major threat to Imperialism becuase despite their Opportunist policy to prop up Bourgeois Natalionalist regimes are beginning to seriously weaken Imperialist super-exploitation of Africa. Imperialism may decide to gamble a war to weaken China because they rather go down with a fight than risk losing billions more which could aggravate the depression.
Trotskyists should support Sudan against Imperialism against an attempt to re-impose Colonialism if war breaks out. Those on the left who wrongly charaterise China as China "Imperialist" have a problem if the Chinese Workers' State is dragged into the Sudan war. Will they dump defence of Sudan if China arms them or goes to war with Imperialism in Sudan. Trotskyists would support China arming Sudan and if China intervenes miltiary to support assistance to a semi-Colony fighting Imperialism. The main tasks of Trotskyists would be to build up mass movements internationally to stop the war before China is drawn in miltiary which reduces the danger of a Third World War breaking out.
If Imperialism embarks on such an adventure it would be the worst mistake since war on Iraq launched in 2003. The Sudanese regime in the last few months has hinted that Darfur and southern Sudan civil war could reignite. Bourgeois Nationalists in Sudan have hugh influence in Chad and other neighbouring countries. Africa could explode in revolutionary upheavals against the attempt to re-impose Imperialism. If a war breaks out tensions could massively increase between China and Imperialism. There are dangers of regional wars in Afria escalating and if China is drawn in miltiary a Third World War cannot be ruled out.
The demands of the anti-war movement should be oppositon to any Western war against Sudan and immeadiate withdrawl of Western armed forces from the Sudanese region! If tensions escalate the biggest anti-war movement could be potentially built in Britain since 2003 opposed to Western intervention. If Imperialism mis-calculates this could lead to a deepening of world revolution against Imperialism and Capitalism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)