Saturday, February 20, 2010

FLTI Majority Document on China as semi-colony of imperialism



Towards the second congress of the FLTI. A document for contributing on the Chinese question

An impressionist minority, under the pressures of both US-UK imperialism and Obamamania, adapts itself to the labour aristocracy and aims to revise Marxism.



IN DEFENCE OF MARXISM
IN DEFENCE OF THE FIRST CONGRESS OF THE FLTI, ITS RESOLUTIONS AND PROGRAM


Chapter I

The revolutionary resolutions of the first congress of the FLTI and the evolution of the world situation: Between the disaster of the world imperialist capitalist system plus the regrouping of the treacherous leaderships to save it and a tenacious and persistent mass resistance. 

In late December 2009, in Buenos Aires a conference was held of the Latin American Trotskyist groups in the FLTI. At the same time in Zimbabwe a huge internationalist campaign was concentrated by the forces of the FLTI to prevent the renegades of Trotskyism and the World Social Forum agents from taking the revolutionary dissidents of the ISO in that country to the bourgeois courts. A tough battle for an International Moral Tribunal succeeded in preventing the counterrevolutionary forces of the WSF to sell out the proletarian fighters in Zimbabwe to the bourgeois state.

Only six month ago in an International Congress, we conquered both the resolutions and program that prepared our international fraction for the struggle of concentrating the forces of the revolutionaries while dispersing those of the reformists.

After years of isolation, the FLTI was set up. At the very moment the congress was being held, the FLTI strengthened two-fold its offensive and reached physically and personally Japanese Trotskyism to open a discussion with and intervene next to it. With them, we have agreed to open a public debate before the eyes of the world proletariat on the differences we have, while we strike together through international revolutionary campaigns, like that conducted with the aim of freeing the imprisoned Peruvian mineworkers.

Our FLTI has become a supporting point for the internationalist combat of the world proletariat and its fighting organizations. As a logic consequence today the FLTI has an effective presence at the hot places of the planet where the proletariat resists or even keeps attacking the exploiters -who try at all costs to make them pay for the catastrophe of Wall Street and the whole world capitalist economy.

While we were holding our first foundational congress of the FLTI, the proletariat responded to Bush and Obama’s counterrevolutionary operation -Cast Lead- over martyred Palestine with magnificent revolutionary actions like the workers and students’ uprising in Greece; or like in Guadeloupe, Martinique and Madagascar with great revolutionary battles of workers, peasants and soldiers united against French colonialism and the lackey bourgeoisies.
At the end of 2008 and the beginning of 2009 the world working class was trying to fight back the attacks launched on them by Big capital, and aiming to reach the centre of the international scene with their revolutionary actions. We were sure that, given that the world condition was passing through what we had defined as a transitory situation, a chance could be opening for the working class to use those combats as a starting point for a revolutionary counteroffensive like that of ’68-74.

Six months after the foundation of the FLTI we can say that we have passed the tests of the class struggle: we were able to define which would be the conditions for the victory of the first skirmishes of the advanced detachments of the revolutionary masses against the crac and the imperialist wars, and concentrated them in the corresponding resolutions for which we fight and are eager to die, resolutions that were published in our public papers. But in addition to that, and specifically we defined that in order to save itself from its debacle, bankrupt Capitalism would recruit and centralize all the counterrevolutionary treacherous leaderships in the planet so they defend its property, disorganize the assaults of the masses against it and conspire to defeat them. This centralization of the counterrevolutionary leaderships is what we have seen worldwide during the last few months.

These leaderships have acted all over the planet applying the same, centralized policy. They imposed counterrevolutionary pacts here and there to subordinate the proletariat to the bourgeoisie as in Palestine, Bolivia, Middle East, Iraq, Honduras, and Madagascar. They also acted like scabs playing their role of strikebreakers at every attempt of the working class to defend their wages, jobs and living conditions at an international level.

In the same way it happened in the early years of the 21st century when the World Social Forum was set up with the renegades of Trotskyism inside to support the Islamic and “Bolivarian” governments that expropriated everywhere the proletarian revolution; beginning in 2007 -at a time when the world crisis was staging a striptease of the capitalist system before the eyes of thousands of exploited around the world and the danger became real that Greece could spark Paris and New York-, the bourgeoisie had to set up the “New Anti-Capitalist” parties so that they, together with the US, Japanese or European union bureaucracies, could be able to contain and defeat any uprising or even any attempt by the working class to respond to the crisis in the heart of the imperialist powers.

Now we can see the 5th International of Chavez the Castroite bureaucrats and the Chinese neo-Kuomintang –that party of “red businessmen” and managers i.e. the Communist Party of China, junior partners of the imperialist powers in the plundering and exploitation of the Chinese working class- together with the world Stalinists, Social Democrats, union bureaucracies and the “anti-capitalist” parties.

Those are the truly saviours of capitalism in crisis; they are champions of the Finance Markets of London, Wall Street, Frankfurt, Tokyo and Paris. They are responsible of subordinating the US working class to the blackened Bush –i.e. Obama- and of making US workers abandon the combat that they had been waging together with their class brothers and sisters –the immigrants- against the imperialist war; as a result the whole US working class was weakened; thousands of immigrants were expelled from USA during the crisis, the hands of the US proletariat were tied up to make it surrender before the layoffs in GM and the massive retrenchments and loss of historical gains. These leaderships are declared enemies of the proletarian revolution. They are expropriators of revolutions. They are the true contention wall that the proletariat will have to destroy if it wants that the exploiters and the whole capitalist imperialist world system pay for the crisis; only so the proletariat will be able to move forward to the proletarian revolution.

It hasn’t been easy for this 5th column to disorganize the revolutionary combats of the masses, which –as in Greece, Guadeloupe and Madagascar- foreshadowed the prospect of a worldwide mass counteroffensive. They are like squeezed lemons, which, as agents of capital, will be taken until the last drop to save capitalism from the catastrophe. They are in charge of guaranteeing the paralyzing of the forces of the proletariat, of throwing water to the fire of the world revolutionary focuses.

Imperialist parasites are thoroughly aware of the role they need their agents to play. Because in order to leave the crisis behind what the imperialist powers, the corporations, their government, regimes and states need is to cause huge defeats to the world proletariat that allow the imperialist powers, and specifically so in the case of those that best succeed in their intents, to advance to higher military adventures in order to dispute their competitors the spheres of influence. They know that the role of the 5th column today is ultimately to prepare the way for counterrevolutionary blows like in Honduras, Afghanistan, the Swat Valley in Pakistan, that is, the conditions for Bonapartism and Fascism.

The masses’ energy hasn’t been exhausted despite the role of the popular front and the counterrevolutionary fences that have been built around them. A sample of this is the attempt of the masses to break the isolation in Guadeloupe, where despite and against the union bureaucracies of the French 5th Republic, of the perfidious French worker aristocracy and bureaucracies, the colony’s masses rose in a political 48 hours general strike to demand the payment of the promised 200 euros that the colonial French regime promised time ago and now refuses to pay. With its struggle, which is extended to Martinique the masses were threatening to open a mass political fight in the whole Caribbean, and even “infecting” other French colonies such as “Ile de la Reunion”.

Mexico, threatened by new imperialist attacks that want to appropriate the key branches of the state economy –like electricity and oil- has also showed this fighting disposition of the masses by means of a heroic combat of the working class against the privatization of the Mexican power company. Those combats developed despite and against the will of Zapatistas, PRD, the “business-minded” union bosses, the renegades of Trotskyism and all those who gave away the Oaxaca Commune. Hundreds of thousands of workers fought in the streets around the Zocalo and within it, clashing with the repressive forces and carrying on a political mass strike against the privatizations intended by the US agent, the Mexican state. The masses had at their head the rank and file workers of the SME (Mexican Electricians Union).

On July and August 2009 the Chinese proletariat with the advanced combats in Tonghua/Lingzou intervened for the first time since 1989 in decisive fights together with their class brothers and sisters of the world proletariat, accompanying China’s change of position in the world market. China today is placed not only as an exporter but also as an importer of consumer goods –as well as of raw materials and all kinds of supplies for the transnationals- which has been motorized by a cycle of state investments and subsidies amounting to 600 billion dollars. As we will see, this has created for the transnationals a golden opportunity for huge business gains, in selling computers, electronic devices and appliances, cars, etc. inside China’s domestic market.

As we will also demonstrate in the following pages –against the opinion of those who are devoting themselves to revise Marxism- under the present conditions of crisis and a new reconfiguration of the world division of labour, the state companies of the basic industries of China still operating from the times of the former worker state –which had been subsidized since the’80s at the expense of a generalized bankruptcy of all the state banks in 2001- have become hopelessly obsolete and are sinking China’s labour productivity average, even to lower levels than those in India and some sectors of Brazil.

The banks, mostly in hands of the US, British, etc. imperialist shareholders can’t keep subsidizing the obsolete state owned companies. They are now coming along to privatize them –like they did in Mexico with the electricity company- or like the process that USA is preparing with the IMF to get all the state owned companies of the former workers states of the eastern block; which are today submitted to the IMF as colonies. These first steps of the privatization offensive, which act as a real counter tendency to the fall of the rate of profit and to the ruin of the international finance capital in crisis, received –as we have said above- a first answer in Mexico from the electricity workers, and, at the beginning of 2009, also by the workers in Rumania, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary, who forced the IMF to bailout with billions of dollars the bankruptcy and default of those countries to prevent the generalized uprising of the masses. We have also seen this same response now in China with a direct class confrontation in Tonghua/Lingzou where the workers fought and stopped the privatization offensive in course in China. This offensive has the objective laying off the great majority of the one hundred million workers who produce in the state companies, a process that could even make the wave of privatizations in Latin America in the ‘90s look like mere anecdotes.

This new imperialist offensive to re-colonize China together with its plan of privatization- has split the Chinese bourgeoisie of the “red mandarins”. One faction is allied through the finances and the stock market to the US-UK financial capital and is for the immediate beginning of the privatizations. The other faction thinks that they could lose the source of their incomes as administrators of the broke state-owned companies. They also fear the Bonapartist Chinese regime’s sure loss of social base -and consequentially that of the CP of the “red businessmen”- in a layer of the working class that still maintains its gains in the state industry (nursery, health insurance, etc.).

But the proletariat irrupted through the gaps that were opened in the top, imposing –in two decisive combats of the great state owned industry- that whoever touches those industries would die; because they are not willing to starve to death through unemployment and no incomes.

These combats -which took the den of counterrevolutionaries of the CPC’s “red businessmen” by surprise- converged with the struggle of thousands of workers whose factories (30,000) were closed in 2008. In those factories, the bosses ran away, stopped production and didn’t pay their workers’ wages. But the workers marched to the town halls, building a human fence around them, invaded the offices and obliged the officials to pay them their wages regularly as if the companies had not been closed. Meanwhile the army has to deal - according to the magazine Foreign Affairs and its mentors of the CFR- with more than 250,000 peasant uprisings per year when it advances ever more towards deep China with the objective of taking the land from the peasants to build over those fields the highways and the industrial lots for the capitalist enterprises -and by the way of transforming those dispossessed peasants into cheap labour for the projected industrial plants.

From the combats of Tonghua/Lingzou on, China has entered a phase of revolts and mass mutinies, which in an embryonic way foreshadows a period of mass political and semi-insurrectional struggle.

As we will see below, in those events it appears ever more clearly that if the Bonapartist government of the “red businessmen“ of the Chinese CP is not defeated, the exploited will lose their land, their food and their jobs, and will only conquer slavery and starvation wages, and a new and worse re-colonization and submission of the Chinese nation to imperialism.

Thus, the economic struggle in defence of their jobs has begun to have at its vanguard sectors of the Chinese working class who for the first time since the events in Tiananmen Square are starting to be players and part of the combat of the world proletariat.Thousands of workers –in those places where factories were closed- mobilized themselves to the municipalities, threatening to cut the mayors’ heads, like in Tonghua /Lingzou, and because of that they now keep getting paid.

We are being told: “those are mere vanguard, spontaneous fights”. And when we, the Trotskyists of the FLTI, took those strikes as banners to the world proletariat, generalizing and divulging those experiences of the masses we consider as one million times superior to the plans of submission and defeat of the treacherous leaderships; we were told that those actions of the masses were not relevant, because the Chinese state had anticipated any possibility of resistance and given concessions to the workers, that it was not interested in shutting down Tonghua/Lingzou, etc. These people act, as Lenin used to say, as miserable liars before the world proletariat; because they want to disguise proletarian victories as defeats or concessions given by the class enemies, as the actual truth is that the “red businessmen” had to give something because they were afraid of losing everything.

Trade unionists do not tell the economic struggle from the political struggle. In times of crac and crises, any rank and file worker knows that the isolated and partial economic struggles become impotent, and that the bosses and their states try to make the workers pay, dosing the attacks factory by factory and sector of production by sector of production.

As Lenin said, the political struggle subsumes the economic struggle and elevates it to a superior stage. It is a phase in which the struggle for food means to confront the government, the regimes, the state army. It is a phase in which the masses understand more and more that without their defeating the class enemy even the minimum gain is lost, not even the minimum goal is attained.

In the regimes with elements of deception or the partially bourgeois democratic ones, the exploiters have in their hands some mechanisms that serve as buffers, through certain legitimacy of their institutions, in front of the mass action. These devices, as the state-ization of the unions, the union bureaucracy acting as an inner police force to control of the workers, and the reformist control of the workers organizations on the part of the worker aristocracy and bureaucracy, surround the class with a buffer to weaken or subside the class struggle. But on the other hand this buffer is continually mined as, under the conditions of the crisis not even the meagre crumbs that those leaderships exhibit in front of the masses can be disguised as reforms.

 In the case of China, as it has a police-military regime of the party of the “red bosses”, any economic struggle becomes immediately into a direct confrontation with the counterrevolutionary party of the capitalist restoration, the Chinese CP.

In this conjuncture of the class struggle at an international level, the Chinese working class and popular masses have entered a phase of revolts and of political struggle with which they hit directly the state and power. That is because any crisis poses directly a confrontation between the working class and the government with its counterrevolutionary repressive forces.

This situation, if it combines with a “boom” in its productive sectors that are linked to consumer goods (as is the case today) may impel the revolts for the land, the bread and the jobs to coordinate with a struggle by the working class for the re-distribution of the riches, a phenomenon that could push up the masses towards a superior stage in the combat and to a direct confrontation with the murderous Bonapartist government of the Chinese “mandarins” that restored capitalism in the country.

It is shameful to see the entire world left silencing together with the imperialist press this school of war that millions of Chinese exploited are passing through in which they are learning how to fight –under terrible conditions. The masses are flexing their muscles for the class war and learning directly in the terrain of combat –lynching bosses for sacking the workers of their factories, in the same way that in India 80,000 workers of the auto-parts industry did in Coimbratore.

The left, including Petras and the rest of the ANGLO-SAXON reformist petty bourgeois academicians only speak about “the dragon” and the “all-powerful Chinese monster” that robs the US workers from their jobs and their wages.

But nobody speaks before the American; British and all the world proletarians about the way in which the workers in China, India, Peru and Mexico fight and are a powerful example for their class sisters and brothers. All the servants to imperialism speak about the “Chinese colossus” but keep quiet about the gravediggers that that colossus has created against itself. Everybody is eager to silence the great combats the heroic and martyred Chinese workers have started to fight and that are already a part of the struggle of the world proletariat.


They keep quiet because they are the bourgeoisie and exploiters’ spokespersons, echoing their masters in putting the guilt of the low salaries and wages of the world working class on the shoulders of the Chinese workers. But the reality is completely different. It was the international finance capital and the new Chinese exploiters, emerging from the capitalist restoration in the former workers state, junior partners of imperialism who ruined the wages of the Chinese workers, enslaving them with a regime of oppression and terror ten times worse than that of Videla and Pinochet; the imperialists relocated their factories there and then went to generalize and impose all over the world the “Chinese” conditions in their maquilas.

As we affirm from the FLTI, the first internationalist task of each class conscious worker in the planet is overall to stop echoing as a parrot the ideology and the infamous lies invented by the exploiter classes.

We must all stand up beside the Chinese working class! Equal pay for equal work! This must be the demand of the US, European and Japanese workers regarding the Chinese working class if they want to defend their own wages and salary and their own jobs.

This program is also a matter of life and death –and fundamentally- for the US and Japanese working class, who are more and more submitted to Chinese-like conditions of slavery and exploitation. That was the essence of our declaration before the 47th Anti-war Assembly that we carried personally to Japan to the JRCL Congress.

Therefore when the FLTI was starting to transform those combats in banners to be generalized and extended, those parrots devoted themselves –even from within the ranks of our own international current- to dismiss them saying that they were “exceptions”, or what is even more serious: “the Chinese state is very rich, they said, so it gave concessions very quickly”. In that way they wanted to counter our fight for generalizing and extending the combats in Peru, in Tonghua/Lingzou. They wanted us to act in the same way as all the reformists did, i.e. silencing those combats before the eyes of the world proletariat.

As Trotsky said in “The Class, The Party and The Leadership” the masses in their spontaneity, fighting against their exploiters, forcing them to pay for the crisis, tend to place themselves in a 180º angle against the program of treasons and defeats that the treacherous leaderships impose to them.

We Trotskyists struggle to encourage those actions of the masses that are in a 180º angle with respect to the traitors and to prevent them from stopping even for a second; we struggle for the international proletariat to take them as a banner and a way to follow; we fight for breaking their isolation so those actions can be deepened and coordinated internationally, because in them, in that spontaneity that is the embryo of consciousness, lives the perspective of advancing to a generalized counteroffensive of the world proletariat and the conditions for Bolshevism to re-emerge and mature. Contrariwise, on the opposite direction only treason on the part of the counterrevolutionary leaderships and submission of the world proletariat to its exploiters can be found.

None of the pseudo leftists that speak in the name of revolutionary Marxism dares to tell the truth to the proletariat, but, which is this truth?: the masses in their spontaneity have been able to go far beyond the limits imposed on them and even to accomplish some partial gains by means of terrorizing their class enemy, something they would not have been able to get under the leadership of the treacherous reformist currents, servants to the bourgeoisie. No union or bureaucracy, or World Social Forum chapter convened to the barricades in Greece, to the Madagascan exploited masses’ armed uprising for food, or even to the working class mutinies in Tonghua/Lingzou and Coimbratore.

By struggling with revolutionary methods, and going for everything, here and there, in China, in Peru, in Mexico, etc., the masses set a limit to the new counterrevolutionary offensives of the exploiters, in spite and against the will of their leaderships, which, trying by all means to liquidate that spontaneity, disorganize the masses’ combats, lessen their extent and put them to the feet of the bourgeoisie. That is precisely the main task of revolutionary Marxism: to untie the hands of the working class in order that it can fight freely, conquer its self-organization and advance to superior levels of struggle.

Contrariwise, wherever the general staffs of the World Social Forum, the renegades of Trotskyism and the union bureaucracies are in charge, the battlefield appears plagued by defeats, sell-offs, great struggles being betrayed, and by the victory of the exploiters. That is the truth.

We have seen that in deep Peru, the masses of workers and poor peasants keep on uprising. All variations of Stalinism have trenched in Lima, in the CGTP, to prevent any general political strike from emerging to centralize the local revolts and semi-insurrections in a single mass revolutionary independent action to overthrow the Fujimorista regime of the FTA and Alan Garcia.

In Europe, Greece has become undoubtedly the weakest link in the imperialist dominion. It foreshadows the very serious crisis of recession and depression existing in most of the European countries, marked by the brutal indebtedness of its states, which had to run to bailout their finance capital and their transnationals from bankruptcy, all of them badly touched by the world crisis and involved and compromised by the popping of the Wall Street bubble.

Pre-announcing that the world crisis not only doesn’t allow the emerging of new imperialist powers but also that there are already too many of them around, Greece creaks under the burden of a 12% budget deficit (four times that allowed by the UE rules) and a 300,000 million dollars debt (almost 120% of its GDP), which threats with a generalized default and with leaving the country loose and switched off the world economy.

In addition, the crisis of the Greek state and the increasingly acute attack against the masses are beginning to end with the provisory stability conquered by the bourgeois regime against the masses. In the anniversary of the revolutionary rallies and barricade combats of 2009, thousands of workers and student mobilized through the streets. The police and military forces detained hundreds of activists while proto-fascists gangs attacked the offices of the workers’ parties. This week rallies and demonstrations by the civil servants and other workers, and an indefinite general strike that threatens to surpass the contention strikes called by the main central unions show the the Greek spark is already alive and well.

The extreme rottenness of the objective conditions doesn’t allow the Greek bourgeoisie or the opportunist leaderships of the proletariat –like the anarchy-unionism or the “anti-capitalists”- to live in peace. Those leaderships with their unionist and parliamentary cretinism together with Stalinism have prevented a second mass assault in a revolutionary process that is latent in Greece and has not been completely dissipated. In spite of the will of those leaderships the vanguard of the Greek proletarians –the immigrants and the temporary workers have stood up. Those “poor devils” as they were called by the Third and the Fourth Internationals, always abandoned to their fate by the worker aristocracies and union bureaucracies, have stood up, raising their demands, and are again entering the battlefield, as when they were the vanguard of the Athens uprisings of 2009.

The conclusion can’t be other than that in an international transitory situation –with revolutionary processes left isolated because of the treacherous leaderships- the capitalist offensive has not been yet able to liquidate completely the mass spontaneity and will to response; the possibility of a mass counteroffensive is still in the air though the phase is more of a defensive character; it is not a revolutionary who abandons the battlefield before the masses are definitively defeated.

In these responses, expressed in the form of revolts, sudden upsurges, political strikes, lives as a revolutionary unabated spark the fighting spirit of the masses; it is about centralizing and generalizing them as fruitful experiences for the world proletariat. It is about understanding that this new stage, a “more defensive” one, but consisting in a mass struggle of a political character, that shapes the present world conjuncture, expresses that the open revolutionary processes –as yesterday in Bolivia, Madagascar or Guadeloupe, have been fenced, as was the martyred Palestine, by the centralized action of the counterrevolutionary leaderships.

The transitory situation tends to become provisory and indefinite. The counterrevolutionary leaderships have succeeded for the moment in creating a buffer between the exploited and the crisis of the exploiters in order to safeguard the latter’s interests.

We are in the fourth moment of the world economic crisis
It is the time when imperialist powers are preparing to discharge against the masses and oppressed people the indebtedness of their states with which they bailed out the financial capital in crisis.


Both revisionists of Marxism and opportunists, that believe that what has happened up to now in the catastrophe of the world economy is all what the imperialist rotten system has to show, are wrong. The crisis is reaching a decisive moment on its outcome; it is reaching new rounds –like in Greece and Dubai- that will hit the working class and the masses harder so they pay for a lot more to cover the indebtedness of the states.

The stagflation pushed by the dollar devaluation, the depression pushed by the overvalued euro and yen; despite the counter tendencies to the crisis –like the very small consumer cycle created in China where they try to counterweight the huge crisis of overproduction of the world economy - are only preparing further explosions like in Dubai and Greece; new attacks to the masses one million times higher than before, and new wars, that will come if counterrevolutionary pacts like that in Honduras or those that isolate the masses in Palestine, Iraq, Madagascar, Bolivia, etc., are successfully imposed.

From the point of view of this fourth moment in the world economic crisis, this is now expressing itself by developing a wide process of depression and recession on one pole –as we now see in the European imperialist powers, accompanied by a brutal indebtedness of their states, which amounts to the 70-80% of their GDP; in this sense Portugal, Italy and Spain are queuing before Greece in the default line. A recession lasts even in USA, where the profits and earnings of the banks and the corporations are recovering due to the remittances of the royalties, profits and other earnings extracted through the pilfering of the semi-colonial world and thanks particularly to the conjuncture of a consumerist cycle in China. The dominant power whose domestic market consists already of the whole world cannot yet recover itself from recession.

Meanwhile, on the other pole, the imperialist powers have found a counter-tendency to the crisis of over production of the transnationals and to the fall of the rate of profit, by forcing its servant the counterrevolutionary restorationist Chinese bourgeoisie, to invest in a new consumerist cycle a part of its super profits, that is of the surplus value extracted from its own working class.

So after putting a trillion dollars to cover the US deficit, the “powerful Chinese dragon” was forced to give 600 billion dollars to its banks (mainly controlled by the HSBC, JP Morgan and the French BNP Paribas, as we will see later on) which leveraged one trillion plus 600 billion dollars in consumer credits, and investments… for the transnationals. These have been able to multiply the number of credit cards (Visa, American Express, Master Card) to a rate of one each 10 inhabitants of China. That is, 160 million credit cards (we insist: they are from Visa, AMERICAN EXPRESS, MASTER CARD, all of them thoroughly broke in Wall Street) so that the transnationals can sell 12 million cars and more than 185 millions in home appliances, and other consumer goods in the Chinese domestic market, which has consumed and goes on consuming fridges, TV sets, vehicles and computers from Westinghouse, Phillips, Whirlpool, Toyota, Sony, Renault, Ford, GM, Mercedes Benz, Hewlett Packard, Apple, and so on.

This impressed deeply on all the chatterboxes of the world reformist left. Because, of course! The Chinese Mandarins went away all over the world in a buying spree to get minerals, oil and raw materials in Africa, Asia and Latin America. And they bought them from… the imperialist transnationals that control in those regions the minerals, the steel, etc. Then they sold those supplies and raw materials at a subsidized price to the imperialist transnationals, which have been the only ones gathering a profit from this consumerist cycle in China. And this same so-much-talked-about Chinese consumerist cycle is acting as a counter-tendency to the crisis of overproduction and the fall in the rate of profit in all the branches and sector of production worldwide. Or are you going to say that the 12 million cars or the 7 million computers sold are pure Chinese?

In another chapters we will go over this topic to explain the actual slap on the face of the working class and the Marxist theory that this “explanation” of a counterrevolutionary gain of the world imperialist system means –namely, the capitalist restoration of the former worker states giving way to a sort of portent embodied in a former worker state transformed into a imperialist power … the definition of China that the reformists give today. Actually the supposed “wonder” is merely the fact that new markets and fresh blood had been given away by the Stalinist (either the “soviet” or Maoist, etc. varieties) counterrevolutionary betrayal when restoring capitalism and giving the worker states as a gift to the world capitalist market; fresh blood that was transfused into the sclerotic veins and arteries of the decaying capitalist system and helped it to outlive itself.

Meanwhile the depression and recession invade Europe and a wide inflationary process that is caused by the devaluation of the US dollar expands all over the world –being this the way in which US downloads its crisis on the shoulders of the rest of the world, imperialist rivals included, also motorizing this superpower’s transformation from a net buyer to a big exporter in the world new division of labour.

In this fourth moment of the present world economic crisis, the bankrupt capitalist system saved by the treacherous leaderships has borrowed a breathing space. It is only a brief alleviation, as when a dying person is put under a mechanical respirator to help him breathe a little more time. But this time, in spite of the medical help, it goes on gasping, breathing arrythmically, lacking desperately oxygen from a continuous source, because the transfusion comes not from a supposedly new Chinese finance capital, but from super profits, the super plus value extracted from the Chinese and international labour force and from the extra riches of oil and gas extracted from the former soviet republics, specially from Russia in the case of the German and other European imperialists.

Nobody doubts that these super-profits and extra riches are an able mechanical respirator, but it is not enough to resolve the huge crisis and indebtedness of the European imperialist states, beginning with their enormous deficits that outgrow their GDPs, so that those states will have to make their workers and popular masses pay for them with inflation and a direct attack against their jobs, wages and living conditions, including those of the peoples that they oppress in their spheres of influence.

We are speaking about a capitalism having had victories that today it uses as a lifebelt not to sink into the abyss of History in its bankruptcy. The first of those victories is its ability to buy all the leaderships of the proletariat in order to get an extra life span, it has been able to recruit them to help it hide its profits and to throw all its losses and crises on the shoulders of the masses.

At the same time, this filthy system borrows time to wait for the best moment to attack with decisive blows its own working class in the imperialist countries; moreover it has began to throw over those masses a hell of layoffs, wage cuts and privations. And in Italy and US, with semi-fascist misdeeds and raids against the immigrants –as happened to the coloured workers attacked in the south of Italy or as it happens daily in the US-Mexico border against the Latino, Asian, etc., labourers- imperialism has began to show a sample of what it has prepared for the whole of the working class.

This filthy system borrows time finding new usages for the new markets it conquered in ’89. This time it not only takes advantage of China and Vietnam “comparative advantages”, i.e. cheap, almost slave-like labour with a relative degree of qualification, but now it makes them play the role of new consumer markets. The imperialist powers are taking advantage today, amid the world crisis,  of the relocation of their imperialist enterprises all over the world, which allowed them settle the counterrevolutionary offensive of 2001/2002 in their favour, plaguing the semi colonial world with its maquilas (sweatshops). As an example  we can mention the relocation of auto plants, principally assemblers, to India, to the Mercosur countries in Latin America or to China; the textile industry moved its plants to Egypt, Pakistan and Vietnam; also the high-tech industries moved to India, where the 70% of Silicon Valley relocated, because highly qualified info-tech engineers and programmers could do in exchange for a very much lower salary the same production that in the US cost 10-20 times more.

This relocation that the imperialists powers as Germany or France also effected, this time within the east European block, is a powerful advantage that the imperialist powers have against their own working classes, an advantage that allows them to blackmail their workers with the specter of unemployment due to their moving the production abroad.

Through these moves new consumer niches were also created, and the finance capital expanded its giant supermarkets and technological corporations together with all the production of consumer goods. But the recession that has not receded in Japan, US and Europe shows that we are merely in front of a simple counter-tendency to the crisis of overproduction and the fall of the rate of profit, as this new consumer cycle in some areas of the planet, like that in China, is not accompanied by the export of tool-machines, new assembly lines and fresh investment in a technology able to revive the production in the main imperialist countries. No doubt this breakthrough will only be found with the production of destructive forces for the present and future wars.

In this world conjuncture capitalism has been following faithfully the laws of its epoch of decay: it has created here and there niches for reproducing itself while it destroyed entire zones and branches of production at a world level. Moreover, it has deepened a process of disinvestment in the metropolis and of overinvestment in some sectors of the semi colonies in the production for the world market economy, at the expense of destroying the most part of the productive forces that were established in the most developed imperialist countries.

This process is expressed in the world economy in some semi colonial countries or nations, where a process of creeping growth continues, though tumbling and in a disorderly way accompanying the consumerist mini “boom” in China; those “still growing” economies, are acting as suppliers of raw material under the master’s voice of the seed, oil, steel, food, etc., transnationals. You can see clearly this process in the MNCs established in Mercosur, as well as in India subsumed in a new slavery to the service of US-UK and in the African countries under the domination of the Anglo-American.

But… showing that we are watching a mere little countertendency in the catastrophe of the international finance capital, not even one of the miracle countries, from China to the new exporter countries, including among them the most important, USA (which with the devaluation of the dollar is attuned to become again a big exporter) has achieved the resolution of the huge growth of its industrial reserve army, the increase of the layoffs and suspensions, showing a chronic unemployment… all of which is an irrefutable proof that the productive forces not only have stagnated, they are in a frank involution.

This is so because the bankrupt world capitalist economy, absolutely broke, in these specific niches of growth makes the proletariat produce in conditions that make it pay more than ever the world economic crisis, with a tremendous increase of both the absolute and relative surplus value. This leaves millions of workers in the metropolises in recession, and also in the colonial and semi colonial world, to the mercy of the open attack of Capital, with the sinking of their wages and salaries and their living conditions. And millions of new outcasts go to enlarge, as the 3rd International used to say, a new true sub-species or sub-race of human beings, the perpetual unemployed, who cannot even dream any more of entering again the productive cycle.

We Trotskyists affirm, against the entire impressionist petty bourgeois left -stuck to the coattails of the bourgeoisie, that in spite of theses countertendencies, that is, in spite of these consumer cycles in some sectors of the planet, the world imperialist system has not been able yet to come out of the crisis as a whole. And the precise size of this, showing that we are in a fourth moment of the crisis, is the atrocious indebtedness of the imperialist states, that have yet to make the masses of the colonial and semi colonial world pay for it with new re-colonization wars and superior attacks to the workers in their own countries.

The other exact measurement of the amount of the crisis that is on and on, without the global re-composition of the rate of profit of Big Capital is the preservation and continuous enlargement of the industrial reserve army which has developed as a chronic phenomenon. Anybody could suspect that it takes 10 colonial slaves going as immigrants to England or US to destroy or deplete the expense budgets of any imperialist state, if one watches the relentless persecution to the immigrants in all the imperialist powers.

We affirm that beyond the declaration in the last Davos summit by the representatives of international finance capital stating that today the breakthrough for the problems descended on their business lay in India, Russia, China or Brazil, not even there where they are concentrating capital in investments that recompose in a provisory way their rate of profit, the workers that had been expelled out of production by the crisis of 2007/2008 recover their jobs; meanwhile the layoffs and the chronic unemployment are deepening in most of the metropolises and also in the colonial and semi colonial, with the loss of more than 800 millions jobs worldwide and 1.2 billion of starving people (at least 11 million of them are going to literally die of hunger each year, according to FAO and other starvation administering agencies), from which those who have only fried clay tortillas to eat –as it happens in Haiti- are only a small sample.

All the imperialist ideologues are guessing… if in Wall Street almost all the big banks are now again out of the red ink and are showing impressive profits, if the super finance capital has recovered its profits and is even giving enormous dividends to its stockholders and handing out juicy bonuses to its CEOs, why US, UK, France and Germany cannot yet feel sailing in sure waters, while Spain, Portugal and Italy are sinking in the financial swamp following the steps of Greece?

The response to those guessing is exactly in what we affirm. There are counter tendencies consisting in the pilfering and super exploitation of the colonial and semi colonial world to unheard levels, the absorption of new markets conquered by the world capitalist economy, like China or Russia, and the victory embodied in the relocation of the imperialist enterprises, which weakened the proletarians of the imperialist countries thanks to the betrayal of their leadership that continually ties up their hands impeding them to struggle freely and facilitates imperialism the extraction of super profits from the colonial and semi colonial world. As we have said before, these countertendencies are a breathing space, which gives some precious profits to the parasites of the finance capital who quickly pocket them, at the expense of maintaining the majority of the inhabitants of the planet under water.

Thus we see now in China an expansion cycle, this time a consumerist one, that accompanies a stock exchange “boom” and a real estate bubble. This consumerist cycle has decanted 160 million of rich Chinese consuming amid a sea of 1,2 billion starving slaves; the former are meanwhile indebting themselves with their credit cards, while 400 million peasants are evicted from their land at gunpoint in order that those fields can be used to reopen and/or build new factory facilities, which will not be able to give jobs, surely, even to the 10% of the dispossessed peasants, because before they are ready to produce a new crac caused by the Chinese chronic overinvestment, the overproduction of goods, the fall of the rate of profit and the bursting of the real state and financial bubbles, will shake China to its foundations not very far from now.

There to this tiny Chinese consumerist cycle (that only seems big because of the inherent huge proportions of the country), all the capitalists of the world have run for super profits. There the laws of the fall of the rate of profit will act and deepen their effects. This process will sharpen the conditions of re-colonization of a China already sacked and pilfered with its martyred working class, yesterday as an exporting maquila and today doubly sacked in its savings capacity and its domestic consumption by the MNC and its junior partners, the managers and bosses of their factories, that festering sore of History, the old Stalinist bureaucracy become today in new bourgeoisie, slithering as snakes in the service of the imperialist power.

Meanwhile the “Chinese” banks, in majority hands of the international finance capital have set their investments, that is the funds given to them by the Chinese state, not mainly to help the consumption – as most of the Keynesians that claim to be Marxists believe- but to real estate and to the financial casinos of the Shanghai, Beijing… and Hong Kong stock exchanges. In this way a real state bubble is being created and re-created in Shanghai and Beijing whose bursting will show that China is going “to keep the losses” and the finance capital with the profits, preparing to submit China once more with more and thicker chains.

We Trotskyists affirm that the European, US and Japanese recession (that has created a bunch of outcasts out of the countries of the former Eastern Block countries, of Africa, Asia Latin America and the Middle East) not only is going on, but it will continue developing without a respite unless the value of the titles, shares, bonds and currency existent in the world economy achieve the same value as the goods created by the human work, that is, it will develop up to the moment that the imperialist system succeeds in destroying enough riches and re-concentrates the capital in new and more enormous trusts and monopolies that, leaving behind them winners and losers, could end controlling the decisive branches of production in the world economy.

The rate of profit cannot be recovered without Big Capital achieving strategic victories over the international proletariat and the oppressed peoples of the world with new wars, fascists’ putsches and counterrevolutionary coups, so that the exploited are forced to pay for the 90 trillion dollars that the capitalist system has devoured as profits before having produced them. What lies ahead for the exploited is new catastrophes, wars, generalized starvations and new historic convulsions, because the world capitalist system will not get out of its crises without them; it would only get away partially from them in a creeping and miserable way, in some and delimited branches of production, at the expense of destroying most of them immediately after, preparing new crises and new wars.

Nothing to wonder about: this is the way in which the world capitalist system functions in its epoch of death agony, that of imperialism.

The historical prognosis of Socialism or Barbarism keeps exacerbating.
The race between crisis and proletarian revolution goes on. A winner has not yet been defined


In the meantime because of their crisis of leadership, the masses, here and there betrayed by the fifth column, haven’t been able to centralize their combats and were forced to retreat to isolated political fights –sometimes defensive and sometimes offensive- that act as sparks of political revolutionary fight by the masses twinkling here and there in the planet. The political fight against privatizations in Mexico, the local semi insurrections in deep Peru of the workers and peasants, the tough combats in Lingzou and Tonghua (China), Guadeloupe getting back to the combat against French colonialism to get the €200 with political strikes; the direct physical fight against their exploiters as in Tonghua and Coimbratore (India) are just symptoms of what we say here.

The prognosis of “socialism or barbarism” is already here as an immediate, concrete historical alternative. New catastrophes threaten us if the proletariat through the proletarian revolution does not prevent the capitalist catastrophe; because capitalism will only survive over the ruin and decadency of the exploited and the whole society.

The overproduction caused by overinvestment in the works in China, as all the parrots to the service of imperialism are announcing with fear, coming after a consumerist “boom”, a “boom” in the stock exchanges, a real estate bubble, will signal the moment in which the Chinese veneer business WILL BE OVER AND IT WOULD NOT ALLOW ENOUGH ROOM FOR EVERYONE TO SUBSIST AND GET PROFITS.

Meanwhile today we are witnessing a pressure from the part of US and UK to force China to revalue even more its currency and enlarge its reserves in dollars –in order to deepen the consumerist cycle that would allow US to export goods to China directly from any place in the world, doubling its present volume of exports. This imperialist blackmailing by Obama anticipates that more and thicker chains are being prepared to enslave the Chinese semi colony.

This is what got crazy and exasperated such an amount of impressionist petty bourgeois, specially those that dwell in the San Francisco Bay, always prompted to get the “Chinese specter” out of the trunk to prevent the American working class from getting up again on its feet in its anti imperialist struggle, together with the Chinese working class, against their own imperialist bourgeoisie. The reformist left, which speaks full-mouthed about the “dragon” and the ”new Chinese imperialists monster” -a “monster” that is being today robbed up to its bowels by the international finance capital, which these gentlemen are actually covering- will break their teeth against Mount Everest. No doubt the inexorable laws of capitalism, the fall of the rate of profit that this new process is already pre-announcing, will make the fictitious consumerist cycle in China burst and evaporate, carrying with it the collapse and the default of the “emerging countries” –i.e. the so called BRICs- that are today seen from Davos as a source of countertendencies to the fall of the rate of profit of the imperialist powers. Certainly, when such a thing happens, the moment would have come in which there will not be a place for the whole bunch of imperialist powers not only in China but also in India, Brazil, Middle East, anywhere in Asia or any other sphere of influence of the international finance capital.

That is what lies ahead of the present consumerist cycle in China that is a mere countertendency to the world crisis beginning in 2007/2008.

In that moment, when the new Chinese –Indian, Brazilian- bubble bursts; when the European working class is to be forced openly to pay for the bailout of the imperialist banks that are thoroughly broke and for the indebtedness of the European states; we Trotskyists affirm that nothing will last of the alleged harmony or silence that today reign in imperialist powers that today look as “Sleeping Beauties”, deep in their thoughts, chewing up philosophically their terrible deficits and state debts.

Take into account that the crisis of the Shanghai stock exchange in 2007 was the harbinger of the fall of the rate of profit of the international finance capital and of its present bankruptcy. In the last meeting in Davos, the spokespersons of the finance capital discussed if this small “Chinese boom” would be apt to last 2,3 or 5 years, While they prepare to intervene, in front of the crisis and the default as in Dubai. And also in front of that in the works in Greece or Spain, that are today the weaker links of a chain of imperialist dominance that is beginning to creak quickly and ominously.

The crac is still here to stay. Not enough destruction has been achieved, the capital has not been concentrated enough, the masses have not been sufficiently smashed and scattered, the production of destructive forces has not reached the necessary level; too many imperialist powers are still roaming around the planet. The rivals that have to be reduced to kneeling vassals are still on their feet.

Big Capital has not yet recovered its rate of profit; there are too many imperialist powers at large. The last news that corroborates that these are the inexorable tendencies of the present crisis is that Greece and Spain have been sent to do their homework under the surveillance of the IMF, which acts as a veritable gendarme of the financial masters of the G-20 to liquidate broke states and corporations in bankruptcy under the imperialist mandate of US, Germany, France, UK and Japan. Before the IMF these minor imperialist powers as Greece and Spain have to give account of their acts and adopt painful austerity plans as if they were a third-hand banana republic of the 90’s.

In the next crisis, either if it takes place in China, Russia, Brazil, India, Spain, Greece, etc., it will be decided what imperialist power will get those new or old markets, and what will not, that is which will be definitively the winners and which the losers. Whichever takes control of these new markets, and has the upper hand in the process that has already been opened of concentration of capital in the different branches of production, will be part of the winners; whichever is left behind will be a loser.

There does not pass a single day without a merger, a buyout or a mutual destruction of the trusts and cartels, what marks a gigantic concentration and re-concentration and centralization in all the branches of the production in the world economy.

 We have just witnessed the American Kraft devouring Cadbury and reigning unrivaled in the food industry. Long respected Toyota is shaking to the foundations in Japan because of the campaign against it due to the “flawed cars with the dangerous jammed accelerator”. We see the US banners, GM and Ford, getting rid of those production lines that bring them huge losses and become obsolete, as the Opel and Volvo, and selling them to the Chinese patent-seekers who are going to pay with royalties for the right to produce in China obsolete cars with obsolete technologies and long-depreciated machinery, while the MNC of the automakers re-concentrate closing plants, destroying or paralyzing factories, developing new assembly lines of new vehicles that are smaller, and use electricity or other alternative sources of energy. But overall, we see them super exploiting and exacerbating the extraction of both absolute and relative Surplus value from their workers, in order to modernize and reconvert their businesses.

The US and Canadian mining companies and their Australian partners, together with those from UK have launched a ferocious offensive over Africa and Latin America, signing agreements with the governments to extract minerals and sack to the bones those resources using whatever method even the most harmful for the population of those countries, and then they sell those commodities overpriced to their servants, the Chinese Mandarins. The same happens with the production of alternative energy, where the Danish Vestas with German capitals is taking this entire branch of production, or the German medicine producer Bayer that is buying big and merging with lots of smaller companies (running a race against the US Pfizer that is absorbing Wyeth and other minor rivals), or the US Boeing competing with the European Airbus in the aeroplane race. And all of them are concentrating more and more, putting their competitors and “free competition” on their knees, as Trotsky said in the ‘30s, affirming that the monopoly does not abolish competition, but takes it over.


The current moment of the crisis and war

But all this cannot develop peacefully in the planet, because the greatest countertendency to the paralysis of the imperialist corporations and the crisis is not only the Chinese consumerist “boom”, but, and essentially the US military-industrial conglomerate, which is responsible for most of that country’s deficit. In the activities of that conglomerate the key corporations linked to the Wall Street banks reconstitute their rate of profit, driving the US state to prolong old wars and to launch new ones, to advance in re-colonizing offensives, as in Iraq, Afghanistan and now Pakistan; they also work to multiply the quantity of overt or covert American military bases in the planet in order to protect and defend their businesses and their spheres of influence.

They know for certain that the “Chinese boom” is prone to be a short-lived one. They know, and are already afraid of it as each day brings with it the possibility of a volcanic awakening of the Chinese proletariat, of its deeper layers, which amount to 300 million of exploited. This highly probable possibility makes their hair stand on the end whenever any imperialist “analyst” dares to bring this topic to the surface.

Imperialist strategists, as well as us revolutionary Marxists, know perfectly that China will witness a ferocious dispute for its market, for its cheap/slave-like labor, and that the end of the movie will bring either a proletarian revolution or a partitioned and occupied China, in the way it was in many years of the twentieth century.

US-UK Big Capital knows that behind the tags that read “Made in China” there lay the exports of the main European and Japanese MNC, which supply the Chinese bosses with patents, technology, assembly lines and machinery, under the exclusive control of European and Japanese finance capital to export to the US market or to their own countries and spheres of influence. The present hawkiness of Obama with respect to China, the tension created between the two countries, Obama’s demand that China goes to the WTO to declare which patents it is effectively honoring, are merely ways of warning the European and Japanese competitors about who is really the boss in China, who effectively has the upper hand there.
That is why the US imperialism has begun deploying and mobilizing troops and reinforcing its bases in Hong Kong and has also signed an agreement with Japan to maintain its bases in Okinawa and the entire region.

It is a matter of life and death for the proletariat to prevent this process through the victory of the proletarian revolution, because if this process goes on developing, the way to future inter-imperialist wars would be open. The powers that have to give in these disputes in the next years and in this trade war that is in course, all those that are put aside and lose their old markets and the prospect of new ones, no doubt will arm themselves and become the “aggressors”. These are the ineluctable laws of Capital that make it survive if the proletarian revolution does not prevent it.

Truly, the rate of profit would not reconstitute itself in the whole of the branches of production in the world economy unless the totality of that economy does not work for the sake of war, for destruction.

It is necessary to define with precision the rhythm and the tuning of the world situation. For the currents of the reformist left enrolled in the catastrophist variety, especially those in US-UK, the inter-imperialist war is round the corner.

Within the FLTI, a minority current affirmed in November that a new Chinese imperialism was emerging, as we will see, because of the Chinese “national peculiarities”, using the same theoretical method of explaining the changes and anomalies appealing to “national peculiarities” used by the pseudo-theories of Stalinism, which coined that of “socialism in one single country”.

In this case, it was a genuine continuation of the Cliffites, affirming that the “power of the Chinese state enterprises had propelled that country to dispute a share of the world”.
In the mentioned document not even a word is dedicated to the wars that punctuated the emergence of the imperialist powers in an already partitioned world. Not even a word about which were the Chinese military bases to defend its “colonies” and “spheres of influence”.

Lenin has already warned about the difference between capitalism in the 19th and the 20th centuries. According to him, that difference boiled down to the fact that England wanted to get rid of its colonies –conquered in previous centuries- during the 19th century because they had become a burden in terms of money, and England would prefer to trade with them as independent nations; contrariwise, for imperialist England, the loss of its colonies would signify disappearing as such, and specifically it would not have been able to buy its own working class through handouts and privileges, in order to avoid even the least vestige of the danger of a proletarian revolution.

Lenin affirmed that there is no imperialism without colonies, spheres of influence and sources of raw materials, military bases and wars to defend its dominions.

Our minority, silencing the fact that in their document of two months ago they had ignored completely Hong Kong and Taiwan as Chinese territory occupied by US and NATO, plays overnight a sudden and bold about-face affirming that the Third World War is looming.

Thus the minority of the FLTI changes without a transition, from a pacifist instance, from seeing the emerging of a new imperialist power without wars, colonies, military bases… to the prediction of an imminent Third World War!

And why? What has changed to explain this instant conversion? The explanation is that the imperialist press began to speak about movement of troops in Hong Kong and Taiwan. It happened the “pressure” by Obama over his servants the Chinese bosses.

Thus, the minority passed from posing “zero wars” to pose “war is coming now”, only they stated that they were not for the military victory of China against US. What a shame! They have suddenly changed their positions as an adaptation to a social-pacifist policy within US.
Along the 60 pages of their November document the affirm that in the case of a war between US and China, that war would certainly be for the re-colonization of the latter so that they would be with China and against US. Now they have changed their position, they are defeatists on both sides.

Now, both their first and their second position are thoroughly opportunistic positions before a war between China and US. We must recall that now, without telling that they have changed their position, in their declarations on Haiti and on the Third World War, they announce that they will be defeatists with regard to both sides. That is, they are vulgar social-pacifists that would not be for the victory of the oppressed nation (China) against the oppressor (US); they were not and continue not to be –when they “defended” China in their former documents- for the expulsion and defeat of the US-UK troops from Hong Kong and Taiwan. Contrariwise, we revolutionary Trotskyist have always been and will always be for that expulsion and defeat, in the same way we are for the expulsion and defeat of the imperialist troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We don’t see in them even the least vestige of a revolutionary policy, either then or now.
This is only an example of many of the way that the petty bourgeois current evolve, and because of their revisionism they end following as the shadow follows the body the movements of their respective imperialist powers.

The theoreticians that say that an imperialist China has emerged should have to accelerate their campaigns about the imminent Third World War before the world proletariat. Already in Davos the imperialist representatives have said that only 3-4 years lie in front of us before the moment the Chinese “boom” bursts and the cannons begin to speak in the trade wars, to define which imperialist power takes all in the dispute for China.

The minority has to go out quickly declaring that they are for the defeat of US, but at the same time they are not for a Chinese victory. That is, the same servile policy towards England that the entire English left had when the 1982 war for the Malvinas (a.k.a Falkland Islands), namely, “Neither with England nor with Argentina”, because England is imperialist and Argentina, though a semi-colony, was ruled in that time by a military dictatorship. An open rupture with Trotskyism that affirms: “In Brazil there now reigns a semifascist regime that every revolutionary can only view with hatred. Let us assume, however, that on the morrow England enters into a military conflict with Brazil. I ask you, on whose side of the conflict will the working class be? I will answer for myself personally—in this case I will be on the side of “fascist” Brazil against “democratic” Great Britain. Why? Because in the conflict between them it will not be a question of democracy or fascism. If England should be victorious, she will put another fascist in Rio de Janeiro and will place double chains on Brazil. If Brazil on the contrary should be victorious, it will give a mighty impulse to national and democratic consciousness of the country and will lead to the overthrow of the Vargas dictatorship. The defeat of England will at the same time deliver a blow to British imperialism and will give an impulse to the revolutionary movement of the British proletariat. Truly, one must have an empty head to reduce world antagonisms and military conflicts to the struggle between fascism and democracy. Under all masks one must know how to distinguish exploiters, slave-owners, and robbers! (Leon Trotsky,“Anti-Imperialist Struggle is Key to Liberation” - An Interview with Mateo Fossa (September 1938) First Published: Socialist Appeal, 5 November 1938)

We are facing a revisionism that already begins to justify and set up a program that is wholly social-imperialist. The labor aristocracy and the petty bourgeoisie riding on Obama’s coattails is the material basis that propels the emergency of these new catastrophist currents.

Also some of them, every year devote themselves to foretell wars between US and China/Russia, making the proletariat believe that the Chinese “bogey-man” and the Russian “monster” may be trying to launch their nukes and biological weapons over US. But instead, what exists in those countries are counterrevolutionary white armies that only serve to massacre their own peoples for the sake of this or that imperialist power.

We Marxists know that the counterrevolutionary armies of Putin and Hu Jintao only exist for the sake of smashing their own peoples and perform genocides as in Chechnya or Tiananmen.
The problem for the imperialist powers is whether the proletarian revolution climbs again to the top of the agenda in China and Rusia, throwing down the infamous regimes of the capitalist restoration. In order to impede that they have NATO and its military bases, which so conveniently served that purpose in the Balkans. There are also the US, French or UK military bases to dispute those territories, as they have done once and again during the twentieth century and are ready to do in the twenty first century.

 With their position they are whitewashing Germany, which in the case it is again fenced and isolated, will arm itself to the teeth and foster fascist murderers worse that Hitler. From the bowels of a bankrupt Japan and a cornered Italy will emerge 500 “Mikados”, “Francos” and “Mussolinis”, as there already emerged counterrevolutionary Bushes in US, who will be seen as “democratic doves” in comparison with fascism that will roam over the entire US if this country initiate in the next period a decay, losing spheres of influence in the planet, as its fortunetellers are just announcing.

As Trotsky said in “Whither France?” the timing in politics is so essential as is the tempo in Music to define what kind of music we are playing or listening to.

According to these catastrophist currents new world wars would be in the works embracing “imperialist China and Russia against the US block”, as they now voice to the four corners of the planet. They announce a looming war in a moment when by now the imperialist powers limit themselves to disputing in an ungentlemanly way the spheres of influence, the concentration in the branches of production, the new technologies, and for the moment all of them have an equal say in the pecking order of the “Chinese poultry yard”.

These people believe that the imperialist powers, after all the experience they gathered during the twentieth century, don’t know that wars are the midwives of revolutions. These people have forgotten that before the imperialists are able to go to war they have to smash their own proletariats. They ignore that the bourgeoisie will not appeal to fascism or to new inter-imperialsit wars unless they first defeat their own working class and the world proletariat, that is, as a last resort.

This catastrophist left, that uses to sing wedding songs in the funerals and play funeral marches in the weddings, like to announce catastrophes but only as an alibi to go to minimal reformist programs, covering Obama and US imperialism –the real imperialist master of the world- so creating the conditions for the US-UK proletariat to accompany their own imperilisms to a superior offensive to re-colonize China.

They think “the crisis of the ‘30s” when it is merely beginning. They give account of a submitted Germany as if it would not have reunified in ’89 and taken all the territory embracing the old Eastern Block up to the Russian steppes as its sphere of influence, disputing the US imperialism the entire Middle East.

They speak of a “defenseless” France that manages the most advanced aero spatial technology, that possesses 170 military bases all over the planet second only to US-UK, and which is alternatively disputing and/or signing agreements with US all over Middle East, Latin America and Africa.

Inadvertently they are justifying a great coalition, one that surely the US-UK imperialism going to conform when the time of the Chinese crac, the time to attack China, if the Chinese state is divided before a blow of the proletarian revolution or before the intent of another imperialist power to get possession of the territory.

Meanwhile, another wing of the reformist left, the possibilist wing, is announcing again the end of the world crisis. “You see, there is a “boom” in Russia, in China, India, Brazil. “The crisis has not reached there”, they tell us. What are these people happy about? If in those countries the MNC and the servant regimes and governments have downloaded the entire burden of the crisis over the shoulders of the workers and the masses, with the dismissal during 2007-2008 of millions of exploited!

And when the crisis didn’t appear as such and the expansive cycle continued as in China with sales of commodities, raw materials or consumer goods, at the same time a chronic industrial reserve army was consolidated, while the smaller quantity of workers that had not lost their jobs had to produce more than they were producing before, rendering an increased amount of both absolute and relative plus value in those countries, as is the case in Argentina, Brazil, India, Chile, etc.

These currents are blind to see, or either they don’t want the proletariat to see, that in those mini “booms” in some sectors of the globe or in some branches of production, the “good luck” of some countries means the sinking into misery of the majority of the nations and countries, but overall, these mini “booms” bloom over the chronic unemployment of the working class a world level, and that the indebtedness of the states foreshadow new wars, new catastrophes, and, what they most fear, new revolutions and fascism.

For these other kind of reformists, the anti-catastrophists, no imperialist wars are possible in the near future. “The crisis may be over”, “it has reached its bottom”, they affirm, and they are happily acting as scabs of any important strike in which they where at the head of the fighting workers.

For the catastrophists the fall of the US banks was and continues to be “the last crisis”, as Trotsky said in “Whither France?” about the Stalinists in the ‘30s. For then the world proletariat has been already thoroughly defeated, or else, they have received huge concessions in order to carry it as cannon fodder to war, as is the case of the Chinese working class, “because the enormous reformist power of its state”.

They say that the way to war is already open, without defining which are the winners and which the losers among the powers, without any fascism that smashes the proletariat of the metropolises. Really, we are before a group of social democrats with 45º Celsius degrees (113 degrees Fahrenheit) of fever. Because nobody can think that with the Chinese Navy anyone could take New York, or that a new Pearl Harbor can come from the obsolete Russian military aviation. In navigation, aero spatial and optics those nations are backward as any third-hand banana republic in relation to the belligerent capacity of the imperialist powers as Germany, Japan, France or any of the lesser imperialist powers of Europe, which according to these people “today do not represent any risk”, are “vassals”, etc.

It is evident that these gentlemen have not learnt anything from the First and Second World Wars. After the 1WW, Germany was effectively a vassal power, it had been banned from arming itself or producing even big commercial ships, and besides it had a million less labour productivity than now. Not to speak about Japan, either! Now, with the labor productivity that these powers have today, these imperialist powers can arm themselves to the teeth in a question of days or even hours.

No doubt we are before petty bourgeois pacifists that speak of the war without understanding ANYTHING about it. In the assembly lines of production of war tanks, the same as those of cars, China and Russia cannot compete even with the Swedish Volvo, and they only have armies able to act “bravely” as wardens, murderers and slaughterers of their own working classes for the sake of the imperialist powers.

For maintaining its military-industrial conglomerate, Old Russia is total and absolutely dependent on the German, French and even US technology. Only so it can achieve that its obsolete atomic facilities -with technology of the ‘50s- do not blow up as in happened in Chernobyl some years ago.

We are in front of same groups of irresponsible, chatterboxes and servants of their own imperialist bourgeoisies. Because the unified Germany can arm in a record time, with its high technology and with the Russian nuclear installations, an anti-missile shield, in the some way that US has mounted in Poland and Hungary. If Germany is not yet doing that, it is because it is still “pecking in the poultry yard” in China, Middle East and Latin America, in the same way everybody was pecking essentially in the Wall Street banks –associated to US in sacking the world… and we have seen how they got trapped and caught a big indigestion!

That is why they get quiet bout the fact the China is occupied in Hong Kong and Taiwan by NATO’s military bases. They shriek as hares, saying that an inter-imperialist war is looming between China and US, because now thay have just declared to be “defeatists” in both sides. Because if China disputed the world to the US and the latter attacked the former, it is obligatory to be defeatist in China and in US. That is, they are preparing with their “defeatism” and pacifism in US, a policy of defeat to China, that is they are against the Chinese masses uprising against their government and its infamous restoration regime that has signed an agreement with imperialism about an autonomy of mutual accord in Taiwan and Hong Kong under the mantle of the UNO.

A pacifist and Pabloite policy and program in front of the war

As we have said, in their document of just two months ago, the minority of the FLTI affirmed that in case of an US war against China, they would defend China. Today they are defeatists regarding both sides without giving any explanation. They are openly covering future military aggressions ftom imperialism against the oppressed Chinese nation. Yesterday, with their eclectic policy of backing the “imperialist China” against US, if the latter wanted to colonize China they embraced the policy of the Pabloites in the 2WW in front of a France occupied by Hitlerite fascism. In November, they affirmed that they would be with China in the case that US decided re-colonize it. But let’s speak clearly, though the eclectics do not understand anything about “clarity”.

But if China is actually an imperialist power there is nothing in it to be defended if it is attacked by another imperialist power. Such are the inter-imperialist wars, using the proletarians as “cannon fodder” in the war for them to kill each other, exactly to make other imperialist powers to kneel down and be submitted, when they dispute the partition of the planet, as was established for instance in the Versailles Treaty by England, France and US against Germany after the 1WW or as German did when it occupied France during the 2WW.

The document of our minority was a pitiful one; it even announced that China was disputing US all its spheres of influence; that notwithstanding, they were going to defend China. This they said in early November. That is, in November they were proposing a program of defensist struggle in favor of the autonomy and the self-determination of the occupied imperialist nation, in this case, China. But this is the same program that the Pabloites held during the 2WW in France and the rest of the imperialist countries being occupied by the fascist army.

The Pabloite program was in for the defeat of the imperialist aggressors (Germany) and for the autonomy, the right to self-determination and defense of the colonized and invaded imperialist country, as the policy of the POI-CI of France under the leadership of Pablo in the ’42 conference in the occupied France. They reneged the policy of defeatism on both sides proposed by the conference of the Fourth International in ’40, which held that defending the autonomy of the Occupied France was to defend the autonomy and the self-determination of the imperialist gangs in order to pilfer their colonies and semi colonies.

That is, in the November document our minority fought for the right to self-determination of a China that was invaded by US, but under their definition of an imperialist China, they were defending the self-determination of the Chinese imperialist gangs that are pilfering the world.

Even if you see in front of you an inter-imperialist war, holding the defense of an imperialist country not only means eclecticism, but also it is a betrayal to the Leninist program in front of an inter-imperialist war. That is, they were even dissimulating while they posed that China was disputing the world to US as a hegemonic power; now they hold that position openly, so passing clearly to the side of the US with a defeatist position in front of the oppressed nation.  Then and now, they are always in the same side as Obama, and confronting the interests of the international proletariat.

And this happens just in a moment when Obama is angry with Hu Jintao over the autonomy of Taiwan, of Hong Kong, of the Dalai Lama (Tibet)… We must speak clearly, now is the time for China to pay for the crisis revaluating its currency. Now that “it is necessary to pressure” China according to Obama’s plans, the minority BECOMES A DEFEATIST AGAINST BOTH SIDES.
That is the fate of the eclectic; he ends as servant of his own bourgeoisie. The revisionist, empirical chatterbox, the impressionist petty bourgeois finds himself in the end in the barricade that confronts the oppressed countries, in the opposite barricade to the world working class. For all their efforts to re-accommodate and amend successively their positions, they only mark time in the same `place: that occupied by opportunism.

Against such a contempt against internationalist Trotskyism, we Trotskyists affirm that it is forbidden to defend the right to the self determination af any imperialist country that has been oppressing and still oppresses other countries and which “liberation” carries with it the “right” to pilfer colonies and semi colonies. We are in the opposite barricade of the minority document of early November that capitulates to imperialism, and state that in the inter-imperialist wars we will never be for the defense of any imperialist country, even the weakest one, even if it has been occupied, even if its enemies try to put it on its knees.
With the Fourth International and its lessons on the 2WW, we affirm that in the France that was occupied by Hitler the victory of the socialist revolution was at the order of the day both in the Republic of Vichy and in the “free” (not occupied) zone, and also the military defeat of the German war machine as first link in the way to victory for the socialist revolution in Germany. This was the correct form of presenting in this case the Leninist politics of “turning back the guns”. And this is the policy of defeatism for both sides that now the minority is proposing: for the defeat of the Chinese nation before an imperialist aggression.

Meanwhile we Trotskyists, that see a China ever more re-colonized, sacked and humiliated, treated as any other semi colony of the world is (not only during the expansion cycle of the last 6 years but also during the current consumerist cycle in the market)… we are unconditionally for the military victory of China and the military defeat of the US “democracy”, because if this “democracy” wins it will impose a regimen a million times worse of sacking, terror and super exploitation than that which today exists under the CP Mandarins. And just because the struggle within China we would fight for a proletarian leadership of the war against the Chinese Mandarins, servants to imperialism, and we would dispute them the leadership of the national war and of the anti-imperialist struggle with the program of the proletarian revolution and the civil war.

In this case our friends of the minority in the FLTI, now would be defeatists of both sides, that is, social-pacifists in US. What a pity! But theirs will be the responsibility for that betrayal.
This people is playing hide and seek with imperialism, with the proletariat, and with the program in front of the wars, as if the 3rd and the 4th Internationals wouldn’t have left us a rich legacy about it.

They are lost in a wood of three pine-trees, namely between a Pabloite policy for an alleged inter-imperialist war, the peaceful emergence of a new imperialism in one single country as China, and the looming of a Third World War expressed as a war of bourgeois camps all over the world.

And all this is to hide that what is in the works in the current international conditions is trade wars for the control of the branches of production of the world economy, new colonization and re-colonization wars in the colonial and semi colonial world and new attacks against the proletariat of the imperialist countries; meanwhile the imperialists and their native bourgeois servants are keeping the popular fronts and the policy of counterrevolutionary agreements to contain the world revolution.

What has in common this opportunist left, all the revisionists of Marxism is that they hold that it is possible to go to counterrevolutionary inter-imperialist wars without fascism, without the bosses having smashed the international proletariat. As if the monopolies and the imperialists MNCs could be able to do freely what they want without smashing their own working class.
But, alas! Just because they tried to do that some years ago, when they faced a minimal resistance in Iraq and Afghanistan Bush’s entire structure of power fell as a castle of cards and the US proletariat could put itself in a position of counteroffensive. Moreover these gentlemen are of the opinion that it is possible to carry on inter-imperialist wars with “democracy”.

In their pacifist but not catastrophist variant, they are of the opinion that with “new engines” as Brazil, Russia, China or India it is possible to get out of the recession and crisis in the US, France, Canada, Germany and Japan. That is, for these people, the semi-colonial and colonial world, impoverished, exploited and pilfered by the imperialist parasites, today ruined, could act as the engine of the world economy!

This last “joke”, that “we have left the crisis behind us”, amounts to affirming that when the usurer is broke, the poor devil that is forced to pay the shark loan month after month for fear of receiving a gunshot in his head, has become now the winner, has become strong and all-powerful! That amounts to a miserable pretense of calling the victim as victimizer and vice versa.

After the 1WW and having already seized power in Russia, Lenin affirmed, speaking about that war beginning in 1914, (in the same way that the Manifesto on the War of the Fourth expresses in 1940): After this war, “without a number of revolutions the so-called democratic peace is a middle-class utopia.” “Under capitalism, especially in its imperialist stage, wars are inevitable.” Other wars will come. The fairy tale of a war to finish forever with all the wars is nothing but that, a hollow and pernicious fairy tale. “Proletarians of the world, remember this prediction!” The Fourth International stated the same thing after the opening of the 2WW.

We Trotskyists affirm today what Lenin said in 1919: unless a number of revolutions triumph in the period ahead, the 2WW will not be at all the “last of all the anti-imperialists wars”. This is a fairly tale.

But it is not yet resolved whether some revolutions are not going to reach victory, so preventing the way to war from opening. And that is what the current moment puts in the centre of the stage. The question is whether the ranks of the revolutionary movement are going to regroup in time to stop the way towards war, which will be ineluctably open if the proletariat is defeated.

And we affirm that not only breaks with Marxism the pacifist that believes the fairy tale about the 2WW being the “last inter-imperialist war” but also the catastrophist that flees from the battlefield and declares the defeat of the proletariat when the battle is just beginning, when it is still possible the achieving of victory for a number of revolutions that could impede the opening of the way to the war.

Both kinds of reformists are social-pacifists to the bone, they don’t see, and consequently don’t prepare the proletariat of the imperialist countries and of the semi-colonial and colonial world for the new counterrevolutionary blows that will necessarily come against them when the Chinese consumerist “boom” or the bubble of the commodities in the colonial and semi-colonial world burst, nor for the new wars that effectively will come when there won’t be enough room for all the imperialist powers’ sacking of the super profits in the world economy.

We Trotskyists affirm that there is a speed race between the succession of new blows of the crac and the world economic crisis on one side, and the class struggle on the other, a race that will keep going on for a whole historic period, like it happened in the ‘30s crisis that carried to the 2WW. We affirm that this race has not been yet settled. Because new blows of the crac, new bursts as in Greece and Dubai or like the sudden fall in Wall Street are getting ready to show in Beijing, in Germany and in Spain, if the proletariat does not stop them by its entering in revolutionary maneuvers.

We affirm that the race between the worker bureaucracies and aristocracies that have come to the battlefield with the aim of disorganizing any embryo of mass counteroffensive and to fence the revolutionary processes on one hand and the revolutionaries on the other, is still going on and expresses in the struggle of the international Trotskyist movement trying to reach a way to the masses and achieve a correct policy for getting in time to the new phases of political fight of the masses that has begun. This new phase is developing as in Yonghua/Lingzou, Coimbratore, Peru or Mexico in the shape of revolutionary sparks, within a stage of revolts, mutinies, worker uprisings and political strikes, that anticipate the tendencies of the masses to break the fence imposed around them by the treacherous leaderships.

We are entering a historic period of enormous tension and polarization among the classes at an international level, where in the conjuncture the focuses of the world revolution have been fenced and control by the treacherous leaderships, opening a political and class struggle conjuncture that remains indefinite, where there coexist new attacks of counterrevolution and fascism and intents by the masses to free themselves from the plagues visited on them. The left that is riding the coattails of the Obamamania does not prepare the proletariat for the struggle that is coming and which has its logic point of departure in the current developments.

Haiti is an example of the new counterrevolutionary offensives that Obama has planned
The liquidators of Marxism in the imperialist countries and their capitulation

Haiti shows clearly what imperialism is ready to apply as a means of getting out of its crisis.
This island-country that had been occupied by the UNO and the mercenary troops of the “Bolivarians”, and was kept as a reservory of cheap slave labor in the Caribbean –either to be used in the Dominican Republic, Central America or the US, where a million of Haitian immigrants perform the most menial jobs, including those jobs despised by the rest of the Latino workers- while most of the residents were reduced to eat clay tortillas (sic), was shaken by a seism and had to dig the common graves for 350,000 workers and poor with mechanical shovels before the sadden and bewildered eyes of the world proletariat.

When the earthquake shattered in pieces the Haitian capital and its outskirts, the US imperialism –that had just succeeded in imposing its counterrevolutionary coup in Honduras, with the shameful support of the “Bolivarians” linked to Zelaya, and later on in legitimising the coup makers with fraudulent elections- was keen to run eagerly to invade the Haitian nation. It was very conscious that the state had been reduced to smithereens in Haiti so that for the masses it was only a question of finding a gun in order to get food, break the fictitious border that separates them from the Dominican Republic and expropriate the food and the lands. This is the real motivation for the barefaced imperialist invasion: to interpose their force between “the proletarians” and “the guns” that would allow them to get “the food”.

In front of this situation the reformists and traitors began to demand “humanitarian help” for our Haitian class brothers and sisters, a help that any worker would give wholeheartedly in order that their children don’t die. But every class-conscious worker knows that all the “helps” are taken in the ports and airports by the invaders, that those troops give that help at will, even from the air, to scatter the masses and put them as far as possible from the gun with which they could have conquered their food in the supermarkets, in the containers, over the lands, in the ports and the “free zones” (i.e., industrial lots exempted from paying taxes that the Haitian rulers have conceded to diverse MNCs to build their maquilas).

This is the real Haitian tragedy: when the masses were seeking for their food in the warehouses, the containers, the supermarkets, etc., the invaders counterpoised their guns. And there is no solution, or bread, or a decent life without the gun and the seizing of power. There is no way out of barbarism other than the victory of the socialist revolution.

Whoever was unable of passing the test of the Chinese question and the new counterrevolutionary offensives promoted by imperialism, by all the imperialist powers to pilfer and sack China to the marrow, no doubt will be unable to pass the test of Haiti.

The entire world left has been trapped and lies submitted to the US marines that hand out humanitarian help, therefore putting the Haitian masses as far as possible from the socialist revolution, that is, from the bread. And they accuse us revolutionaries of being “sectarian”.
They want us to support the charity of 15,000 litres of mineral water for 3 million thirsty souls that must drink water in the sewers: so that is your “help”! Miserable rascals! You would have to go to Haiti and try to live on that “help”!

We say: all the power to the Haitian working class! Expropriation without compensation of all the assets and properties of the exploiters! For the generalized armament of the masses and the expulsion of the invaders! One single isle, one single revolution in La Hispaniola (the isle that is home to Haiti and the Dominican Republic, NT).

This is the help that the Haitian proletarians need from the part of the US and Latin American proletarians!
Fighting for the defeat of the imperialist US troops amounts to fighting for the Haitian proletariat to be able to eat and drink as human beings!

Haiti concentrates all the contradictions of the world situation, including which is most important, the treason of the proletarian leadership, the treason of those paramedics that try by all means to save capitalism from its destruction. The same as the Haitian workers are treated, the coloured workers are treated in Italy, being beaten and persecuted by the fascist gangs of Big finance capital. Like them the African workers suffer in Congo, Rwanda, etc. the genocide of millions colonial and semicolonial slaves, most of them coloured people, in nations supported by the “humanitarian help” in UNO parcels thrown down from planes, while the Anglo-American takes out all the minerals, precious stones and oil from the African nations. Those that cry for “humanitarian help” are plain servants to the UNO, in the same way as they were to the Society of the Nations before the 2WW.

It is a veritable shame that no sector of the US left, all of them being servants of the treacherous leaderships, the worker aristocracy and Union bureaucracy of the AFL-CIO, has had the courage of calling the million of Haitian workers that live in the US to stage street uprisings and industrial actions as strikes and sit-ins, of putting again on their feet the Million Workers March –at least of the Million Haitian Workers living and working in the states- in order to paralyse the US war machine, in a moment that the US troops are deployed to Haiti ready to shoot any worker or poor woman that goes to the supermarket or to the landowners’ land to seek for his/her loaf of bread.

The world proletariat is split between the worker bureaucracy and aristocracy and the reformists that believe that you can eat in Haiti, India, Brazil, Spain, US, Greece, etc., without a revolution, on one hand, and on the other all those that like us think and proclaim that in order to get bread, to get a decent meal, it is imperative to seize power and make the socialist revolution, expropriating the expropriators.

A bloody deep river is dividing and separating each time more and more reform from revolution within the world proletariat.

Under these conditions of penury and unheard sufferings for the masses, of counterrevolutionary pacts and revolutionary sparks in the shape of political struggles of the masses, it is necessary to keep firmly the ideological and programmatic positions in the battlefield, to defend the revolutionary positions which the revisionists are trying to erase from the surface of the earth as they would like that any revolutionary continuity is destroyed. It is necessary not to leave the battlefield announcing that there is already here the defeat, not to make the masses believe that the proletarian energy has been completely depleted and that the war is round the corner, just in a moment when the struggles and the decisive combats are simply starting.

The minority of the FLTI, with its revisionism to Marxism en the Chinese question, has already thrown over the board the whole of the revolutionary program we conquered together in the foundational congress of our international fraction.

They have presented a program for Haiti that goes from asking for the “humanitarian help” of Cuban and Venezuelan workers, to poising the “fight for a worker-peasant Haiti”. How shameful!

It amounts to high treason any program that in Haiti does not articulate itself around the fact that it is a must to defeat the invader and seize power if one wants to reach the bread. It is the same as raising the LIT’s program of “humanitarian help” that helps the imperialists to put the masses on their knees through miserable alms, dividing those that are chronically starving from those that have recently lost their homes, as the invaders do.

We repeat: How shameful! The minority has buried the lessons of the Paris Commune that we reaffirmed together when the foundation of the FLTI before the magnific spontaneous insurrection of the workers peasant masses in Madagascar, who divided the army by its base, threw down the president Ravalomanana and imposed a armed dual power.

 “The working class will rule in the industrial cities, which will all become revolutionary centres and form a federation in order to attract the countryside over to the side of the revolution and overcome the resistance that will be organized in such trading and maritime cities as Havre, Bordeaux, Marseilles and so on. In the industrial cities the socialists will have to seize power in local institutions, arm the workers and organize them militarily: 'He who has arms has bread,' said Blanqui”. (P. Lafargue, Oeuvres Completes, Volume I, quoted by Trotsky in “The question of revolutionary forces”. Trotsky’s Writings on Britain - Our emphasis)

That’s why “without a gun there is no bread”, as the Paris Communers used to say. Without throwing away the invader –which is an obligation for the entire working class of the continent- the Haitian workers and popular masses will not eat properly; much less they will eat from the “humanitarian help” if they do not take in their hands the containers, the warehouses, the supermarkets and the supplying centres that are in the airports; they won’t be able to eat properly  either if they do not expropriate the lands and the private property of the bourgeoisie together with their brothers and sisters of the Dominican republic. This is the only way to reconstitute Haiti.

Yes. “When you help yourself you will be helped”, that is a Marxist apothegm. That would be a evolutionary shock in the Caribbean to help attain victory for revoluiton in Central America, all over Latin America and also in the US.

Thus we have demonstrated that who revises and destroys the Marxist Theory ends in real life a million kilometers far from the correct program and policy that the working clss needs to attain victory.

For internationalist Trotskyists it is necessary to get ready and regroup the international proletarian vanguard in order to fight against a new revisionism that has emerged to justify the counterrevolutionary actions of the treacherous lederships, those who have allowed this rotten system to outlive itself over the ruins of the world proletariat and the entire human society, in on of the worst crises of History.

No doubt YOU CANNOT JUSTIFY THE BETRAYAL in Greece, Palestine, Madagascar, Bolivia, Honduras, THE BETRAYAL to the US and Chinese proletarians, WITHOUT AT THE SAME TIME DEVOTING YOURSELF TO REVISE MARXISM.
The struggle against revisionism is at the top of the agenda of the international revolutionary Marxism.


Chapter 2

The foundational documents of the FLTI have passed the test of the developments in the class struggle, and again about the still indefinite character of the world situation

This SCI reaffirms the contents of the main political documents voted in the July congress, which have armed our current and created the conditions for its constitution and for a principled merger of different currents with different approaches flowing from different experiences. Programmatic positions and lessons of the international proletariat combat were expressed in IWO part 1 and 2.  According to us, the political and programmatic responses conquered have passed the test of the events and met the level of the combats of the international proletariat. 

We reaffirm our support for the 23 points, which keep their great validity regarding the definition of the international conditions and the Marxist program before the world crisis.  They were the base for the agreement to build a Joint Committee between FLT and WIVL, and allowed us to advance in the agreements with HRS comrades in USA and the NRI in Argentina. 
They concentrated on the immediate task to prepare a counteroffensive of the world working class to smash the rotten capitalist system, or either the latter would smash the masses with starvation, misery and war.

In the 23 points we launched together the combat against the WSF and the renegades of Trotskyism, and we started a process to consolidate our ranks with the program before the Cuban revolution -for the political revolution, and confronting the “Bolivarian Revolution”, a fake “revolution” that has expropriated the Ecuadorian, Argentinean and Bolivian Revolution.
In the agreement accomplished we confronted ELAC of PSTU and LIT, who had put the Oakland workers and movement against the war to the feet of Obama, and had tied hand and feet the proletarians of the entire American continent by backing the treacherous bureaucracy of COB that submits the workers and poor peasants to the counterrevolutionary pact of the popular front with the fascists to drown the Bolivian Revolution.

In addition, in the 23 points, we took into account the Palestinian, Colombian and Cuban questions; truly acid tests which show the terrible role of the native bourgeoisies as stranglers of the masses’ revolutionary processes in Latin America as well as in Middle East.

We affirm the validity of the programmatic agreement signed with the WIVL, which was the starting point, together with the 23 points, for the gathering of FLTI.  In the resolutions of our foundational congress, the point “on the principled agreements which allowed the FLTI foundational congress to take place” - clause b), expresses clearly that the emergence of our fraction was based on the agreements signed with WIVL, making clear that those “… move forward and consolidate from the agreement of the joint committee of FLTI between WIVL and FLT to which NRI of Argentina and the Sao Paulo revolutionaries endorsed.  This was a programmatic conquest for the common intervention facing the first counterrevolutionary hits, as well as the first responses of the masses as shown in Greece, Madagascar, Guadeloupe and France, which concentrated the strategy and the program to set up and develop the soviets and the question of insurrection and the fight for power, together with Bolivia, SA and Zimbabwe where there was stated the combat against the popular front and the treacherous leaderships…”

Our foundational documents, based on the most advanced lessons of the class struggle for the world proletariat maintain all their validity towards the 2nd Congress of the FLTI.Let’s recall that in July, after 20 days of collective debate, the following documents were voted affirmatively by the foundational congress of the FLTI, plus other resolutions- according to the text of the resolutions on the constitution of the FLTI published in the IWO first Part:
 “On the world situation, facing historical events”, the articel intitled “The worldwide regime of dominance imposed by imperialism since 1989 has entered into political crisis” and “The crisis of the revolutionary leadership has deepened and worsened”, (see IWO Special brochure #1)

Also the congress adopted the elaborations on the Cuban question and the historical balance sheet of the 4th International that the former FLT contributed to the congress’ debates. These elaborations, which defined the foundational positions of the FLTI on the international question as well as the positions on the French, Madagascan, Greek, Palestinian, Peruvian, Iranian and Honduran questions, have passed the test of the live events in the few months elapsed since the congress. They have armed us politically to intervene together with the resolutions on South Africa, Bolivia and the combat against the popular front and against the treacherous leaderships that have subordinated here and there the proletariat to different factions of the bourgeoisie, playing the role for which they had been recruited in supporting crisis-ridden capitalism during the bankruptcy of the international finance system.

The acid tests that we had to face 6 month ago in our foundation congress allowed us to update the Marxist program and also to pass the tests of life. When we held our founding congress, we had defined that the operation “Cast Lead” slaughtering the Gazan Palestinians was being responded by the revolutionary uprising of Guadeloupe, Madagascar, by a heroic resistance in the own Palestine and by the struggle of the French working class occupying factories.

We defined that while the masses were beginning to hit in Peru once again and gaps at the top started to open in Iran as well as inter-imperialist disputes so the masses could revolt in that country, US imperialism performed a counterrevolutionary coup in Honduras in order to dominate again its backyard threatened by other imperialist competitor powers such as France, Spain, Japan or Germany, which had been disputing during the last period that US backyard with the support of the native bourgeoisies.

Before all those events and this transitory situation emerged, FLTI had succeeded in defining a program stating that the masses would not be stopped in France and were going on with the occupation of factories in spite of the will of their treacherous unionist and reformist leadership. We affirmed that in Guadeloupe it was necessary to move forward to organize soviets and conquer the armament for the masses in order to overthrow the French colonial regime, as the only possibility to consolidate a victory in the way to conquer a workers and revolutionary government that guarantee the effective payment of the promised 200 Euros, that is, the bread, in a single and centralized struggle with the French proletariat in the metropolis. This possibility was openly obliterated by the unions and the “anti capitalist” parties, those servants of the French 5th Republic. In our congress, we called to confront in Greece the anarchist and new anti capitalist parties that applying a pacifist and unionist petit bourgeois policy had led the first combat of the masses to an abortion as they refused to fighting for workers and soldiers’ committees and to gathering together the workers’ rank and defeating the Stalinist leadership in the unions.

The focus of our elaborations in July was to have a program to help the masses to surpass their current leaderships, to generalize and centralize the combats into a mass counteroffensive. It is unquestionable that the FLTI has passed the test. It did not miss any unseen elephant in any room, and it did honor the level of the combats between the masses and the bourgeois counterrevolution as well as the fight against the treacherous leaderships with the program voted and conquered in the congress.

We had a program to fight against the “democratic front” of Zelaya and the Bolivarians supported by the renegades of Trotskyism and the reformist Latin American left; that program consists of “defending the democracy with the proletarian revolution’s method”, as Trotsky said. All the reformists instead ended up under Obama and Clinton’s plan to guarantee that the only blood that was spilt was that of the workers and peasants in Honduras, and so the coup was imposed and the masses would not intervene in an independent way to defeat the coupists in the streets.

Zelaya ended up calling on the people to rest in “peace and common sense” from the Brazilian embassy of that Brazilian lackey bourgeoisie, junior partner of French imperialism in Petrobras and the war industry -Brazil is one of the greatest weaponry exporters of the world based on French war technology; besides Brazil has bought in France 5 warships, submarines and state-of-the art aero-spatial technology.

The Brazilian bourgeoisie organized a commercial agreement with the Japanese to develop digital TV sets and equipment and to enhance joint investments in Manaus and other maquilas that Japanese imperialism has in this country. It also organized a financial agreement from Rio de Janeiro, the finance capital of this country, with USA. The agreement was one of total submission to US imperialism, which is the first creditor of Brazil’s foreign debt with more than 160 billion dollars, homogenizing the political-commercial agreement with MERCOSUR.

As we affirm in all the foundational documents of the FLTI, in Latin America a native bourgeoisie has been consolidated, both in Mercosur and the so called ALBA, as well as in the countries of the FTA, all of them under the discipline of the OAS and the TIAR; they all make business deals between each other and with all the imperialist powers.  And for the sake of a big business deal, as is the gas pipeline from Venezuela to Bolivia, Chavez hugged Uribe while selling out the Colombian resistance, and all the Bolivarians ended up backing Colombia in the affair of the 7 US military bases in this country. Before that, from OAS and UNASUR they supported the counterrevolutionary agreement which was used to share the wealth of the hydrocarbons in Bolivia between British Petroleum and Exxon under the umbrella of fascism in the Media Luna with Totalfina and Repsol under the umbrella of Popular Front in the Altiplano (Bolivian Plateau) to control and expropriate the workers and peasant revolution.

In South Africa, we were in the vanguard, fighting to unify in a single revolution the struggles in the south of the continent, fighting for the Federation of workers and socialist republics of the South of Africa, and were at the head, as we had done in Bolivia, giving an incessant fight against the popular front, against the Stalinist control of the unions and the subjugation to the government of the black bourgeoisie, as servile to the Anglo-American and the imperialist companies as it was yesterday to the slavery regime of the apartheid.

Our combat against the genocide and the mass slaughterers like in Congo, and our struggle against the popular front and its siren chants allowed us to give the first steps in the grouping of the revolutionary and internationalist forces of the proletariat in the South of Africa. And it was possible to unite the ranks of the SA Trotskyists together with the Zimbabwean ones who having broken with bourgeoisie and the exploiter’s regime, were under the threat of being taken before a bourgeois court and confront a bourgeois trial by their former “comrades”.

In the combats against the popular front in Bolivia, we fought against the terrible policy of putting miners and their union leaders, like those in the COB as ministers or deputies of the popular front to guarantee the sharing of the hydrocarbons between the different imperialist MNCs who have partitioned and share Bolivia among themselves.

In South Africa, fighting decisively against the popular front, we confronted the Stalinist bureaucracy of COSATU, fighting for workers and soldiers’ committees and intervening in each fight against the bureaucrats’ betrayals to the strikes for higher salary, strikes that as in Latin America were sold out by all coats of political and union bureaucracies.

In Argentina, we also fought bravely against the left of the WSF and the renegades of Trotskyism that by imposing the “social peace” aborted any serious attempt of the proletarian vanguard to regroup its ranks and fight against the capitalist attack and its government, as in the case of the stubborn combats of the Kraft workers, the Subway workers, the auto industry workers in Cordoba and the steel industry workers of the steel belt.

That is why we affirm that all those documents voted 6 month ago were correct: because they armed us to intervene in all the ongoing events.

It is clear that imperialist butchers have disguised as Obama to save capitalism in crisis and bankruptcy and to take the masses out of the stage in USA. The “extended hand” of Obama to the Muslim bourgeoisie was just a pact with Iran to support the Shiite bourgeoisie in Iraq, just in the moment when UK imperialism withdrew from Iraq, to prevent the masses of the south of the country from smashing the occupation army as well as the US troops in the region; at the same time that pact allowed USA to organize a faction of the Ayatollahs to start thinking about doing good business deals with USA, in order to capitalize the hate of the masses against the Bonapartist and anti-worker Iranian regime.

The pact with the Ayatollahs’ bourgeoisie was used to contain Hezbollah, which was disciplined and made enter the pro imperialist government of Lebanon, and which sealed an agreement so that the slaughter in Gaza can continue unpunished; it also served to guarantee Hamas its possibility to negotiate and to put in place the necessary pacts to guarantee the sell out of the fight of the Palestinian masses. The Palestinian masses are today fenced by the oppressor yoke of the Zionist State of Israel and by the silence of all the treacherous leaderships of the proletariat. Meanwhile the Egyptian bourgeoisie is ready to build up a wall, not only high over the sand but also down 10 meters deep, so all the tunnels which are used to give supplies to the tortured Gaza resistance get closed.

We have seen the validity of the Iranian resolution, when the masses are trying to enter in political struggle with a generalized hatred against the Ayatollahs regime. This means that while US imperialism makes pacts with the clergy, it is at the same time preparing the emergence of a pro-US bourgeois faction in the country. This fraction should not only abort the Iranian workers revolutionary uprising and prevent the beginning of the second revolution, as it was in the ‘80s; but also it will have to guarantee to take Iran out of the French-German sphere of influence, where it has placed its business in oil and oil byproducts, fertilizers and its world trade deals.


The mass counteroffensive was strangled with the counterrevolutionary pacts; and imperialism, like yesterday in Honduras and today in Afghanistan, launches its first counterrevolutionary offensive.

That imperialist butchers have disguised as Obama means to define that today US imperialism has concentrated all its counterrevolutionary forces not only on the coup in Honduras but also on a generalized offensive in Afghanistan, supported by NATO and the lackey governments of China and India. Those countries are disputing each other about which of them is going to take the copper and cobalt for the MNCs established in India and China, under the US command in Afghanistan. With those small businesses, India and China are in charge of paying the correct share to the Afghani bourgeoisie and the protectorate government servant of USA, to dispute -as US agents- those business to the aggressive Germany who needs the opium (of which a 80% is produced in Afghanistan and the other part in China) to Bayer and other imperialist labs.

US imperialism, with the murderous Pakistani army and supported by the Chinese Mandarins, has launched a counterrevolutionary offensive in the Swat Valley to surround the Afghani resistance in the Pakistani territory. This has left more than 2 million peasants out of their lands and more than 800.000 refugees expelled from their houses, living in tents, facing icy weather, starvation and illnesses. New attacks to Yemen are being prepared to control all the bourgeois fractions and stabilize the region, because the explosion of Dubai bubble had left a million Palestinian, Iranian, Iraqi, and other Asian workers without jobs and returning to their countries, the same ones who have built with their own hands the greatest real state investments of the world. This can spark the migrant working class of United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Syria and the entire Middle East, mainly of Yemen from where the US-UK finance companies built their financial and real estate paradise as continuity to the real state-housing- bubbles of China, USA, Spain, so on.

Yemen is in a key point from where Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Somalia and Egypt are dominated.  It is an excellent military base from where the imperialists can control all the Red Sea, the Gulf of Eden and the Persian Gulf.  Moreover, it leads to the Indian Ocean and is near to all the sensible points of Oceania and Eastern Asia.Just in the moment of Obama’s trip to Ghana, the rockets were aiming to Yemen; in the middle of a world crisis, USA will not allow that anyone tries to dispute its dominance and shows that it will respond bombing and shooting anyone who dares it.The bursting of Dubai’s bubble anticipates that the peace of the cemeteries conquered from the time being in Palestine and Iraq will last little.

In Egypt the revolts of the working class against the hunger and the crisis do not stop. The regimes of the old patriarchs of Saudi Arabic and UAE are getting weaker, while the situation in Iran is explosive. The workers, students and poor peasants in this country are pushing more and more to get into political fight and threaten with the Iranian revolution. The bombs in Yemen aim to warn that there would be no possibility for new revolutions in Iran or in Middle East because this would mean new counterrevolutionary interventions like in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are a warning to France, which has a military base in Djibouti, in front of Yemen. In addition, Rwanda has just got out of the sphere of the French-Belgian influence and into the English Commonwealth and this will be defended even with bombs if necessary.
No power will withdraw peacefully from its claim to the domination of the planet. Nor will it keep its position through peace or democracy, but supported by the cannons that are the only sound voice to dominate the world.

Our foundational documents have passed the test, since we made it clear that in the bankruptcy of imperialist Capital, all the forces of labor aristocracy and bureaucracy in the world were concentrated in saving capitalism in crisis from a mass revolutionary uprising.
When we constituted the FLTI, we affirmed in our congress that it was about to set up a supporting point to concentrate the revolutionary forces and disperse the great counterrevolutionary forces being concentrated to make the masses pay for the crisis and to save capitalism in bankruptcy.

Here and there, the union bureaucracy, the social imperialist parties, the Bolivarian bourgeoisie, Muslim bourgeoisies, recycled Stalinists and renegades of Trotskyism were part of a truly unholy alliance to save capital in bankruptcy, which in a few days in 2008 and 2009 burnt 14 trillion dollars in Wall Street Market, while other big amount of dollars were handed out to the banks by the state to prevent the generalized bankruptcy of the finance capital.

The cry out of all the bureaucracy and the counterrevolutionary leaderships against the masses was clear. They were spokesmen of the great capital and spoke openly of its interests before the masses in order to save it. In its crisis, the capital blackmailed the world working class: “If I fall down the cliff, you will fall with me. But if I save myself, you will be saved too.”

Thereby, by setting the tradition of all the union bureaucracies of the imperialist countries and all the social imperialist parties, it was imposed a return to their homes over the millions of immigrants settled in the European and North American imperialist powers. They were first used as slave labor and unregistered workers during the expansion time, and now they were given the back like dogs to increase the industrial reserve army of the semi-colonial countries.

The opprobrious wall between USA and Mexico, the bayonet of the Italian army and all the repressive forces of the bourgeois states at the service of expelling immigrants reached the highest point with a wall and a fence in Melilla to prevent that any slave from Africa gets to Europe. “British jobs for British workers! US jobs for the American workers!”

So was the war cry of the union bureaucracy of the English Trade Unions and the American AFL-CIO. While with civil gangs and armed militias the US state controlled the borders between Latin America and the south of USA, in Mexico the infamous regime was armored under the excuse of combating the drug trafficking, and the country was militarized.

For revolutionary Marxism, that has taken as its own the lessons and the program of Bolshevism, only defending the interests of the lower and more exploited layers of the working class, it is possible to defend the historic interests of the whole working class.

Today we are witnessing, impelled by the ruined middle classes of southern Italy and organized by that country’s finance capital as the Olivetti and its partners of the Calabrian Mafia, a brutal attack against the heroic coloured workers that in Italy, Spain, England, France, Belgium and the Netherlands perform the most menial and despised jobs. When these outcasts suffered the shootings of the fascist hordes they confronted them by putting in place self-defense committees and saying: “Enough is enough! Stop all persecutions and attacks”.

But in that though battle one could hear the silence and total immobility on the part of the Italian working class because it has been submitted to the interests of the labor aristocracies and bureaucracies. The left of Berlusconi, of the Olivetti, of the rogue Italian finance capital, used to bloodsucking and murdering the Middle East masses and Africa, did not offer the least response in defense of the immigrant workers, who are the heart of the Italian working class. Only hollow phrases of compassion and humanity came from the petty bourgeois of the World Social Forum. They only act to save the capitalists from their crises against the masses.

The crisis of the proletarian leadership continues exacerbating while the entire rottenness of the capitalist imperialist system is exposed to the light of the day. The decaying capitalist world of the “state-of –the art technology in windmills, nuclear centrals, aviation, aero spatial, info-tech is… overpopulated!

Is it possible that the admission of 100 extra immigrants could make US, France and England collapse? This constitutes a serious potential problem for the imperialist powers! Incredible! Up to these ridiculous extents this rotten capitalist imperialist system has gone. It is because the world market is now much smaller; capitalism has reduced the planet to a bunch of parasites. Either they or the majority of the exploited masses die.

One only class war, one only class, one only fight for victory! Because if not, fascism will not content itself with smashing the coloured proletarians, but in the same way that years ago Mussolini did, it will take Rome and then everything will be too late. This is the prospect!

Because of the action of the counterrevolutionary leaderships, things did not go well for the working class of the imperialist countries nor for the working class of the semi-colonial countries. The spark of Greece and its revolutionary uprisings were far from burning Paris because of the parliamentary and unionist cretinism of the “anti-capitalists” and anarchists. In Paris, a united front of trade unions and treacherous reformist parties took the working class out from the occupation of factories that had gone as far as taking bosses as hostages and submitted this struggle to the treacherous negotiation with the bourgeoisie and the French 5th Republic. The speakers of the anti-capitalist parties travelled as lackeys of French imperialism to tell the revolting Guadeloupe and Martinique masses that “with the tax of the French taxpayers it was not possible to pay the wages” of the exploited in these colonies.
From Mozambique the World Social Forum concentrated, together with the AFRICOM and the French imperialism to discuss how to back a government of national unity to expropriate and abort the workers-soldiers-peasants’ revolution that had started in Madagascar and how to prevent it from being extended to the rest of the south of Africa.

Also the congress adopted the elaborations on the Cuban question and the historical balance sheet of the 4th International contributed to the congress debates by the former FLT. The same pacts with fascism in the Media Luna and the popular front in Bolivia, deepening the expropriation of the Bolivian revolution, were made in Palestine, betraying and backstabbing the working class in this country.

In this way, the entire crisis was a burden downloaded on the shoulders of the world working class. The revolutionary processes were isolated with the counterrevolutionary pacts, the popular fronts and a treacherous policy of class collaboration. Thus it was imposed what we may call a real “sliding scale of suspensions and lay-offs”, that is to say, in the productive process we had to accept the dismissals of millions of immigrants, part-time workers and those paid under the counter; while we had to accept here and there the closure of transnational branches leaving hundreds of workers in the streets around the world. At the same time it was imposed a “sliding scale of wage cuts” with which the proletariat in the factories is now producing twice or three times more than before causing an increase in the exploitation rate of the world working class and more unemployment with 500 million of workers around the world losing their jobs and watching helplessly the machines stopping due to the impotence of a dying capitalist system in bankruptcy.

It was the action of the counterrevolutionary leaderships and the jail keeper agents of the capital inside the workers movement, the union bureaucracies, supported from the left by the “anti capitalist” parties and other renegades of Trotskyism what allowed the capitalist system to download the burden of its brutal crisis over the working class and the oppressed people of the world.  We saw those agents of Capital in action in the strike waves against the high cost of living and dismissals in South Africa, Argentina, Brazil, in the General Motors in USA. In each fight, the capitalist crisis was discharged over the workers who were imposed the fact that to save them as a class, the working class should save capitalism in crisis and neither destroy nor overthrow it in its bankruptcy.

This allowed the bourgeoisie to launch new counterrevolutionary offensives against the working class. The imperialist bosses of Kraft had to increase its value in the stock market to acquire the capital to buy Cadbury and concentrate in that huge trust the 80% of the agro industrial production of the world. Its boss, Warren Buffet, had declared in the stock market “if there is a war in America, we are winning it” when he sent the Argentinean judges and police to repress the strikers and impose a new “American shift” of 12 hours work and the dismissal of the entire internal commission (shop stewards’ committee) in the Kraft plant.

The Argentinean working class developed a great resistance to this attack. But it was sold out not by the union bureaucracy, but by the reformist left parties which signed the social peace in the Labor Ministry with Kraft bosses.  They refused to centralize the combat of the masses and led the resolution of the conflict to the feet of Kirchner’s Labour Ministry; thanks to them Kraft bosses continue winning the class war. In the same way those “leftists” went on covering the military coup in Honduras since they were part of the “democratic front” with Zelaya and the Bolivarians.

Since the events in Kraft, another discourse of the transnational against the working class started to be heard: “Now, we fire you when we want, we hire you when we want, we pay you what we want and you work the hours that we want”.  They say: “we are coming back to Afghanistan stronger with 30,000 more men.”

Under these conditions, the inter-imperialist disputes do not stop for a single second. Germany, who had made great business deals with Taliban for the opium for its labs, building schools and roads, was put back in its place. USA sent its Chinese servants to take the copper so they can sell it cheaply to its transnational companies that produce cars, IT products and computers. They are selling millions of those products to the new Chinese middle classes and the bourgeoisie that emerged in that country based of the misery of millions of Chinese slaves. China is now, which finances the building of roads, schools, and so on. Thus, USA does not spend a single dollar and takes the profits.

While the cannons are aiming at Yemen, the imperialists, like in Italy, start to send the fascist gangs to attack the most courageous Italian working class, the colored immigrants. These do the worst jobs in Italy. Those fascist hordes are only comparable to the white guards who control the USA-Mexico borders and kill thousands of desperate immigrants every year.
These new imperialist counteroffensives were encouraged and supported thanks to the water thrown by the treacherous leaderships to put off the fire of the proletarian combats.


It is against this treacherous policy of the 5th column within the workers movement that the process of mass political struggle has emerged; we have insisted on the examples of this process in this document, because -though still being a vanguard phenomenon, they anticipate that the proletariat is beginning to feel that it must enter a mass political struggle, confront the fence of its treacherous leaderships, and defeat the governments and regimes in order to conquer bread and jobs and stop the terribly high cost of living.

In this still undefined situation, with revolutionary sparks based on the masses’ spontaneity, the perspective of victory lives for the world proletariat.The action of the treacherous leaderships concentrates all the tendencies for the consolidation of the defeats, tying the fate of the exploited masses to that of their exploiters. The crisis of the proletarian leadership has aggravated to extreme degrees. Transforming the spontaneous tendencies -which express, according to Lenin, the embryo of the consciousness- into a mass political struggle implies a necessity for redoubling the forces to centralize the ranks of the revolutionaries and the healthy forces of the International Trotskyist movement, to disperse the ranks of the 5th International and of its 5th column within the world working class.

Based on these lessons, undertaking these tasks and behind these banners, we march towards the Second Congress of the FLTI. This time, we know that in this race -as we had discussed in our first congress that the reformists will blow out, as the room for concessions are smaller and capitalism in crisis only pushes them to behave as butchers, strikebreakers and servile lackeys of the bourgeois counterrevolution. Because the reformists who claim to talk on the name of revolutionary Marxism cannot submit openly and with impunity every workers’ struggle to its class enemy without smashing their teeth against the rocks of the class struggle.

The exploiters have to centralize the reformist ranks more and more into an ever more centralized international, because more and more they need to prevent Tonghua/Lingzou, and the Peruvian and Mexican combats from generalizing, as it happened yesterday with the Kraft workers in Argentina, or today in Coca Cola in South Africa, or with the civil servants and the immigrant workers in Greece again, since the capitalist system is everyday more and more afraid of the emergence of revolution as the objective conditions of the current crisis creates it permanently. They will not live in peace, and the masses and we will not let them live in peace!

In short, it was neither the intelligence of the capitalists with their system in bankruptcy, nor that of their government or the “smart” bourgeois political leaderships that have saved such rotten system up to now. The super profits taken from the overexploitation of the colonial and semi colonial countries were used, as Lenin said, by this handful of imperialist parasites to corrupt the labor aristocracy and bureaucracy and the treacherous leaderships, paying them with crumbs fallen from the imperialists’ banquet, to save their system and states in bankruptcy from the hatred and the struggles of the exploited masses.


The imperialist capitalist system achieves a breathing space and prepares new and stronger attacks against the masses

The imperialist powers, leaning on the G20, and this time also on the IMF, saved the countries of Eastern Europe from default and a thorough collapse submitting them to the control of the IMF under the US leadership. From the time being, it has prevented a generalized bankruptcy due to a postponement of unpaid debt of one billion dollars of those countries - from Lithuania and Latvia to Ukraine, Hungary, Rumania, Poland, etc. All of them are on the brink of a default. All of them are also European and German maquilas- and now they are also strangled by the imperialist finance master of the planet (USA) with an external debt and new agreements with the IMF, with which they have been submitted with triple chains to world imperialism.

Our foundational congress reaffirmed that USA would make feel its weight of dominant power even more in the period of crisis than in the expansion period. This is what is happening. Europe and Japan with their banks have been trapped to the core in the Wall Street crisis. The European finance capital was led to the crisis, default and bank failures. The states have saved finance capital by creating public debt and emptying their treasures, and for that reason, they are totally indebted.

The European recession is already chronic and structural. As we have seen with the devalued dollar USA is creating in those imperialist countries a deflation of prices. There are two discussions in imperialist Europe: How and When each power is going to unload onto the masses and spheres of influence its crisis, that is, who is going to pay for the cost of the bailout to the UK, German, French, Spanish, Dutch, Belgian banks in bankruptcy, etc. The crisis of the Greek default is, above all, a European crisis that will be paid by the masses through inflation or direct attacks against their living standards and historical gains, as it is already happening today.

In Spain the proletarians watch astonished the loss of dozens of thousands of jobs, while the Spanish finance capital, under the mandate of the Spanish King, goes on sealing profitable business deals and getting juicy super profits in Latin America, Asia and Middle East. Meanwhile, Germany tries to escape from such a crisis by avoiding all commitment with the European imperialist powers in bankruptcy, stating that “each one saves itself” when Spain, Italy, Portugal -like the weakest links of the imperialist domination chain- are about to fall in a similar situation to that of Greece with the bursting of their bubbles and the debt default of their states.

Once the Greek revolution was isolated, the proletariat did not generalise the general strikes of Belgium and the occupation of factories in France due to the action of its treacherous leaderships. This is the only thing that allows imperialist bourgeoisie to breath and state –like in Germany- that the way out is a generalized reduction in salaries and labour hours in order to keep the jobs untouched.

Germany is the first exporter of machine-tools (and the second largest exporter of any kind of goods) in the world, together with Japan that -as it had to compete against USA- developed the highest labour productivity in the production of machine-tools and in the production line, above all in the automobile industry where Toyota surpassed the US auto industries as regards the labour productivity.

The point is that the US, Japanese and European crisis and recession express the fact that the world crisis has not resolved the flow of the capital from the speculative and finance circuit to the production of goods, leaving aside some exceptions (for example, at the beginning of 2008 the speculative investments in future values of oil and commodities, or today the Chinese short cycle of expansion where the rate of profits has been partially enhanced, or even in some small specific sectors of the planet and in a few production branches of the world economy) since the average rates of profit of the monopolies and the profitability of their key productive branches in the world economy have not been yet reconstituted.

The capital will not return to the productive process, apart from scattered niches or speculative manoeuvres, without new and decisive attacks against the masses, without stagflation or inflationary blows, new counterrevolutionary coups and fascist putsches, new crises, and above all, without WARS, WITHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF DESTRUCTIVE FORCES FOR THE SAKE OF WAR, since only by destroying entire branches of production and areas of the planet, concentrating capital, increasing the rate of surplus value and the productivity of labour based on war, will capitalism be able to escape from this crisis; that is, it would only gain a prolongation of its life span by drowning the planet in a generalized catastrophe unless revolution prevents it from doing this. 

We reaffirm that imperialism will not get out from THE CRISIS without wars and fascism that would allow it to make the masses pay –till the last cent- for the losses of finance capital and without establishing winners or losers among the imperialist powers. We affirm that the world has been already conquered and partitioned -as stated in our congress’ documents- in two world wars and the 1989 capitalist restoration in the former workers states that gave fresh blood to the rotten semi-corpse of the world capitalist system.

We affirm that the ’89 event defined the war and its dual character since the world economy regained the new markets of the former workers states under the US command. But it couldn’t get that prize within the Yalta conditions, that is, with Germany and Japan as US vassals, with a France relatively independent and the City of London in servile partnership with Wall Street. The new markets expanded the horizon of the imperialist powers that existed in the Yalta period and a powerful unified Germany emerged that alongside France was in open dispute for the East of Europe, Middle East, and Africa against USA. Japan subjugated and linked to the US military branch of production in Yalta, generalizing its production towards the civil productive branch of techno-goods, was dislocated from the US engine in the ‘90s; left with its fate tied to the Pacific business as the great finance moneylender of the investments of the transnationals in China, and disputing, even with Germany, the first place as exporter of machine-tools at world wide level, it also became a first player in the automobile industry and was keen in moving –like it did during the last period- its high tech and consumer goods enterprises to China. In that way, Japan increased its rate of exploitation and profit by exporting from there towards the US market.

Japan, as a result of the war, was occupied by USA and ended up as its lackey so that it cannot dispute even a centimetre of anything authorization in the Pacific where the 30% of the commerce of the world capitalist economy flows without US authorization, and let’s recall that this was imposed on it through two atomic bombs making two Japanese big cities evaporate. Some people want to affirm that in this place -the Pacific- where USA fought for the control of the world, a Chinese imperialism can emerge to dispute USA the world dominance without taking into account the fact that USA dropped two nuclear bombs. Kautsky celebrates, laughs, applauds from his tomb his epigones of today.

And today those people expect to make the world working class believe that China, disputing the world with the USA in a peaceful way has emerged like a new imperialist power thanks to its intrinsic characteristics resulting from the nationalized industry of the times of the workers’ state, that has been kept untouched during the restoration of capitalism in that country. A real national socialist brutality that following the Stalinist policy of socialism in only one country has elaborated today the theory of the emergence of imperialism in one single country when the world has already been partitioned and the finance capital controls all the branches of the world production.

We insist, THE WORLD HAS ALREADY BEEN CONQUERED, DIVIDED AND RE-DIVIDED WITH THE RESULTS OF YALTA AND POSTDAM AND OF THE ’89 EVENTS. Whoever states that the world can be divided again without wars is a vulgar pacifist and talkative servant of the “democratic” imperialisms that are preparing with Obama the worst counterrevolutionary attacks on the world.The world has also been re-conquered at the end of the II World war and since the events of ‘89.USA has made the world its own domestic market. With the newly opened markets there were business for everybody; but also there were huge trade wars and inter-imperialist disputes during this new period in which -we hold- the exceptionality of Yalta with its US “super imperialism” and lackey or secondary imperialisms arrived to an end, so the world began developing a more “normal” period of domination of US imperialism like dominant power, with the Franco-German and Japanese imperialisms disputing with it the spheres of influence and branches of production or sectors of the world economy.

In 1914, Lenin defines that the world has been partitioned. That means that the branches of production of the world economy have been concentrated and controlled by trusts, cartels, and the monopoly and finance capital under a flag (nation). And in order to partition the world, the imperialist powers had to wage wars, as it happened with Germany when it was separated and expelled from its spheres of influence and obliged to launch the First World War.

The Marxist theory of imperialism affirms that commodities, according to their quality -that is, according to what human needs they satisfy- are grouped and produced in world branches of production, and controlled by monopolies, trusts and cartels, like Big Oil” that control the oil branch, the Seed monopolies that control the cereal and food’s business; the same happens with the pharmaceutical, chemical, automobile industries, etc, and even with the mother of the branches of production in the imperialist epoch, that is, the production of destructive forces for war.

In the FLTI congress we affirmed that the world has already been partitioned under these conditions and also that this is THE CRISIS since there is now no room in the world economy and in the production branches for new imperialist powers to dispute it. We said there are too many imperialist powers because it is not possible to get out from the crisis or reconstitute the rate of profit without an even deeper concentration of the production branches of the world economy in cartels and trusts becoming even more powerful.

Because of the control of those branches of production by the imperialists, the relationship between the states was either of colonial master or of colony or semi-colony. For that reason, we affirm that it was THE CRISIS since there is overabundance of imperialist powers and the outcome of this crisis would solve what imperialist power loses zones of influence and which one wins them and submits the colonial world with double chains, starting with the open and definite re-colonization of Russia and China.

In his work “Imperialism and the split in socialism” written in autumn 1916, when summarizing magnificently his 1914 definition of imperialism, Lenin defines the new emerging epoch in the class society called “imperialism, higher stage of capitalism”. That brilliant work slaps on the face any quack doctor or snake oil vendor that has appeared to sell new salvation formulas to the proletariat. Based on that work we are going to start discussing against the revisionists who do not start from the ABC of Marxist science, but from the new ideological fashionable solutions taken from the bourgeois sources that infect the working class through the aristocracy and labour bureaucracy.

Lenin affirms as follows:
“We have to begin with as precise and full a definition of imperialism as possible. Imperialism is a specific historical stage of capitalism. Its specific character is threefold: imperialism is monopoly capitalism; parasitic, or decaying capitalism; moribund capitalism. The supplanting of free competition by monopoly is the fundamental economic feature, the quintessence of imperialism. Monopoly manifests itself in five principal forms: (1) cartels, syndicates and trusts—the concentration of production has reached a degree which gives rise to these monopolistic associations of capitalists; (2) the monopolistic position of the big banks—three, four or five giant banks manipulate the whole economic life of America, France, Germany; (3) seizure of the sources of raw material by the trusts and the financial oligarchy (finance capital is monopoly industrial capital merged with bank capital); (4) the (economic) partition of the world by the international cartels has begun. There are already over one hundred such international cartels, which command the entire world market and divide it “amicably” among themselves—until war re-divides it. The export of capital, as distinct from the export of commodities under non-monopoly capitalism, is a highly characteristic phenomenon and is closely linked with the economic and territorial-political partition of the world; (5) the territorial partition of the world (colonies) is completed.” IHSC

Russia and China entered the world economy thoroughly ruined. Russia had a brutal devaluation of the Ruble, a restorationist bureaucracy who stole more than 200 billion dollars by making them flee out of the country to the safes of the Citibank and JP Morgan Chase, sharing out the state enterprises while leaning on the cannons of the counterrevolutionary coup of August 1991 launched by the mafia and the thugs of the old restorationist bureaucracy; all that led Russia to backwardness, to a lifespan of 50 years and to wars and genocides like that of Chechnya; meanwhile in Balkans the capitalist restoration was imposed by massacres like in Bosnia and bombs like those of NATO on Belgrade.

That Russia in ruins that lost Ukraine, Belarus, Latvia, Lithuania, Georgia, the ex-Muslim Republics where the 40% of oil lies, that is surrounded by US military bases established in those republics, with 49% of its oil and gas managed by the German BASF through that front firm called Gazprom, is called pompously “imperialist Russia”.

China that buys raw material and supplies of cereal, agro-industry, minerals and intermediate goods from the world market and in the semi-colonies from the own US, Australian, Canadian, French and England transnationals (that control Africa and Latin America), while financing the US monstrous deficits and foreign debt, and its labor force has been used by the international finance capital to sink the salary of the world proletariat like a comparative advantage is called pompously new “imperialist” power.

It is imperative to tell the truth to the world proletariat. If it buys, sells, covers deficits, bailout banks, lends for production, buys for the sake of third parties and administers slave labor, that is not monopolist capital, that is not parasitism: it is to work under a master, it means being a privileged employee to the international finance capital.

We affirm that imperialism was able to get out from the 1997-2001 crisis, which in its spirals devastated from Indonesia to USA to Turkey and caused the default in Argentina in 2001, thanks to a process of military Keynesianism and counterrevolutionary wars. That was compounded with the re-location of imperialist enterprises in different places of the world economy in accordance to the comparative advantages each of these places had for the privileged exploitation of the labour force according to its quantity and quality and the comparative advantage of the given currency for exporting to the world market. Thereby, 600,000 imperialist enterprises were established in China, and the Silicon Valley was moved to India to produce with its hi-tech companies taking advantage of its highly skilled labour force. Thereby, the textile industry was established in Pakistan and Vietnam where the small hands of peasants and children can be used for the great scale production of fine woven fabrics. The automobile and weapons industry found advantage in the devalued currency in Latin American Mercosur.

Apart from that, this means that while USA was relocating its imperialist enterprises, Germany and BASF looked to the East and in partnership with the Great Russian bourgeoisie, took care of the gas and oil that supply the imperialist Europe. Besides, it opened true maquilas and made a backyard for itself in the Eastern European Block in a row with USA.
Japan, the great exporter of machine-tools, lent its capital with zero rate in the ‘90s and now –when it lends money at a 2% rate for the transnationals established in China. Above all, its capital was invested in a 5-7% rate to exchange Yens per Australian dollars and for investing in the Shanghai stock market and in the speculation on the Chinese Real estate –housing- bubble controlled by the imperialist companies.

This combination of elements that led imperialism to get out from the serious crisis in 2001-2003 had key driving forces, as follows: the military counteroffensive and wars for oil that sent back Iraq and Afghanistan to the middle age, demolishing Lebanon 3 times and putting the Palestinian masses in true concentration camps and ghettos worse than that in Warsaw. All of this was done side by side with the action of the treacherous leaderships that prevented the revolutionary processes of the semi-colonial countries from synchronizing with the proletariat in the imperialist countries, like that which for example, had started in Spain, and aimed to fight against the participation of their countries in the Iraq invasion.

That is, as our foundational documents say: China and Russia meant fresh blood injected in the sclerotic veins of decaying world capitalism, like a semi-corpse or moribund man receives blood and oxygen allowing him to live and endure its condition for 4 or 5 years till 2007 when the first symptoms of a coming massive heart attack in the world economic crisis appeared; a crisis that is still under way and began with the bursting of the stock market bubble of Shanghai.

In the expansion cycle of 2003-2007, China financed the US deficits by buying the bonds of the US treasury with its dollars at a cost of more than one billion dollars that permanently lie as a time bomb in its central bank. Meanwhile, by permanently waging wars USA guaranteed the control of the oil industry and the development of construction creating here and there housing bubbles like those we have witnessed bursting, China in 2007 and then in 2008 in USA, and more recently in Dubai attracting like a vacuum cleaner the majority of capitals of the world, even the European and Japanese capitals taken in the finance crackdown of Freddy Mac, Fanny Mae and the wicked dwellings of the finance oligarchy, that is Wall Street. The super-banks spent in advance the values not yet produced by the human work per 90 trillion dollars. In 2007, oil companies like Exxon won 140 billion  dollars of gross profit with the Republicrats’ war, speculation and issuance of securities for futures.

It’s hard to believe that there are so many people determined to hide the super-profits of the enterprises of their own imperialist powers, and who want us to believe that China with a 20 billion dollars Foreign Direct Investments would have already conquered a finance capital, which is being exported. That’s ridiculous. It is the small change given them by the transnationals for their services: for helping feed a counter tendency of the transnationals to get and produce with funds and cheap raw material of the Chinese state for their production in China. 

Lenin and the Third International stated that the most important economic factor of our times is War. Thereby in the 1948 crisis, we witnessed USA acting in the Korean war, in the ‘65-66 crisis in Vietnam; in ‘82-87 they propelled the Star Wars (the massive deployment of missile launchers and missile shields ready to demolish the worker states with the pushing of a single button, NT), in 2000/2001 a crisis in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Le Monde Diplomatique” in September 2009 wondered which war will appear resulting from 2007-2009, and responded “For the time being, a new turn of the screw in Afghanistan”.

Imperialism is parasitism and war to save parasites that live of clipping coupons without working, which control the branches of world economy through their cartels and trusts. The military US budget to maintain its army without wars, that is, to maintain all its commands in the world is over 700 billion dollars. This is the equivalent to what the US government paid for bailing out the Wall Street parasites.

US imperialism makes a living from a military complex that spends the equivalent to the value of the oil companies Exxon and Petrochina, plus Microsoft. For that reason, such new Imperial Rome -USA- that emerged from the treason and strangling of the proletarian revolution by Stalinism at the end of the Second World War, is a monster that has created the main super enterprise of the world with its military-industrial complex (as President Eisenhower said). Besides, the 30 most important universities in USA were contracted to the military-industrial complex in the development of science and technology FOR WAR.

This is a parasitic finance capital. It was organized for war and in the great funds of investments around the Wall Street’s Super-banks -that true world finance oligarchy that per each dollar they leverage it up 50 or 60 times without backing in their assets, that is, they do so by speculation, buying commodities at future values to make the value of the seed and food enterprises’ raise fictitiously as well as the value of oil through their wars. (These seed and food MNCs control the world economy as regards grains and cattle). Similarly, then, they revolved around themselves with mortgages on mortgages provoking the bursting of the housing bubble.

That is imperialism! Like Lenin says… PARASITISM!... “three, four or five giant banks manipulate the whole economic life of America, France, Germany”. It is a great definition. A bunch of super-banks –that float above all the commercial banks of the world- managing investment funds located in the 4 blocks of Wall Street, full of parasites eating the benefits with no backing from any good produced by human labour showed in their bankruptcy that they control 400 trillion dollars of the world trade and have under their shelter the 37% of the worldwide stock of shares, even those of the imperialist banks of England, Germany, France and Japan.


The revisionists, with the fairy tale of an “imperialist China” want to cover again what the world crisis has uncovered: the super profits and the parasitism of the world finance oligarchy

Today as it is the fashion among the revisionist parrots of Wall Street and the City of London, we are going to talk about “concrete numbers”. This “fashion” is aimed to hide the filthy dirt and the hidden huge super-profits of the international finance capital while every day these oligarchs with their court of parrots try to make the world working class believe that there is no money for salaries, housing, or education. The fact that those super-banks have robbed the salaries, jobs, dignity, and lives of millions of exploited of the world is what they want to hide. Thereby those super-banks must die if the working class and human society are to live.
The task of revisionism is to prevent the proletariat from remembering and engraving in their memory the multi-millionaire figures that mean all the riches of the world is concentrated in very few hands. They must prevent the proletariat from knowing the fact that from such a banquet table the crumbs fall to pay the world labour aristocracies and bureaucracies for acting like jail keepers of the world proletariat.

The 20 billion dollars in FDI that China has put abroad –a figure used by our minority in the FLTI in a shameful way as an argument to demonstrate that “China exports finance capital”- are a humble small change that does not even reach the 10% of the super profits extracted from the Chinese proletariat. That is because the lion’s share of that surplus value is got and sent to the metropolises, as in any semi colonial country, by the big MNCs that are in China, and the bourgeois Chinese Mandarins only take a minor slice of it in exchange for their services as jailers and murderers against the working class and the exploited masses. They want to hide that the Bolivarians, the Muslim bourgeoisies and the “market socialism” bourgeoisies of Hu Jintao, and other slave-owners’ foremen, are junior partners of the bankers of Wall Street, Frankfurt and Paris as regards the sharing out of the imperialist business. 

Today, revisionism wants to hide again and seal with 7 keys the 4 blocks of Wall Street so that the world proletariat forgets that 8000 parasites and vulture investment funds leverage up and control 400 trillion dollars of the world trade, and constitute -as Lenin says- an oligarchy of super-banks controlling the planet and the fate of world, while the biggest commercial banks with open branches in every country, among them the Chinese, English, US, Japanese, French commercial banks do not capitalize more than 2 trillion dollars.

“China and Russia are imperialist” they say. They must lend a convenient mask to that handful of parasites that live by clipping coupons in the imperialist countries based on the plunder of the semi-colonial world, so they can hide the control of the 80% of the finances and super-profits of the world. They must hide the following fact from the proletarians: all the money, the trillions of dollars and wealth taken from the working class are in the hands of a handful of parasites to whom we must defeat through the victory of the proletariat revolution because actually in the world there is an overabundance of riches to give salaries for everybody, housing for all, reduction of the labour hours for all, and much more than that: Yes! For the entire working class in the planet!

As the Foreign Affairs journal recognizes, the investment funds leverage up more than 90 trillion dollars without any backing, that is, they have no equivalent in the real value created by human labour. That means that capitalism has already consumed what it hasn’t yet produced. As we say in our documents: if there are no goods created by human labour, neither God nor Rockefeller can create value.

We are talking about 400 trillion dollars of interlinked operations among such super banks oligarchy mainly from USA, its partners, and the City of London where German and Japanese imperialisms put everything on line since 2001. They all together were dragged to this “ ’89”, but this time a ’89 of imperialism that has burst in Wall Street. This is the super-finance capital. This is imperialism, that Lenin defined as “a handful of parasites that live clipping coupons based on millions of slaves of the semi-colonial world”.

In its work “Imperialism higher stage of capitalism”, Lenin affirmed: “It is characteristic of capitalism in general that the ownership of capital is separated from the application of capital to production, that money capital is separated from industrial or productive capital, and that the rentier who lives entirely on income obtained from money capital, is separated from the entrepreneur and from all who are directly concerned in the management of capital”.

And then he goes on: “Imperialism, or the domination of finance capital, is that highest stage of capitalism in which this separation reaches vast proportions. The supremacy of finance capital over all other forms of capital means the predominance of the rentier and of the financial oligarchy; it means that a small number of financially "powerful" states stand out among all the rest. The extent to which this process is going on may be judged from the statistics on emissions, i.e., the issue of all kinds of securities”. (V. I. Lenin, “Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism” chapter III. FINANCE CAPITAL AND THE FINANCIAL OLIGARCHY- Selected Works, Volume 1, pp. 667-766 ?First Published: Early 1917)

This is what we now do in the present work: we demonstrate that the Chinese or the Indian outward FDI (India is nearly pairing China in that) are merely a fifth or even less than the superprofits extracted from the semicolonies by the great finance capital.

The Chinese Mandarins run to buy commodities and minerals in the semicolonial world from the MNCs that are producing or extracting them, and do not separte themselves from the productive process or from the management of capital; completely differently act the 6 million parasites in Wall Street (that live by clipping coupons for an amount of 400 trillion dollars), who nobody knows personally, who nobody knows who they are. Therefore the activity of the Chinese mandarins is not imperialism, it does not constitute the separation of the imperialist parasites from the management of capital but is that of an agent, an employee and manager of the world finance oligarchy’s capital. That means they are junior partners, in the same way any national bourgeoisie is that manipulates and manages the commercial, indusrial or bank capital, for the sake of the international finance capital, as we will see later. We are witnessing mere foremen, or estate surveyors, no other classification corresponds to the Chinese Mandarins.

But the role of the treacherous leaderships consists precisely in hiding this truth from the world proletariat. Because there does not exist this worker that accepts a wage cut, the loss of his/her job, the expulsion of an immigrant or the dismissal of one of his/her fellow-workers if his/her leadership speaks with the truth, telling him/her that in the four blocks of Wall Street and an equivalent area in the City of London circulate 400 trillion dollars per year of the world trade, of wich a bunch of parasites manage to eat 90 trillions, a bunch of parasites that do not produce anything and live by clipping coupons. That is, these parasites have spent, they alone have consumed eight times what the entire US produces in a year!

We have to tell the truth to the Chinese workers! It is necessary to throw down the foremen of the counterrevolutionary party that is an agent of the Citibank, JP Morgan, Renault, the French 5th Republic, the Bundesbank and the bloodthirsty Japanese imperialists!

Stop hiding from the workers the superprofits of the capitalists! Let’s tell them the truth! The outward FDI of the Chinese Mandarins and the Indian sepoys are mere small change given them by the MNCs, that is a minor portion of what these MNCs get from the plus value extracted from the brutal super exploitation of the Chinese working class!

In 1998 when we split from PTS, those Kautskyists said -after 10 years of capitalist restoration in USSR- that there was no capitalism in Russia since its economy did not work normally because there were a lot of Mafiosi who made big amounts of capital flee abroad. We, Trotskyists, told them that capitalism consists precisely in such things: thugs, gangs and mafia.

If when imperialism emerged it created the initial accumulation of capital with pirates of the kind of Morgan and thieves like the Crusaders, imperialism in its phase of decay keeps its super-profits using bombs, destroying entire countries, fostering mafias and thugs who plunder the world with wars.

This is the thesis of imperialism we are going to defend. Imperialism is parasitism, control of spheres of influence, military bases, since only in this way the monopolies and trusts support themselves, that is, by controlling the world economy. And as Lenin said, imperialism is essentially the split of socialism, that is, it pays labour aristocracy so that it hides the imperialists’ profits and super- profits from the eyes of the international proletariat. 


In each moment of the expansive waves of the world crisis, the capitalist economy has searched for Counter Tendencies that fed and deepened revisionism in Marxism 

For us Trotskyists, the decisive law of historical causality, by which ultimately capitalism is supported does not operate in the objective factors, but in the subjective ones, that means the crux of the problem lies in the crisis of the proletarian leadership.

When the 2001/2003 expansion cycle created the image that we were going to enter an expansion cycle of a “multipolar” world, with a developing pole in the Mercosur with Brazil at its head, another one in China and Asia, another one in Russia and another one in USA, the world revisionist impressionist left, like chatterbox parrots and fortune-tellers of financial capital’s prosperity, told the world proletarians that what was coming was a 50 years’ capitalist expansion cycle, superior even to that of the 1880-1914 capitalist expansion that had led the advanced capitalist countries to the super saturation of capital and the emerging of imperialism. The crisis of leadership, that is the overabundance of treacherous leaderships and their acting, was always preceded by the poison of the revisionists of Marxism that paves the way for their treasons.

Unlike the 20th century, this time revisionism does not emerge from the ranks of Social Democracy or Stalinism, but from the ranks of the renegades of the Fourth international, who conducted it to the feet of the bourgeoisie and caused the worst of the revisionisms. Ever since 1989, when Lenin’s statues were falling down, these servants and spokesmen of capital blamed the Trotskyist program and the Bolsheviks theory for the loss of the former worker states, for the massacres that devastated Bosnia and the entire Balkans, Armenia, the former Islamic republics of the USSR and the Tiananmen square, forgetting that they had been servants to Stalinism in the West and accomplices of its treasons at the end of the 2WW. Those Marxist renegades, of all shades, were getting ready for a wide expansion cycle, while they buried the Argentinean, Palestinian, and Bolivian revolution, the national wars as those in Palestine or Lebanon, and submitted the proletariat to the "democratic”, “progressive”, Bolivarian and Muslim bourgeoisies.

Those leaderships that subordinated the proletariat to the bourgeoisie were the same that were announcing that a progressive capitalism was going to develop and that workers’ and popular gains could be achieved in a “multipolar world”, only to justify their betrayals. Those shameless people said that in 2003, when US-UK imperialists were massacring anti-imperialist fighters before the eyes of the whole world in Mazar-i-Shariff and Afghanistan was being sent to the Middle Ages.

They broke their teeth against the real life, when the crisis hit China, sunk Australia and just like symptoms of worse heart attacks it hit Japanese financial capital. THE CRISIS and the world catastrophe begun again as The Asian Crisis, as it did in 1997-2001, where there was the biggest concentration of parasitic super-speculative financial capital, which was already withdrawing its capitals from China because of the declining rate of profit and wanted to settle in Vietnam, India and Central America with new maquilas that could keep down the value of the world labor force.

And when the first premonitory heart attacks of the economic crisis hit the world economy, these tricksters said: “the crisis hasn’t get the real economy; they are just the signs of a stock market crisis”. Of course, they weren’t Chinese, Japanese, Australian, North American or European workers who were already losing their jobs, or those that suffered the increase of the cost of living as in Italy with the increase on the price of pasta, or those that had to work in ever worse conditions.

 “Come on!” they told us; “Capitalism keeps all its vigor and potentiality”. And said excitedly “It’s just another cyclic crisis”.  The oil barrel cost US$140. The prices of cereals and other grains, like soybeans, were at their highest historic level. Thus they covered the huge amounts of capital that left the productive process and speculated with the price of commodities and future values.

The revisionists of Marxism tried to keep their ideological positions on the battlefield, but fell down as a sand castle by the sea tide when it comes in. The Wall Steet market fell, the superbanks were falling apart and what was left before the eyes of the masses was that “the emperor was nude” and that we were facing THE CRISIS of the world economy; that financial capital had already spent 90 trillions dollars that human work hadn’t yet created; which were subsidized by the states which came out to bail out the banks and big financiers “too big to fail” to prevent the generalized bankruptcy of the finance capital in the imperialist states; for that purpose they are increasing the semi colonial plundering and at the same time flooding the world with the emission of debt bonds. What is coming today are defaults, bankruptcies, new ruptures in the chain of payments –like in Greece and Dubai, as yesterday were the former Eastern Block countries, and as today it threats to strike Italy, Spain and Portugal- as the tide rises and already hits the weaker defenses (i.e. minor imperialist powers) that are also which will have to pay for the crisis of the main imperialist powers -that are doing everything possible to be the winners in the current crisis.

Against what the usual stupid charlatans say about its decadence, far from loosing its hegemony, in the middle of its crisis, USA has been attracting (as the dominant power) the biggest amount of capital in the world, in the middle of its crisis to cover its deficits in the trade balance, and in its budget, social security, reserves, etc.  As in a game, the entire world runs to put into USA 14 trillions dollars in the moment of its biggest historic crisis. As Trotsky said the ruling power makes us feel its power the most during the crisis, more even than during the expansion and growing cycle.

And this is so, because the revisionists who have broken with Marxism have never understood that the strength of an imperialist power is defined by its labour productivity, that means by the historic tendency of the human civilization and from the different modes of production generated by it, to taking from nature in the least possible time the biggest amount of necessary products, for the satisfaction of the human needs.

This tendency of increasing technology, quality machinery, improve the use of labor force in the productive process as well as its qualification; these tendency to finishing the production anywhere in the world, using the comparative advantages of the different sources of raw material, or of a devaluated currency that allows to export at a lower price; this capacity of producing and moving the commodities “just in time” is what Marxism has named labour productivity. That is why the ruling imperialist powers are those who have the most powerful gunboats; the strongest armies and the highest labour productivity.

Marx defined different laws that govern the bourgeois economy. He studied them and defined them in order to explain why in such an anarchic system, in which millions of producers that do not know each other go to the market to buy or sell their products, can work in an apparently synchronized way. He studied the Commodity, and with it the Law of Value that regulates all the exchanges in the capitalist economy, of which its fundamental contradiction lies within the productive process. As a consequence, Marx defined the relentless struggle for increasing the labor productivity, which guides the entire activity of capitalism, as well as the activities of all the preceding productive modes before it.

Therefore, in his reports to the congresses of the Third International, Trotsky asserted: “the law of labor productivity is as important for the human society as the gravitational law is for Mechanics”. Trotsky affirmed together with the 3rd International that the struggle for the labor productivity in the i9th century took mainly the form of free competence and it maintained a dynamic equilibrium in the reformist epoch of capitalism through the cyclical crises caused by the exhaustion of the machinery.  But precisely that competence conducted to a monstrous concentration at the end of the expansion cycle of 1880-1914 with the emergence of the trusts and the corporations that began to control and planify the world economy and its productive branches, which were kept under the control of the parasitic finance capital.

For Trotsky and all the Marxists, capitalism of free competence found its end and the world had already been partitioned and was going to be re-partitioned through the wars of the cartels, the trusts and monopolies. There doesn’t exist any more the epoch of the free competition that allowed new processes of concentration of capital, messrs. reformists and revisinists. We are now (and that from a long time ago) in the epoch of the control on the productive branches and the spheres of influence all over the world on the part of the monopolies and the trusts, with their gunboats.

They want to make us Marxists believe that we have returned to the reformist epoch of “free competition” between the Chinese state monopolies and the imperialist corporations that control the productive branches and the spheres of influence with their weapons shooting in every direction. As Trotsky said, the epoch of economc liberalism has long ago died in the phase of death agony of Capital and the free competition “is a hen that hatched not a chicken but a crocodile”, so “nobody should wonder if this hen cannot manage conveniently its offspring”.

No doubt we are in front of revisionist currents, either in their catastrophist or pacifist variants, all of them, as we denounce, giving a picture of a progressive development in the capitalist mode of production in the planet, and which hold the persistence of free exchange, free competition and a healthy development of the productive forces. And we denounce them because they want convince us of the existence of a mode of production which has a long way ahead before it exhausts its potentiality in History, when we are actually witnessing the worse crises, wars and catastrophes of its history.

Imperialism is the permanent destruction of productive forces and the increasing of the productivity of labor is linked to the development of destructive forces. USA, which imposed Ford’s line of production, proved to have a better production line than Germany or England; so it emerged as the ruling imperialist power after the WW II, while England had emerged as the imperialist ruling power on the late 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century because its navy controlled the world trade with its cannons.USA will go into decadency if it’s the losing power in the world crisis. But so far it goes on being the winner, because it is the one that has thrown its crisis to the rest of the world, as the new debts of the European imperialist states show.

The peculiarity of USA -as the dominant power- to where 14 trillions dollars have arrived to save it since its historic crisis began, is that that is the place where the most powerful destructive forces in the planet are concentrated; upon which it will be able to reconstruct its profit rate based on war and destruction. The capital knows this and is not silly; it is coward, but not silly.

This explains the enormous income of capitals to USA; i.e. the high standing labour productivity from its 30 universities producing high technology for the monopolies and the suppliers of the US state trusts, that then are capable of generalize their production to civil branches, at zero-cost, financed by the US state. So, unlike in the rest of the imperialist powers, the US labour productivity far from going backwards during the crisis, is increased.
According to Foreign Affairs statistics productivity in US industry grew a 13.4% on the third quarter of the year. Industrial GDP grew 5.2% on the same period and there was a peak of 8.1%, the biggest growth since the third quarter of 2003. In USA productivity grows in the recessive phases. On the fourth quarter of 2008 the GDP fell 6.6% and productivity grew 3.2%. And when the economy heals it keeps growing. In the third quarter of 2009 the industrial GDP grew 2.8% and the productivity 8.1%.

That’s why the US is the dominant power. Its productivity of labour grows both in the growing cycles and in the decreasing cycles. This is because it handles the biggest concentration of destructive forces and financial capital of the world.

It sounds funny and sometimes pitiful, seeing the quack doctors talking about the “Imperialist China” when we see Hu Jintao and other servants of the imperialist financial capitals begging in the summit “against the greenhouse effect” for new “non contaminant” technologies, which are owned by USA, Shell, the Pentagon, to make of the cleaning of the planet the biggest business for the transnationals; as yesterday it was the destruction (and the re-construction of what had been destroyed) and as the war will be again.

That’s why a first conclusion from this data, as the imperialist general staff predicts, is that the post-crisis US productivity is about 10% to 15% superior to Japan’s and EU’s. This allows USA to produce in a cheaper way the production branch that it’s interested in, at a lower cost and getting the surplus value from the rest of the bourgeoisies on the world market, including China, because ultimately the world is its domestic market.

This is the tendency that is incubating in the prospects of a way out from the crisis of this rotten system, by US capital creating a new world labour division with USA as an exporter with a devalued dollar that –while it goes on throwing inflation to the rest of the world- allows this imperialism to place itself in a privileged situation in relation to the productive branches of other imperialist powers and dispute them in the whole world economy. That’s why that new Chinese Kuomintang full of slave-master bourgeois and murderers of workers, who are selling out the Chinese nation in partnership with USA and world imperialism had stated that they could only be the second brother of USA and the rest of the imperialist powers. (That means not being the first son but the one that takes charge of caring for the widow if the first one dies).

This is the way things are on this planet in bankruptcy thanks to the world imperialist system and the betrayal of the proletarian leaderships that are preventing the working class from destroying capitalism just in a moment that it is lying at death’s door.Thus USA pays back by devaluating its currency and bringing inflation to the whole world economy the services given to it by its servants and rivals. So it increases its comparative advantages for export, pushing for the deflation of European prices and gradually imposing and trying to rebuild a world division of labor that allows it to reconstitute its rate of benefit, exporting to every corner of the world market, and transforming China now -besides being the safe box that has financed its deficits by exchanging valueless treasuries for fresh dollars- from the maquila platform for the imperialists’ exports, into a raw materials importer, into a buyer of patents, minerals, and goods that the same imperialist powers, especially US, produce and sell at world level.


 Chapter 3

The FLTI on a war foot against revisionism in Marxism, which aims to justify the betrayal to the World proletarian revolution and the counterrevolutionary offensives of imperialism


China and India: A counter tendency in the midst of the stagnation of the world economy, or the parrot-liars repeating the discourse of imperialism about “a new engine of the world economy”?


US imperialism is disguising as Obama while the opportunists posing as Marxists, the new representatives of empiric-criticism, are disguising as defenders of dialectics

In the Anglo-Saxon left influenced by the Obamamania, there is a particularity. These leftists are frightened by the crisis of the financial capital, or just hurt or touched by it; these leftists want to make the world proletariat believe that the world is not partitioned, let alone will be partitioned by means of the sound of guns (as Lenin and the III International said). They want to make the world proletariat believe that within the breaches of the world economy -as we will see further- an ‘imperialist China’ has emerged, like the rabbit coming out of a wizard’s hat or thanks to the magic exerted by Merlin the wizard. This “imperialist power” in its expansion, would be capable of disputing to US the spheres of influence all around the world.


Some of these gentlemen are very careful. Take British SWP, which claims in a casual mood that “at least in Latin America, China has started to dispute them (i.e., US’s spheres of influence)”. Others, instead, like Workers Power, Socialist Fight and the rest of the ‘left wings’ of the ‘anti-capitalists’ parties of the US/UK, are claiming openly and shamelessly that China has irrupted into the world economy just as Germany did in 1914: disputing the world with Britain, or as the USA did in the second world war taking the entire world for itself.

But according to all these revisionist chatterboxes, China would do it peacefully. China, these quack doctors say, would be taking peacefully for itself all the production branches of the world economy and all the spheres of influence. “What about Japan, France and Germany? Those are second-class imperialisms.” As apocalyptical professors, pointing to the audience with their admonishing forefingers, they have already sentenced that a new imperialism has occupied the leading role in all the inter-imperialist disputes all around the world and that it is responsible for sinking the working class wages in the imperialist centers –especially USA-, as well as for their job losses.


We are facing a new revisionism akin to that which in 2003/2005 pre-announced a multipolar world with ‘an expansionist cycle that would last 50 years’. It is a Kautskyist revisionism that holds that a new or renovated imperialist power can emerge without wars, a vision of the world that revolutionary Marxism fought and defeated both in the theoretical and programmatic stances as early as 1916. Lenin said “By means of this suave lie (that England’s colonial monopoly had already been destroyed, so wars had become unnecessary, Ed. Note), Kautsky smuggles in the bourgeois-pacifist and opportunist-philistine idea that "there is nothing to fight about". On the contrary, not only have the capitalists something to fight about now, but they cannot help fighting if they want to preserve capitalism,… “ (V.I.Lenin, Imperialism and the Split in Socialism - October 1916 - Collected Works, Volume 23).

But almost a century after these words were written the neo-Kautskyists have the insolence of painting the world imperialist system as a club of gentlemen who share amiably the world and their business as philanthropists managing charity entities. They try to sell an anti-Marxist, rottenly pacifist vision that poisons the class consciousness of the workers, and justifies the backwardness of the Chinese nation and the worse plundering it has ever suffered in the hands of the HSBC, USA, and even Japan and the EU.

This new revisionism, as such, has penetrated and continues penetrating the international Marxist movement, especially in the Anglo-Saxon powers. In those countries finance capital needs to create and re-create a ‘demon’ called ‘Chinese imperialism’ in order to make the working class join the imperialist bourgeoisie of London and Wall Street in their new military adventures around the world, at the same time they divert the hate of the masses from their own governments, i.e. Obama and Brown, towards the ‘Chinese demon’.

Within the FLTI, as we have stated previously, a small minority has emerged in the groups which were influenced by the Anglo-Saxon left from which  they came from, before merging with us, such as Workers Power or the LCRI of England.We have already seen this minority leaping from here to there like grasshoppers, staging a Copernican evolution in their positions; they change these positions without confessing that they are amending and changing them, with a petty bourgeois irresponsible method, lacking seriousness and openly seeding confusion. They use a typical Mandelite method of discussion. And please don’t accuse us of “abuse” for the adjectives we are forced to apply: we are tempted to say: “Let the minority reach an agreement with itself, discussing within it its own documents”.

These overt contradictions, appropriate to chatterboxes that do not establish a clear subject of discussion about any worker could pronounce his/her opinion, are called by them… “dialectics”.

In the July congress they affirmed that the discussion on China was solely a theoretical discussion about whether China could get to become an imperialist power.  In November they affirmed in a long document that China was already an imperialist country though it still kept strong features of a semi colony, and so if US was to invade it or attack its territory, they would defend it. Then –as is the habit of every revisionist that revises the program and the Marxist Theory trying at the same time that the revolutionaries and the class conscious workers do not discover their tricks- they began to hold a new position in the discussions regarding Africa, Bolivia and Honduras: according to them, China had already begun to dispute USA all its spheres of influence, in short, the entire world. And now, while the mechanical shovels were burying 350,000 corpses in Haiti (and a shameless silence came from USA) they went out to foretell the imminent inter-imperialist war between US and China, proclaiming their defeatist policy for both sides, under the impression of the clash between Obama and Hu Jintao around Taiwan.

These are the facts. Thus are the usual deeds of the petty bourgeois prestige-seekers when a worker tells them: “you are wrong on this point”. They answer: “but here we have said another thing, and there, still another one”. Because they are everything for everybody, they offer all kinds of merchandise, as in a peddler’s showcase. But all their arguments and positions aim to confound the workers and revise Marxism.

Many workers have asked us the reason why we devote so long and detailed a document, which means hours and days of our time, to such a discussion with people that have proved to have so little seriousness. Now, we want to tell the truth to the advanced workers of the world: revisionism covers with its sophistry the programs and the strategies of reformism aimed at strangling the proletarian combats. Revisionism prepares the cadres and the parties that are needed to betray the proletariat.

Because of the delay in the proletarian revolution as a consequence of the betrayal of the proletarian leaderships, today the times do not get us nearer the inter imperialist war (at least so far) but to some moments in which there will be defined what imperialist powers complete the re-colonization of the former worker states and which are the kind of double chains that are used to submit those countries and their working class, perhaps the most exploited in the world together with those from Africa, Middle East and Latin America.

What lies behind this struggle against revisionism and the chatterboxes who serve their own imperialism? That they, by means of their revisionism are preparing the biggest defeats in the physical combats, hand to hand, of the international proletariat against its class enemy, in the same fashion that social democracy did before 1914 against Marxism; or in the same way that Stalinism, with its pseudo-theory of “socialist in one single country” worked to expand its policy of popular fronts and strangle the French, Spanish, Portuguese, etc. revolutions. We affirm that new wars of occupation are in the works that will overshadow those in Iraq and Afghanistan, making any pacifist blush. Russia and China are in the sights of the US, European and the rest of the world imperialists. The capitalist parasites are waiting for the counterrevolutionary governments and regimes to finish all the dirty work of smashing the proletariat and submitting the oppressed nations, so then they can come and get the entire booty without sharing it with anybody.

The same is true with the counterrevolutionary pacts and the perfidious policy of the popular fronts. They throw water to put out the fire of the Bolivarian Revolution, of the combats of the Palestinian and Centre American masses, of the Iraqi and Afghan resistance, in order that imperialism can come later to drive in its counterrevolutionary claws without being molested.
The parties and cadres that betrayed those combats in the name of the working class were formed by the revisionists of ’89, by those that said that in 2003 a period of capitalist expansion of 50 years was soon to open, and that “it was necessary to produce because capitalism was going to share the resulting wealth later on”.

All of them are already grouped, as squeezed lemons, in the 5th International. Now the booby traps come for us, for the irreconcilable Trotskyists, so that we kneel before the Obamamaniacs and their next counterrevolutionary offensives. We are afraid that they will not be able to count on our good will, because it is and shall always be to the exclusive service of the historic interests of the international proletariat.

Our minority is constituted by a current together which we have been combating for years, as is the CWG of New Zealand, and by the HWRS who we have recently got to know. Both of those currents come from Cliffism or its successive splits, as Workers Power in England, etc.
Many times the insufficient delimitation of the Marxists with the currents from which they come from, when the pressures of the labour aristocracy and bureaucracy on the world proletariat worsen, takes them back to their starting point. This won’t be the first or the last time.

So, inside our FLTI, a minority has emerged. The only militant task they had in the last six months was the elaboration of their documents on ‘imperialist China’. These documents have been translated into Spanish and published in English and Spanish for the whole FLTI in due time. Soon they will be put into debate before the eyes of all the international proletariat, since the Chinese question has become a critical programmatic question for their international combat, and this takes them inevitably, to disregard all the foundational documents of our fraction. Thus they have become a liquidationist current inside the FLTI and, now in the field of the Anti-Marxist revisionism, they have gone to the side of the ‘anti-capitalist’ Anglo-Saxon left, as we will demonstrate in this document.

The “anti-capitalist” currents in France and Germany do not hold the pseudo-theory of an imperialist China, because China is not the “monster” that those imperialist powers need today as a subterfuge to carry their own proletariats to join them in further offensives. These imperialist powers, for now, are concentrating in Eastern Europe and Latin America, which are the zones they dispute with the US, and also certain parts of Asia such as India, Pakistan, the Philippines, etc. They also focus their strengths in keeping their spheres of influence in Africa, where, as in Latin America, the US has returned to take back what it considers of its property, using very well its front man (Hu Jintao), a local manager who for now keeps US business in Asia-Pacific.

The European imperialist powers are aware of the limitations they have in the Pacific against the USA. They know very well that in 1989 with the capitalist restoration in the former deformed and degenerate workers states like Russia and China the counterrevolutionary character of 2WW was defined in favor of the ‘democratic allies’ front, i.e. Roosevelt and Churchill.

That is to say, US imperialism and its partner, British imperialism, won Russia and China as they had planned with the double character of the Second World War where it was defined which imperialism would remain as the dominant (USA), which imperialism was defeated and would remain as vassal (Germany and Japan) and which imperialists would remain as secondary powers, like France and other minor European powers.

The front of the “allies” of the 2WW knows perfectly well what was discussed at the conferences of Teheran (1943) and in Yalta (1944) about who dominated the Pacific and which was the role played by Russia and China for those that won the war. Japan knows this very well, and it still bleeds from its wounds caused by 2 atomic bombs, for daring to dispute the Pacific with the US, one of the richest areas of the planet and a the vital passage for USA.

The proletarian revolution at the immediate end of the war, together with the heroism of the soviet masses, prevented the USA and Stalin from creating the conditions of a Perestroika and Glasnost, i.e. the capitalist restoration, as well as the settling of the capitalist restoration by the Nazi invasion to the USSR. Stalinism saved imperialist Europe from the proletarian revolution, but it could not prevent the expropriation of the bourgeoisie in one third of the planet, as it was forced to do with the Chinese revolution, later in Vietnam, Eastern Europe, Cuba, North Korea, etc.

After the defeat of the world revolutionary uprising of 1968/74 and after giving the Stalinist bureaucracy the role of guaranteeing the strangling of the world revolution all over the planet, imperialism returned to those states with its restorationist offensive, making sure that the Stalinist bureaucracy become a direct agent of imperialism and move in the ‘80s to be part of the camp of the capitalist restoration, as the IV International had predicted. That is why we insist in that there are de ANGLO-SAXON left currents and also those in Japan, that is the worker aristocracies and bureaucracies of that bloc od imperialist powers which stir up their own proletariats with the ghost of the “Chinese monster”.

For the European powers the way out of the crisis will be determined by the definition of which of them remain standing up and which sink in the troubled waters, and become as subsidiaries of those that win the competition. As a consequence, Germany has closed on itself and said “each one saves itself as it can” and the country that was yersterday Maastritch master has left today to their fate all its European partners, for them to sink as much as possible in their debts –Greece, Spain, Turkey, Italy, and also France (today allied to US through a conjunctural pact). A proof of that is the refusal from the European Central Bank to rescue bankrupt Greece, leaving it as a banana republic in the hands of the IMF.

Again, this crisis poses that the solution for Germany will come only if it gets to control Europe. That is why France is taking sides very seriously with US, because Germany will emerge as the victor form the crisis if it turns to be the first European power from Portugal to the Russian steppes; from there and without junior partners it will dispute the control of the spheres of influence in Africa, Asia And latin America.

France has puts its spheres of influence under agreements with US imperialism to stabilize the world, as we have seen in Honduras, in Bolivia and the Middle East with the Iranian Ayatollahs, after the crisis of Bush government and the burst of the world economc crisis.
But for US its domestic market is the whole planet. And while it leaves Europe alone to get in shambles, thoroughly indebted, US has put its feet on the Pacific and Africa, and has returned with a counterrevolutionary offensive –with fascist putsches as in Bolivia, coups as in Honduras or invading as in Haiti- to recover Latin America as its “backyard”. Meanwhile it props up its offensives in Afghanistan and Pakistan, this last one a true beachhead with a perfect placement from which to watch over the whole of Asia, “the old Silk Road”, together with its military bases in Hong-Kong and Taiwan, and the carrier it has placed in Okinawa, Japan.

There they are, leaning out of the left pockets of the tailcoats of Obama and the British Queen, all the currents of the UK-US left, preparing to justify the counterrevlutionary offensive of the “democratic” imperialists with murderous Obama at their head.



Scientific Socialism and the Theory-Program of the Permanent Revolution or Marxism VS. the quack doctors’ affirmation of a “national imperialism” emerging from the very guts of the Stalinist theory of “socialism in one country”

As we have said, in 1989, the definite outcome of the Second World War was defined with the capitalist restoration in the former workers states, which acted as a fresh blood injection to revive the stinking dying body of world capitalism.

This meant an enormous counterrevolutionary victory for the capitalist world economy, which let Imperialism outlive itself – even spending far above the values created. This situation has caused a world economic crisis even bigger than the crisis in the 1930s.

Whoever does not take this as a starting point to approach the discussion on the Chinese question, that is, whoever does not start from the actual historic developments of the last few decades and the world economic crisis; from the war, the revolution and the counterrevolution; and using as a tool the Marxist theory, which states the laws that rule in the historical process, is a vulgar impressionist, i.e. a pragmatic liquidator of Marxism and its apothegm that there is only one single world economy and that the epoch of national programs is long over.

The revisionism in his/her empirical idealistic method cannot but fabricate national socialist pseudo theories. This could not be otherwise.

As all the currents who have already decreed that China is an imperialist country, the minority of the FLTI, affirms this has happened because of the national contradictions and national particularities of the capitalist restoration process given in China. They said “Chinese imperialism” came up as an exception because of national particularities. This is the theory of national-socialism, since for us Marxists what defines the national processes are not their national particularities but the world politics, world economy and the world wide class struggle, to whom the national particularities are subjected. (cf. Trotksky’s criticism of the draft program for the 5th Congress of the Comintern, in The Third International after Lenin, Alma-Ata, 1928).

That’s why in their document of open rupture with the FLTI and Trotskyism they affirm as follows:
  “In other words China has turned the crisis of US and EU finance capital and the global recession into an opportunity to export its own finance capital and to establish imperialist spheres of influence. As a result, China is now entering directly into competition with the existing imperialist powers as an emerging imperialist in particular posing a major challenge to the US, the UK, Germany and France and Japan. What accounts for this amazing performance when the rest of the imperialist states are in recession or stagnating? The answer can be found by going back to the salient point that the secret of China’s “success” rests in its highly centralized state banks and SOEs which can act to take advantage of the global recession.  And while we argue that China is no longer a DWS we say its ‘advantage’ is a legacy of China’s history as a deformed workers’ state (DWS). In other words if China had not been a DWS it could never have become a dynamic capitalist country. It would have been fated to be divided and ruled by imperialism from the early 20th century to the early 21st century. Like all other semi-colonies, China would never have been in the position to accumulate sufficient capital to force its ruling class to export surplus finance capital and emerge as a new imperialist power.” (our bold)
(…)

 “To characterize China today as imperialist appears to contradict the logic of Lenin’s theory of imperialism which states that no colony or semi-colony can make a national democratic revolution and emerge as a new imperialist power. However, if it can be proved that China did make its national revolution and win independence as a DWS and that the restoration of capitalism did not cause it to lose that independence then there is no contradiction with Lenin’s theory. We would find that the essence of his theory explains the apparent anomaly that a former workers state can do what is otherwise impossible – become a new imperialist power.”

Let’s begin from the beginning. First of all, China did lose its independence with the fall of the worker state. With the Nixon-Deng Xiao Ping pact in ’75 it lost its independence. It handed over to the US the entire Chinese southeast and its slave labor for the imperialist powers to produce there in those “free zones”.  China lost its independence, “freed” its ex-import trade from the state control. It does not any more take sovereign decisions about what it exports or what it imports. It lost the control of the state banks in the hands of the imperialist banks.

China lost its independence. With its portion of the massive surplus value extracted from its slave workers it is forced to buy US treasuries and to sell to the MNCs located in its territories raw materials at a subsidized, cheap price. China did lose its independence. What these comrades say is a shame and a barefaced lie against the Chinese proletarians and exploited people.

The outstanding leaders of our minority speak about a “dynamic Marxism” that “interprets the new events”. This is for them “dialectics”; we think that they are in an open rupture with scientific socialism, with regards to the proletarian science for the proletarian revolution.
According to these people, “dynamics” is a catchword to disguise their empiricism and pragmatism, because to explain the new developments it is not necessary to throw to the trash bin the entire Marxist science, that is, its theory. It is necessary to enrich or correct Marxist theory, but starting from its own method, from its own laws of dialectical materialism and historic materialism, from the theory-program of permanent revolution, from the law of the uneven and combined development, from the laws that rule the capitalist economy, and from the law of the fundamental historic causality that explains all the anomalies and exceptions in this historic process, namely, the crisis of the proletarian leadership.

Because ultimately the crisis of the proletarian leadership explains the de-synchronization between the subjective and the objective factors of the world proletariat, including the de-synchronization within the latter.

We will go over this point later. But returning to the attitude of the comrades of the minority about the Marxist methods, they act as a physicist that discards the gravity law to explain the attraction and the movement of the planets, or like a physician that says the laws that rule the functioning of the respiratory or circulatory apparatuses in the human body do not matter, because it is necessary to start from the anomalies that have appeared in the movement or in the organism. We are sure that these people would be expelled from Physics or Medicine for being charlatans, quack doctors, tricksters, etc.The theory of the “national peculiarities” was utilized by Stalinism to explain the anomalies, and so it created its theory to justify “socialism in one single country”.

We have explained in another chapter how China does not emerge in the epoch of free competition capitalism during the 19th century, and therefore it was not able to occupy the place of the more advanced countries. It re-emerges amidst the rottenness of the 21st century, in the most decaying and bankrupt epoch of the world capitalist system. We affirm that if the independence of USA was to be decreed today –which reached it at the end of the 18th century-, even with its entire potential, it could never be an imperialist country. England would not have allowed it, messrs. Reformists. Germany and France would not have allowed it either. Not to speak of Spain and Portugal.

These ignoramuses that liquidate the law of the uneven and combined development, of the reformist epoch and of the revolutionary epoch, don't even realize why, for example, countries like those in Latin America, that during the 19th century had began their democratic revolutions, could not become advanced capitalist countries like the USA. It was because in the last days of the 19th century powerful England was beginning to accumulate its finance capital and it was not going to allow them to leave behind their backwardness.

They do not explain why countries that were left much more behind as those of Africa, that achieved their “independence” in the aftermath of the 2WW, today are backstepping to be again mere colonies in the hands of the imperialist dominance. That means imperialism is reaction all along. It was the “free competition” of the reformist epoch in the 19th century of organic accumulation of capital which allowed advanced capitalist countries to emerge and that the backward ones were subsumed to that mode of production in the world economy with what Marx called “the redemption role of capital”.

But in this imperialist epoch, where entire production branches and spheres of influence are controlled by imperialist gangs, and there exist no more possibilities for the emergence of other countries of the likes of US or for democratic revolutions. The historic prognosis is either socialism or barbarism, communism or fascism.

Our minority insists in a crazy way: “nobody has affirmed that an imperialist power cannot emerge from a worker state”. Either socialism or barbarism, gentlemen. And that is what exists in China, a leap forward towards barbarism with the capitalist restoration, as it happened in all the former worker states. Or are you going to defend the “market socialism” of the counterrevolutionary Chinese Mandarins, that regime of counterrevolutionary terror that imposed in China a very small pole or sector with the most advanced world productive forces, and in the rest, a 80% of China and its labor force the worse labor conditions akin to those that Hitler imposed in the Warsaw ghetto?

That was the method of “national peculiarities” defended by Stalinism, which held that the Russian Revolution had followed in the configuration of its “socialist market”, the routes of the old czarist market. And therefore it could, as a backward imperialist power where the socialist revolution had reached victory, not only reach but also surpass the most advanced imperialist countries and conquer socialism in one single country.

Against this pseudo theory and its method the Bolsheviks-Trotskyists rose and its work “The Third International After Lenin” affirms in its chapter The Program of the International Revolution or a Program of Socialism in One Country?:
“In our epoch, which is the epoch of imperialism, i.e., of world economy and world politics under the hegemony of finance capital, NOT A SINGLE COMMUNIST PARTY CAN ESTABLISH ITS PROGRAM BY PROCEEDING SOLELY OR MAINLY FROM CONDITIONS AND TENDENCIES OF DEVELOPMENTS IN ITS OWN COUNTRY. This also holds entirely for the party that wields the state power within the boundaries of the U.S.S.R.” (our emphasis) That is why a truly communist international program “is in no case the sum total of national programs or an amalgam of their common features”.

 “On August 4, 1914, the death knell sounded for national programs for all time (…)
 “Linking up countries and continents that stand on different levels of development into a system of mutual dependence and antagonism, leveling out the various stages of their development and at the same time immediately enhancing the differences between them, and ruthlessly counterposing one country to another, world economy has become a mighty reality which holds sway over the economic life of individual countries and continents." (L. Trotsky- The Third International After Lenin -The Draft Program of the Communist International: ?A Criticism of Fundamentals)

For our minority the definition of the character of China, as we will explain below, starts from the Chinese “exceptionality” or “national peculiarities” which are given by a miraculous combination between the emergence of a new bourgeoisie born from the belly of Stalinism and the state industries that remain from the times of the former worker state, which allowed China to accumulate enough capital and emerge as a new imperialist power.

That is, thanks to its “national peculiarities” – in a world that has been completely conquered and partitioned among the different powers, with its productive branches completely defined by imperialism at a world level- 1,6 billion of Chinese, would have entered the planet in a stealthy way, “tiptoeing” so to say, and taken it for themselves without anyone taking notice.
This is the same method and the same pseudo-theory of the “national peculiarities” that Stalinism and all the traitors used to submit the proletariat to their bourgeoisies and to strangle the world revolution, this time to define the imperialist character of China.

 We ask our readers to please read again the quotation of the works of this tumor that has emerged in the FLTI, of a minority that shows its subservience to the lefts of the Obamamania that proclaims a “dynamic Marxism” and is merrily removing the dust from old theories of the Stalinist rubbish that History has long ago delegitimized.

You will find that the essence of their theory “explains”: the apparent anomaly that a former workers state can do what is otherwise impossible – become a new imperialist power”.

We warn these comrades: UNFORTUNATELY, IF YOU DO NOT STOP AND RETHINK YOUR POSITION, THAT WILL LEAD YOU VERY FAR IN THE WAY OF REVISIONISM AND CAUSE YOU TO BETRAY THE WORLD PROLETARIAT.

Advanced workers and revolutionaries: read carefully that quotation. The minority is saying that there was no bourgeois counterrevolution which restored capitalism liquidating all the historical gains of the revolution by annulling the nationalization of the foreign commerce, imposing the privatization of the profitable branches of production and handing them out to world imperialism, and which sent millions of landless peasants into starvation and unemployment, or to slave-like job conditions, which put China in the 130th place in countries by its GDP per inhabitant.

But let the reader read very carefully. The minority is saying that the restoration process, which is the result of the pact between Nixon and Deng Xiao Ping, which ended the state property of the land and the banks, and which put the Chinese workers to work with less than 30 dollar monthly wage, is not a counterrevolution but that the capitalist restoration kept the gains of the former workers state and moreover, it rose them so much that China competes with USA for the world.

The minority does not care about the worker who works in his/her underwear, on his/her bare feet, chained up to the machines, as 100 million of them do in the South East of China. They do not think about the peasants either, who were removed from their land, as those millions who every year stage violent revolts for bread. They do not think about the slaughter in Tiananmen Square, let alone the 4 million workers who were chased up to the borders of the country by the restorationist army.

The minority is saying that the state companies (who have less labor productivity than the Indian, Bolivian, Argentinean ones and even than those of Timbuktu as regards the extraction of minerals) have made China become “imperialist”!

They are saying that the victorious bourgeois restorationist counterrevolution as held and kept the gains of the 1949 revolution and taken them as banners up to the end to conquer the world, such as capitalism in the nineteenth century conquered other backward civilizations in the planet and took them to progress thanks to the redeeming role of the capital. The minority ends up “flourishing” the Wall Street counterrevolutionary gangs that plunder the whole planet.

The only anomaly that exists is that a minority of a revolutionary organization, such as the FLTI, which has declared itself a public faction “in defence of Trotskyism”, contradicts the theory and the program of the permanent revolution, of the uneven and combined development and of all the Marxist science. And we are not just making this up, since they previously claim: “China has turned the crisis of US and EU finance capital and the global recession into an opportunity to export its own finance capital and to establish imperialist spheres of influence.” (…) “The secret of China’s “success” rests in its highly centralized state banks and SOEs which can act to take advantage of the global recession”. (SOE: State Owned Enterprise. TN). So later on they say: “its ‘advantage’ is a legacy of China’s history as a deformed workers’ state”.

Comrades of the minority, you must stop at some point, since this actually means screaming: Long live Gorbachev! Long live Yeltsin! Long live the slaughterers and the murderers of the Chinese bureaucracy! Long live the cliques of Stalin-Cain and from all the Russian restorationist bureaucracy! They have even known how to keep in the history the prospect of continuing Bukarin’s position, that is uniting the state economy, but going further away than Bukarin, with the capitalist companies and marching to dominate the world in the world capitalist economic crisis.

Comrades of the minority: Do you realize that this is what your affirmation means?

State Banks? Totally inexact! They are fully controlled by the imperialist Banks. The SOEs are in bankruptcy, as well as the state banks, with a generalized bankruptcy in 2001 for subsidizing the loss-ridden SOEs, which subsidized the imperialist companies and banks which plunder China with super profits under the command of their managers, foremen, uncle Tom, with an army of 4 million mercenaries of the imperialist banks to subjugate China as a big maquila for the world market. Its foreman, its Uncle Tom Hu Jintao, can’t even think about touching a single extra penny of the surplus value extracted to the workers movement. If so, its head would roll.

Stop at one point, comrades of the minority! 600,000 imperialist factories are plundering China. 1 trillion dollars of the Chinese treasure is there to support the annual losses of the imperialist powers.  As we will see further on, the Chinese State guarantees a consumption cycle for such transnationals to liquefy their crisis by selling 12 million cars, 7 and a half million computers, so that the own Chinese state, servant as well as buyer, buys soybeans, comestible oil, minerals and oil from the transnationals in the semi colonial world at their highest prices in 100 years.

Comrades from the minority, by characterizing China as ‘imperialist’ you are not only contradicting the logic of the Leninist theory, but you are perverting it. Stop. If you continue down this road, you’ll end up as all the British left, starting with their chiefs of the British SWP and Workers Power, servants of the HSBC and who cover up the counterrevolutionaries: Hu Jintao, Yeltsin and the genocides as Putin. In this imperialist epoch, the rentier, the parasite, lives a separate life from the management of capital. He/she reduces him/herself to the act of clipping coupons, not of administering them.

As all the statistics the minority has in their hands, which were contributed by the comrades in South Africa, Bolivia and Chile, the tags that read “Made in China” cover the imperialist MNCS that since the Nixon-Den Xiao Ping pact of the ’75, are obliged to put as front men the children of the Chinese bureaucrats. In that way the Maoist bureaucracy assured for itself the right to own the private property of the means of production after the capitalist restoration had given a tremendous leap forward after the Tiananmen massacre.

“Made in China”, Messrs. Servants of the HSBC is the signature to the right to legate with which the finance capital guaranteed the Stalinist-Maoist rubbish to become a propertied class. Any enterprise that is located in China has to be registered under the name of a child of a former CCP bureaucrat. And what is the problem for the finance capital that this appears under the "made in China” tag if that allows them to hide in a better way their super profits to the eyes of the proletarians that it exploits and deprives?

To this point in the debate we can scarcely repress ourselves from shouting to you and to the entire left that serves the HSBC and JP Morgan: “You are a bunch of shameless coverers of the right to legate thanks to which the Chinese Stalinist rubbish became in a propertied class, under the “Made in China” tag for exporting to the world economy!” “Made in China is also the way to cover the commercial secrecy with which the exploiters of the Chinese nation and the imperialist powers hide their super profits and the collection of their royalties and patents (copyrights).

So, we Trotskyists will raise as a fundamental demand, against those revisionists to the service of the HSBC and JP Morgan, the war cry: Out with the commercial secrecy of the Chinese firms! To expose the new proprietors behind those Chinese enterprises, the children of the old CCP bureaucrats –who have to be expropriated anew-, who are under the mandate of the directory boards of the MNCs that plunder the Chinese nation, that carry their trillion dollars to cover the deficits of their imperialist states, stealing now the land and extracting until the last drop of juice from the muscles and nerves of the Chinese proletariat!

The struggle for the restoration of the proletarian dictatorship under revolutionary forms will have to settle accounts with these new renegades of Trotskyism that want to throw sand to the eyes of the Chinese workers in order that they cannot distinguish clearly their enemy.
Yes, that is the role of revisionism. But unmasking it is precisely the role of Bolshevism.

Again on the theoretical matrix of revisionism: the Stalinist pseudo-theory of “socialism in a single country”

* The deep political and programmatic differences have their roots in a deep theoretical difference: the revisionists –no matter what they proclaim about that question- believe in the development of the productive forces within the national borders in one single country. Since August 4th 1914, nationalism and internationalism are incompatible.
* In 1923-1924 a fight between militant internationalism and “socialism in one country” started in the Third International. Stalin affirmed that the productive forces inside the USSR were enough to reach socialism inside the national borders of the Soviet Union, even surpassing the most advanced imperialist countries. The Stalinists stated that the productive forces were national, that they were not linked to the world economy. This is how the bureaucracy of the workers state recruited its men to act as puppets and fabricate and divulge a “theory” according to what it wished and needed, revising Marx and Lenin and breaking with all the programs and resolutions of the first four congresses of the Third International.
* That method and that pseudo-theory were based on the “national peculiarities” in the exclusive potential of a country isolated from the world politics and economy. We are sorry to inform you that perhaps such a country could exist in the Moon or Mars, but not in our Earth. That is what we Trotskyists affirm.
* Effectively, Stalin was who based his “theory” in the uneven character of the development of the different countries to support the idea that as a consequence of that “Russian inequality” this country could reach socialism and achieve or even surpass the level of Germany.
* Today, “imperialist China” is based on the same “pseudo-theory of the peculiar evolution of the Chinese national conditions. As if this country could be able to evolve with an uneven development without combining with world politics and economy, which is what defines over the peculiarity.
* This people is not innovating anything, they are not creating anything new; they are not contributing with anything. They have only borrowed Stalinist “theory” to justify their capitulation to Obama.
*
* Trotsky, when criticizing the draft program written by Bujarin and Stalin for the sixth congress of the Third International defined the incompatibility of “socialism in one country” with Marx and Lenin’s program and legacy as follows:
*
* “That the international revolution of the proletariat cannot be a simultaneous act, of this there can of course be no dispute at all among grown-up people after the experience of the October Revolution, achieved by the proletariat of a backward country under pressure of historical necessity, without waiting in the least for the proletariat of the advanced countries ‘to even out the front.’ Within these limits, the reference to the law of uneven development is absolutely correct and quite in place. But it is entirely otherwise with the second half of the conclusion – namely, the hollow assertion that the victory of socialism is possible ‘in one isolated capitalist country.’ To prove its point the draft program simply says: ‘Hence it follows ...’ One gets the impression that this follows from the law of uneven development. But this does not follow at all. ‘Hence follows’ something quite the contrary. If the historical process were such that some countries developed not only unevenly but even independently of each other, isolated from each other, then from the law of uneven development would indubitably follow the possibility of building socialism in one capitalist country – at first in the most advanced country and then, as they mature, in the more backward ones. Such was the customary and, so to speak, average idea of the transition to socialism within the ranks of the pre-war social democracy. This is precisely the idea that formed the theoretical basis of social-patriotism. (...)
* The theoretical error of the draft lies in the fact that it seeks to deduce from the law of uneven development something which the law does not and cannot imply. Uneven or sporadic development of various countries acts constantly to upset but in no case to eliminate the growing economic bonds and interdependence between those countries which the very next day, after four years of hellish slaughter, were compelled to exchange coal, bread, oil, powder, and suspenders with each other. On this point, the draft posits the question as if historical development proceeds only on the basis of sporadic leaps, while the economic basis which gives rise to these leaps, and upon which they occur, is either left entirely out of sight by the authors of the draft, or is forcibly eliminated by them. This they do with the sole object of defending the indefensible theory of socialism in one country.” (Trotsky, “Critique to the program of the IC”, chapter. 1, 1928, our bolds).
*
* This is how the laws of the world economy act in the historical period of 1989 in China, when capitalism was restored. The international finance capital conquered new markets such as Russia, China and the former workers states of Eastern Europe, and put them to produce for its sake. Thanks to them and thanks to the wars, it managed to come out of the 1997/2001 crises and to create a new expansion cycle that fell apart in 2007.
*
* Finance capital took the most advanced technology to China in some branches of production, it put them to work and with that they recovered their rate of profits.
* The veins of Putin’s Russia are opened to supply with gas and oil imperialist Europe. Meanwhile, the former republics oppressed by Czarism, who were later controlled by Stalinism, have been shared among the imperialist powers.
* In the expansion cycle 2003-2007, China, as a transitory capitalist country, was a huge component since it provided slave labour force, letting the world labour force value to go down all over the world, and made it easier for the imperialist companies the process of re-localization of their facilities in the world market.
* Today, the devaluation of the dollar pushes even more the process to consolidate China as a “consumer”, with a reduced but important consumer market (200 million able customers), surrounded by an ocean of 1,200 million starving and dispossessed exploited people, a truly significant industrial army of reserve for the world capitalist market.
* The current linking of China to the world division of labor as a transitory capitalist state generates a commercial minor capital used to cover the shortages of the international finance capital. So finance capitals plunder China and even make it pay for their shortages and bankruptcy. Meanwhile, that creates the conditions for future crisis, cracks and for a future extreme colonization and re colonization of those oppressed people, as it is already happening all over the colonial and semi colonial world, if the working class and the revolution do not stop this from happening.
* There is no such a thing as imperialism in one single country or some state capitalism flexibility capable of developing the national productive forces. There are no state productive forces that can compete with THE MONOPOLY, THE TRUST, and THE CARTEL WHICH ARE INTERNATIONAL AND CONTROL THE BRANCHES OF PRODUCTION OF ALL THE WORLD ECONOMY INTERNATIONALLY.
* OUT with the theory of “Socialism in one country”! OUT with the national capitalism theory!
In defence of historical materialism! In defense of the theory-program of the permanent revolution and the theoretical and programmatic legacy of the Fourth International!

In the Anglo-US left the new fashion is a senile neo-Cliffism

We are facing a decrepit and senile neo-Cliffism post 1989. The Cliffites, heirs in the post war period of currents as that of Burnham and Shachtman’s,  anti-defensist with respect to the USSR and the deformed workers states, vowed on this apologia of ‘state capitalism’.
Because this is what the minority of the FLTI states when it says: “its highly centralized state banks and SOEs which can act to take advantage of the global recession”

As we’ll see later, the Chinese Banks went bankrupt in 2001 and they were entirely occupied by the imperialist Banks and today the SOE have a productivity of labour even lower than that they had when China or the USSR were deformed or degenerated workers states.

The Cliffites, that leftist support of the treacherous British Labour Party and the bureaucrats of the TUC, affirmed that the advantages of “state capitalism” and its state productive forces made Moscow capable -in the post war period- of disputing the world economy to USA, even the space race. The minority, except for its anti-defensism, is just another way of kneeling down, this time not before “socialism in one country” but before “state economies in one country”.

Without knowing it (or perhaps well aware) the theoreticians of the Chinese “exceptionality” are no more than the continuators of the Cliffite pseudo-theory of “state capitalism”. They are stepping in the same steps of the Cliffite Trotskyist renegades, who are the continuators of Burnham and Shachtman and servants to the TUC and of “Her Majesty” the Queen; a current that is social-imperialist to the marrow, an enemy of the struggle for a unified and independent Ireland, freed from the yoke of the British crown.

This is the left of “Her Majesty” and of the British TUC bureaucracy that, through their international satellites, submitted the proletarians to the “democratic fronts” of the national bourgeoisies that supported the interests of Great Britain and her dominions. In that way they acted in Zimbabwe, submitting the ISOZ to Mugabe’s popular front, which pledged fidelity to the English properties and to the British Queen. And that is what they are doing now with the US ISO, which has just voted to build a propaganda group for two years to support Obama the new president.

They are those who during the Yalta period cried “Neither Washington nor Moscow”, while the Citibank, JP Morgan and the HSBC were buying off the entire Stalinist bureaucracy, from German Hönnecker to Russian Gorbachov, and Yeltsin later on, plaguing with heavy external debts the former worker states of the East European block as if they were semi colonial banana republics, as it happened to Poland, Hungary and the then Czechoslovakia, which exhibited terrible external debts akin to those of the Latin America in the ‘80s. Meanwhile, between ’93 and ’98, the imperialist banks, through Yeltsin and the “new bourgeoisie”, after devaluating the rubble, stole in big boxes, suitcases, by plane and whichever means they had at hand, 200 billion dollars which are conveniently kept in certain London bank cellars.
“Neither Washington nor Moscow” they shouted, while the City in London, the subsidiary of US Citibank took the entire East European Block and the USSR.

And now their parrots and Cliffite continuators shout: “Neither Washington nor Beijing”, while New Zealand sends troops to massacre the Afghans under the orders of Obama, and they sut up their mouths; while in Guantanamo there are still imprisoned the fighters of Mazar-i-Shariff, and they shut up their mouths; while Mumia is ever near the end of the death row, under the orders of murderous Obama, and they write that racist judges are who want to execute him; while imperialist troops invade -once more- Haiti and they keep  absolutely mute, because “the danger is in Beijing”!

Thus with one hand they cover the back of the stranglers and pilferers of the Chinese nation, while with the other, they put themselves under the orders of the World Social Forum to build with all the renegades and traitors the Fifth International to gather together and centralize all the saviors of capitalism in its death agony, from which capitalism would be able to be saved if once again JP Morgan, Citibank and the rest of the imperialist parasites of the finance capital succeed in their re-colonization of Russia and China.

And they cannot say we are not speaking about what they have written, because they hold that with the state-ization of the economy and of entire productive branches, without seizing the power, without destroying the power of the bourgeoisie and private property, without nationalizing the foreign exchange, without extending the world revolution, backward countries as China after the ’89 “can reach the most advanced imperialism and dispute it the world”.

Please, gentlemen, be courageous and dare to confess your most intimate feelings: you think the theory of permanent revolution has passed away, is obsolete! For the minority of the FLTI, backward countries, with nationalized enterprises and imperialist corporations that provide them with state-of-the art technology are able to leave behind their backwardness, dispute the dominance of the world hand to hand with the imperialist powers, resolve the problem of national oppression and the land question, the two democratic-revolutionary tasks that both the colonial and semi colonial countries cannot resolve unless they attain the victory of the proletarian revolution.

Trotsky, in “The Revolution Betrayed” has already demolished the Cliffite theory of “state capitalism” and got rid in advance of the fools that support it today. In chapter IX. “Social relations in the social Union”, point  1. “State Capitalism?”” of that masterpiece about the Russian question, that is a complete handbook against Cliffism, he says: “We often seek salvation from unfamiliar phenomena in familiar terms. An attempt has been made to conceal the enigma of the Soviet regime by calling it "state capitalism." This term has the advantage that nobody knows exactly what it means”.

And continues:
“The economic laws of such a regime would present no mysteries. A single capitalist, as is well known, receives in the form of profit, not that part of the surplus value which is directly created by the workers of his own enterprise, but a share of the combined surplus value created throughout the country proportionate to the amount of his own capital. Under an integral "state capitalism", this law of the equal rate of profit would be realized, not by devious routes—that is, competition among different capitals—but immediately and directly through state bookkeeping. Such a regime never existed, however, and, because of profound contradictions among the proprietors themselves, never will exist—the more so since, in its quality of universal repository of capitalist property, the state would be too tempting an object for social revolution.
“During the war, and especially during the experiments in fascist economy, the term "state capitalism" has oftenest been understood to mean a system of state interference and regulation. The French employ a much more suitable term for this stateism. There are undoubtedly points of contact between state capitalism and "state-ism", but taken as systems they are opposite rather than identical. State capitalism means the substitution of state property for private property, and for that very reason remains partial in character. State-ism, no matter where in Italy, Mussolini, in Germany, Hitler, in America, Roosevelt, or in France, Leon Blum—means state intervention on the basis of private property, and with the goal of preserving it. Whatever be the programs of the government, stateism inevitably leads to a transfer of the damages of the decaying system from strong shoulders to weak. It "rescues" the small proprietor from complete ruin only to the extent that his existence is necessary for the preservation of big property. The planned measures of statism are dictated not by the demands of a development of the productive forces, but by a concern for the preservation of private property at the expense of the productive forces, which are in revolt against it. State-ism means applying brakes to the development of technique, supporting unviable enterprises, perpetuating parasitic social strata. In a word, state-ism is completely reactionary in character.”

And he ends with an opposite thesis to that of the minority. While the latter says that the state-ization is regressive in the hands of the bureaucracy and progressive in the hands of the bourgeoisie, Trotsky hold a position that contradicts that absolutely.

“The first concentration of the means of production in the hands of the state to occur in history was achieved by the proletariat with the method of social revolution, and not by capitalists with the method of state trustification. Our brief analysis is sufficient to show how absurd are the attempts to identify capitalist state-ism with the Soviet system. The former is reactionary, the latter progressive.”

That is why Trotsky, in this same significant work, that we subscribe wholeheartedly, concludes (same chapter, point 2,”Is the bureaucracy a ruling class?”):
“A collapse of the Soviet regime would lead inevitably to the collapse of the planned economy, and thus to the abolition of state property. The bond of compulsion between the trusts and the factories within them would fall away. The more successful enterprises would succeed in coming out on the road of independence. They might convert or they might find some themselves into stock companies, other transitional form of property— one, for example, in which the workers should participate in the profits. The collective farms would disintegrate at the same time, and far more easily. The fall of the present bureaucratic dictatorship, if it were not replaced by a new socialist power, would thus mean a return to capitalist relations with a catastrophic decline of industry and culture.”

So it happened in all the former worker states (either degenerated or deformed) though you, comrades of the minority, want to make believe that Beijing equals London or Washington.
This “catastrophic decline of industry and culture” of the masses, spoken about by Trotsky, can be seen now in the millions of slaves that produce in the maquilas or that were deprived of the land, relapsing in starvation and even cannibalism; while the most part of the wealth created by human labor goes to cover and finance the deficits of the imperialist parasites of Wall Street.

This is the catastrophe descended on China where capitalism has been restored; a completely different view than the “wonder” depicted by the revisionists, who one would like to send to China so they feel in their own muscles and nerves the experience of working in the concentration camps of its maquilas for 30 dollars per month, under the lashes and the guns of the Chinese military. The super profits extracted by the finance capital, are superb enough so that some crumbs can be spared to pay all the bureaucrats that want to write pages after pages of laudation for poisoning the class-consciousness of the world proletariat.

Let’s go over our minority’s theory once more. According to it, and revising Marxism the imperialist transformation of China would have developed out of an anomaly, namely, the statized enterprises. Now, Egyptian president Nasser state-ized the Suez Channel in Egypt in the aftermath of the 2WW; Argentinean president Peron state-ized a significant portion of the national productive branches in Argentina in the 40’s; Chavez has just nationalized the biggest Venezuelan steel enterprise (SIDOR); a great part of the Arab bourgeoisies and also the PRI (the bourgeois party that emerged from the Mexican bourgeois revolution in early 20th century) also state-ized important productive branches of their countries at some time in that same century. But no one of them turned to be imperialist.

“State capitalism” is by no means an anomaly in the world capitalist system. Even within the imperialist powers the state-ization of Big Capital and its nationalizatin” is a subterfuge utilized by the bourgeois sate to bail it out from the collapse and the crisis, and then afterwards, when the peril has passed it returns it intact to the shareholders, after “healing” it with the people’s money.

In the semi-colonial world, the state-izations are simply a move in the disputes between the national bourgeoisies and the imperialists that oppress the nation, for a slice of the plus value extracted from the workers and of the (land, oil, etc.) rent (revenues). But these state-izations (as well as the disputes) are short lived and circumstantial because the national bourgeoisies always end giving up to the imperialist master for fear of the proletarian revolution, because the working class has proved to be, in taking the power, the only real national class.

Nor is an anomaly that the state-ized property is kept in that condition in the former worker states where the capitalist economy has been restored. This is the norm, because it allows an orderly capitalist restoration to be made. That is, the productive branches that are profitable go directly to the finance capital and the imperialist bourgeoisie, and the enterprises that demand too much investment or render losses, remain under control of the state so that it subsidizes them and some kind of order can be kept within economy in transition to restoration, to the service of the whole propertied class.

This is no novelty. That was discussed and voted in the foundational congress of the Fourth International in ’38, in the debate between Trotsky and Yvan Craipeau about what appearance could take the capitalist restoration in the USSR in case a Menshevik government took the power there.

And a proof of the correction of this Marxist law is that when the too greedy Yeltsinist bourgeoisie performed in Russia a wild spree of privatizations, the economy could not work any more. So Russia, in shambles from ’89 to ’98, ended devaluating the ruble, shaken by a tremendous crac, back-stepped 100 in its history regarding its indexes of mortality, morbidity, nutrition and life expectancy. And it needed a Bonapatist coup in the hands of Putin to be able to organize a serious, orderly economy, by re-state-izing oil and gas, though a 49% of all the shares of the Russian oil and gas are in the hands of German BASF.

This creeping Cliffism that has emerged in the ANGLO-SAXON left has impacted our minority that is keen to return to it as quickly as their legs allow them.

We insist: they think that they are elaborating “dialectically” in a new “Dynamic Marxism”, but the only thing they are doing is chewing up an old and dirty piece of fabric woven by the pseudo-theories of the “national peculiarities” that ended in the “theory” of “socialism in one single country” -that was put to the service of strangling the world revolution, and in that of “state capitalism” considering the USSR a capitalist country in the afttermath of the 2WW.
From that arsenal of revisionism and treason kept by the Trotskyist renegades in England, our minority extracts the worn out pieces for its patchwork of a theory in order to adapt itself to the Obamamania of US imperialism.

A precedent of this Neo-Cliffite strain of revisionism: Mandelites, after a 10 years’ praising of the so called ‘Imperialist’ Asian Tigers such as Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Indonesia, etc. broke their teeth at the end of the 1990s

There is a precedent of an open revisionism that spoke about the emerging of a new imperialism in the 1980s. At the head of the revision of Marxist theory there were the Mandelites as well as the Pabloites. Under some conjunctural (temporary, TN) circumstances of the world economy, they claimed that the so called “Asian Tigers” were exporters of capital (through their Foreign Direct Investments) and competitors against USA in several branches of production such as auto industry and the metal industry, as the Chaebols in South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, etc.

But the golden dream of the Asian Tigers did not last for long. Mandelites are still picking up the little pieces of their teeth broken due to such an Anti-Marxist brutality. Japan had gone too far in the 1980s with the dream of the Asian Tigers in Korea, Singapore and Indonesia. It was accumulating a huge amount of finance capital coming from its exports to the US industrial-military apparatus, with which, during Yalta, it made a symbiosis for the production of microchips, which was later generalized by the Japanese finance capital, with the Japanese corporations going to civil branches of production of electronics and consumer goods. Through these branches it disputed, head to head against USA, the automaker, photo cameras, optics, home appliances, TV sets, etc. markets.

That was effectively an imperialist country, though vassal imperialism, even the most prostrated of them in the post-war period. It developed corporations, even disputing to USA some branches of production, and it has put some of its finance capital to re-value in Korea, Singapore, Thailand and Indonesia. The vassal Japan with fresh dollars from its exports to USA bought US Treasure bonds and did not keep them in their reserves. Rather, it invested them and revalued as part of its finance capital, developing branches of production, even the robotics in the production line, giving birth to Toyota-ism to compete with Fordism, and also openly competing with Germany as an exporter of machine-tools to the world economy. The
USA responded to this with Reagan, centering its offensive in the capitalist restoration in the USSR with its partner Gorbachev. It advanced in its “Star Wars” to force the bureaucracy to enter into an arms race, which would break down the productive forces of the workers state, while its joint ventures in South East China were advancing full speed under the umbrella of the Maoist bureaucracy. Thus, USA was coming out of the 1987 crisis with investments in the military-industrial apparatus.

As Japan advanced more than it should have with its investments in the Asian Tigers, with the national South Korean monopolies, the Chaebols, as Hyundai, Daewoo, etc., the entire world impressionist left -Mandel and the Pabloites among them talked about “the new imperialisms” of the Asian Tigers; as is normal for impressionist petty bourgeois currents of the metropolises. Even worse, quack doctors of the world left foresaw the American decay and the huge rising of Japan in the world economy.

The Japanese, when buying the Twin Towers and the Empire State, made all the impressionist left and all the academic teachers to talk about a Japanese apogee and predicted US decay, while USA was making its biggest millionaire investments in the “star wars”, preparing the new branches of production such as the mobile phones and the most sophisticated computing, over the basis of the development of the war industry.

USA established the Sillicon Valley with the technological enterprises transforming the industry of war into civil branches and left Japan dislocated from the world labour division and in recession for 10 years. Meanwhile, Citibank and JP Morgan stole the 200 billion dollars that Yeltsin’s former bureaucracy transformed into bourgeoisie had taken away, and put the slave workers of Southeast China to work under the command of Wall Street and its junior partners, the bureaucrats’ children, who went to re-constitute the chief staff of the joint-ventures of the Southeast of China.

Thus, USA, the dominant power with the highest labour productivity in the planet linked to the war industry, leaning on the Stalinist bureaucracy defined in its favour the definitive result of the Second World War in 1989. We repeat: In the expansion cycle of Clinton and the info-tech corporations in the ‘90s with Silicon Valley working at full speed together with the dotcom enterprises, Japan was dislocated from the world labour division and sent to recession for 10 years. And in 1997 the crisis started that marked the bankruptcy of the so-called imperialist countries by the Pabloite and Mandelite chatterboxes.

The Minority of the FLTI uses an anti-dialectic pseudo theory by Burnham and Shachtman in order to define what a colony is

The chatterers who today talk about the imperialist China that buy the US treasury bonds like Japan did, cannot distinguish between a lion and a herbivorous horse like Hu Jintao’s China. China can only buy treasuries and keep them in its safebox, and with its economy and all and its billions of dollars of the exports cannot be at the head of any branch of production in any sector of the world economy unless it is under the sphere of the finance capital (bank-plus-industrial capital) of USA or any other alternative imperialist power.

Finance capital covers its deficits with absolutely devaluated papers and securities issued by broke banks, as is the case of US. Instead China has to spend fresh and real greenbacks. To save its banks, US issues securities and treasury bonds for a total of 700 billion dollars! But they are treasury bonds, paper not real dollars. Meanwhile to reactivate its economy and start a consumerist cycle, China had to put on the table 600 billion real dollars.

Any boss or intelligent petty bourgeois, not to speak of a class conscious worker, when watching this, says: “Who puts the money is the weak one. Who does not put a dime and that notwithstanding, is able to buy everything, that is the real master”. Because Big Capital makes its business deals with other people’s money. The petty bourgeois is who runs its business with its own money.

But in order to confound and deceive the workers of the world so that none of us can tell an oppressor nation from an oppressed one, or know they way that the bosses and their managers act, these revisionist currents have revised th definitions of colony and of semi colony, using the same method as the Mandelites used in the ‘80s to define the “semi-imperialist character” of the “Asian Tigers”.

Let’s see what they tell us utilizing a wholly pragmatic method. Trotsky in its work “In Defence of Marxism” had already alerted about the pragmatic character of the US left. But compared with today’s pragmatics, Burham and Shachtman could be considered as the Kings of Dialectics.

These people define a colony and a semi colony as follows:
“China does not fit the profile of a semi-colony. Semi-colonies have: 1) chronic trade deficits, 2) capital deficits, 3) huge national debts, and 4) relatively low growth rates as surplus value is pumped out of the economy by imperialism. Compared with Mexico which has all of these features, China is very different.”

We insist: these good gentlemen’s pragmatism would make Burham and Shatchman blush.
We know imperialist countries that have a deficit of capital. For example in the present times most of the European countries are absolutely indebted, with capital deficits even to re-activate their economies, as is the case of Spain and Greece, this lst one is in default for 300 billion dollars.

A relative stagnation reigns all over Europe from some years ago and even the most outstanding European imperialists do not grow at a faster pace than 2 or 3% per year; the same goes for US, which has a chronic trade imbalance and needs to live the inflow of capitals from the entire world.

What does this pragmatic, superficial, petty bourgeois method do in order to define what a semi colony is? It takes the outer forms, neither the essence, nor the content of the phenomenon. It defines an imperialist, a colonial, a semi colonial, or a worker state not according to the laws of historic materialism, that is, according to the laws of the productive forces, the structure and superstructure of society, but by its “profile”.

This is a full-length petty bourgeois method! It takes the superficial features. That was the method of Burnham and Shatchman: “Russia does not match the profile of a worker state”, they said. “It has a regime of bourgeois institutions, the law of value reproduces in it; there is a counterrevolutionary bureaucracy that oppresses other peoples; it makes trade deals with imperialism; it seeks to be accepted into the Society of Nations. Definitively it does not match the profile. It is not a worker state”.

Trotsky had to write a full book, “In Defence of Marxism”, to defend dialectics against those charlatans. But to repeat their method 70 years after… that can’t be forgiven. And to do that in the name of Trotskyism is even more serious; because it means that here we are facing deliberate deceivers and not only mistaken people.

Trotsky replied: The discussion is about essence and appearance. If someone shows me a wreckage of a car caused by a serious bump, I would ask ‘what the hell is this?’ It would not match the profile of a car, however it continues to be a car in its essence. The same is true for a worker state or a bureaucratised union, they continue belonging in the working class. That is their essence”.

We know prosperous colonies or semi colonies that in some period of their development have not had deficits; on the contrary they have had super abundance of capitals. For example, take all the OPEC countries as Saudi Arabia, Libya and Venezuela, which for some time had so much capital that they did not know what to do to reproduce it. But they had no other way out that going before their imperialist masters, that transformed the petrodollars into loans that later on were to build up the external debts with which the international finance capital made huge super profits.

In this moment there are plenty of colonies that have no trade deficits, as Argentina, Chile and Brazil, which have devaluated currencies in order that the MNCs can export from there commodities, soybeans and minerals at their will and convenience. They have even huge reserves in dollars and other hard currencies, but they cannot touch them because those reserves are kept as a collateral or guarantee for the free in-out flow of the investments of the imperialist MNCs. For that reason the Argentinean government was not permitted to take 6 billion dollars from its almost 49 billion dollars in reserves to serve its foreign debt payments.

Chile grew continually at rates between 7 and 9% per year, and Argentine did the same at rates of 8-9% annually for the last 7 years. Also India grew at rates of 7-8%, with FDI outflows of 10 billion dollars. According to the definition of the minority, who defines by appearance, not by essence, we would be in front of semi colonies that are in fact imperialist countries, and in front of imperialist countries that are in fact semi colonies. As true Cliffites, they are thoroughly irresponsible people; excellent continuers to Burnham and Shatchman and their anti dialectical method.

A colony or semi-colony is a nation that got late to the partition of the world and to reach its national independence in a moment when the world was already dominated by the finance capital, from 1914. And for that reason it has not been able to develop its democratic revolutionary tasks as the national independence and the land question. If we define them as colonies we will say that they have not even a political independence to have their own government and their own state institutions. This is the case of Guadeloupe, Hong Kong and other colonial enclaves.

If they have a relative political independence, we will say that they are semi colonies, because they maintain pacts with imperialism that tie them to it. In some moments of severe weakness affecting the regime of dominance of imperialism, as is the case during an inter imperialist war, the colonies or semi colonies may achieve a relative political independence from imperialism. Moreover, many a time the national bourgeoisies, by using the proletariat as a menace and keeping it under an iron control, tries to barter with imperialism –which is the biggest propertied class in all the colonies and semi colonies disputing it a part of the national revenues.

Precisely in a colony or semi colony there are two national tasks that the bourgeoisie cannot resolve any more within the national borders: the land question and the rupture with imperialism. A national bourgeoisie and the world economy can effectively resolve temporarily in a semi colonial country not to have trade deficits or low rates of growth.
The minority has sent to the trash bin the Theory of Permanent Revolution, the Transitional Program, the Criticism to the draft program of the Comintern and its pseudo-theory of the possibility of “socialism in one single country”. And they have also sent to the trash bin the Trotskyists’ struggle against Burnham and Shatchman’s revisionism in dialectics. They have not left anything of the Marxist theory on the relation between states in the imperialist epoch. There is where revisionism in the theory carries: to the liquidation of the Marxist science in order to justify the worse treasons to the proletariat!

The definition of China is: a transitory capitalist country, under a restorationist counterrevolutionary regime. It is a capitalist country in transition to being a semi colony or a direct colony, or to achieve the victory of the restoration of the proletarian dictatorship under revolutionary forms, a question that will be resolved historically in the world class struggle at an international level, and in the world arena. These are the two alternatives for China in a world that has been already completely conquered by the international finance capital.

The filthy bourgeoisie coming out of Stalinism in China cannot even give a new Chiang Kai Shek that is a bourgeois nationalist that bartered with imperialism by means of the controlled mobilization of the masses. This current rubbish can only act as lackeys and direct agents of the world counterrevolution. And the proof is in the type of Bonapartist, Pinochet-like regime established in China. Because the smallest concession allowing for partial democratic liberties, or the smallest gap in the totalitarian oppressive regime of these direct agents of counterrevolution in China, would allow the beginning of a revolt of the whole of the masses and their heads would roll in a few days.

Do you really think that this rubbish of a clique of agents for the international finance capital is going to confront Obama and US imperialism and to dispute with them for control of the world? If they dare to do that, it would be as agents and mercenaries of another imperialist power; this cannot be discounted in a more or less near future; nor can we discount that this bourgeois clique of creeping managers resulting from the Chinese Stalinists splits around which imperialism is more convenient for them to serve.

And now that things look clearer, we challenge you: IF THE ENGINE THAT HAS ALLOWED CHINA TO ADVANCE CONSISTS OF THE STATIZED ENTERPRISES, WHY THIS INTELLIGENT “IMPERIALIST BOURGEOISIE” DOES NOT STATIZE ALL THE ENTERPRISES? WHY IT DOES NOT RE-STATIZE THE BANKS AND THE FOREIGN EXCHANGE IN ORDER TO BLOCK THE CURRENT “PRESSURE” FROM OBAMA AND THE US?

If it is an imperialist nation that means it is an independent nation. We do not understand why it cannot do that. But, alas! It cannot take those kinds of measures because “Imperialist China” is a joke, a hoax, the same as your theory of “state capitalism”. Because that would amount (as we said above, following Trotsky’s “The Revolution Betrayed”) to an utopian “state capitalism” that statizes ALL the enterprises and shares ALL their dividends among all the capitalists, who would kill each other in order to get those dividends. That is, a reactionary Utopia concocted by the UK-US Cliffites and Japan.

An open break with the entire legacy of the 4th International as regards the defence of the worker states and its combat against “socialism in one country”. The theoretical matrix of revisionists: the old Stalinist chatter of Socialism in one country.

This revisionism of the FLTI public fraction is not a continuity of the Marxist program or the theoretical and political legacy of the Fourth International. Read carefully what you have written: “The answer can be found by going back to the salient point that the secret of China’s “success” rests in its highly centralized state banks and SOEs which can act to take advantage of the global recession”. Without recognizing it, the theoreticians of “imperialism in one country” and the peaceful restoration ended up being defenders resolutely of the Stalinist theory of socialism in one country.

These practitioners of a “dynamic, new, non-sectarian Marxism, not sticking to old formulas of the 60’s” repeat anti-Marxist vulgarities defeated by Marxism more than 80 years ago.   Finally, you will be who will end continuing the Stalinist theory of Socialism in one country.
Since, what was the theory of socialism in one country based on? On the idea that the development of a nationalized and state-ized economy in a backward country where the revolution has won, made it possible to make this country reach the imperialist status in its development, without the need to expand the revolution at worldwide level.

The public fraction has said that as China maintained the state productive forces and the state production branches, China obtained a comparative advantage which allowed this country to dispute USA its control over the world economy. 

You affirm this for a China with the 70% of its key productive branches privatized! Thus, the leftover of state economy made the miracle of transforming China into an imperialist country that disputes the world to USA! We ask you: with these positions, wouldn’t Mao and Stalin spring out of their graves and applaud? Wouldn’t Bukarin celebrate it? And wouldn’t he shout: “Let peasants enrich themselves, let bourgeois enrich themselves, and let imperialists enrich themselves… ! With state companies we are disputing the world of the masters.”?

However, Leninism, Trotskyism and the entire living Marxist theory in the imperialist epoch emerged to affirm that the state economy of a worker state (either deformed or revolutionary) cannot even dream to reach the productive forces of a more developed imperialist country.  Re-phrasing the Third International: “The Soviet Russia will disappear unless the German proletariat wins! Let’s set up right now the 3rd International, so the German and European revolution succeeds! The backward countries can reach first the proletariat dictatorship, but last socialism.”

We insist. You are not saying yet that a worker state, with a state economy, with a soviet regime can reach an imperialist country, a question that is impossible (and it has already been proved by the decay of the productive forces of a country isolated by the world imperialist economy as it was the Soviet Union).  What you are affirming is that the state national forces, that is, the continuity -under the control of a bourgeoisie government- of such state companies where capitalism was restored subjugating China to the international financial capital domination, made the “miracle” that even the worker state was not able to do nor could even dream to do.

The tail is wagging the dog and the dog, trying to bite it, thinks to be advancing forwards. Instead it is going round and round, and gets always to the same place, perhaps even making a hole to dig into. You, by embracing the theory of “socialism in one single country”, which rests, as we have seen before, in the “national peculiarities” are making an apology of market socialism. It is the same discourse of Hu Jintao, the continuator of Mao and Stalin.

But this is a bastard, senile and decadent degradation of the Stalinist theory of Socialism in one country. One cannot seriously talk about an imperialist Russia when the 49% of the gas and oil companies of Russia are in the hands of German BASF, where the Russian state pays the expenses and the exploration investments and BASF makes the refining and the distribution to all Europe.

It cannot be affirmed that China becomes “imperialist” when all the state banks went broke in 2001, with unpaid loans of 320.000 billion of dollars that had gone to subsidize the broke state companies which produce loss with a low labor productivity, with the collapse of a mine per day, with obsolete steel factories and a regime of agrarian rent and land exploitation that in relation to Ukraine, Argentine, Brazil, or any cheap semi colonial country is 50 years behind, with such an irrational management of the fields that in 20 years it has acidified them at a rate 200 times that of a normal use, rendering them useless in ever growing areas.


In this economy, 1.2 billion industrial workers as well as ruined peasants and rural workers live in China under the subsistence level, eating insects as a previous step to cannibalism, which would come next if things go on as now, like they had to do in China before the revolution; meanwhile there are 250,000 revolts due per year originated in hunger, counted one by one by the Pentagon and the US Congress Committee of Studies on China.

The vast majority of the productive forces of China –among them human labor being the most important one- are in complete decay, degraded and bankrupt. These productive forces are combined with the production of the most advanced machines and the most advanced technology in the hands of the imperialist power to produce mainly consumer goods for the world market.   And if the Chinese parasites want to produce them, they must pay patents and royalties as any semi colony and give explanations to the WTO.

In “The Revolution Betrayed” Trotsky stated:
“Russia was not the strongest, but the weakest link in the chain of capitalism. The present Soviet Union does not stand above the world level of economy, but is only trying to catch up to the capitalist countries. If Marx called that society which was to be formed upon the basis of a socialization of the productive forces of the most advanced capitalism of its epoch, the lowest stage of communism, then this designation obviously does not apply to the Soviet Union, which is still today considerably poorer in technique, culture and the good things of life than the capitalist countries. It would be truer, therefore, to name the present Soviet regime in all its contradictoriness, not a socialist regime, but a preparatory regime transitional from capitalism to socialism.” (…) “The strength and stability of regimes are determined in the long run by the relative productivity of their labor.”

If this was Stalin’s Soviet Union and its state and nationalized productive forces and if the limit of the backwardness allowed Russia to reach first the revolution, but not socialism without the victory of German revolution, what this public fraction is saying is that the state companies kept by the counterrevolutionary restored government to subsidize the imperialist companies were the driving force of the future imperialist China, and for that reason it is now able to dispute the world domination hand to hand to all the imperialist powers.  But such state companies, mines and metals/iron and steel industry have a labor productivity average comparable to those of Honduras, Puerto Rico and any other semi colonial country!

With its entire economy state-ized, why could not the USSR be like Germany and it only could have had resolved its backwardness the proletariat would have taken the power there? Trotsky, in “The Revolution Betrayed” explained it better. Messrs. Ignoramus, it is about the productivity of labour, and that cannot be substituted. It is a certain cultural level of the working class, of the engineers and technicians of a given country. It is about the infrastructure, of the technology, the methods of production, of the labour organization: they cannot be copied instantly. The Soviet bureaucracy went on for long years copying Western automaker and plane-building plants. But they were scraps. The only possibility for the USSR to attain the most state-of-the art technology was if the workers took the power in US, Germany and Japan, and establishing a deliberate, scientific, centralized planning of the world economy.

For that reason the plan of privatizations of the state owned companies is impossible on the part of the counterrevolutionary party of the red mandarins who today are obliged to privatize them (as they did in the past with the bankrupt banks) since HSBC and JP Morgan are not going to keep funding any state company when they lose money. That is why they attack in Tonghua/Lingzou, but workers resisted the plan with revolts and mutinies defending their jobs and the nationalized economy.

A totally opportunistic program of united front with the Chinese Mandarins before the first battles of the Chinese proletariat

Today, the public fraction declares that it is possible the emergence of an imperialism within the frames of the national borders; that a country starting only from its own national productive forces can become imperialist.  Those revisionists take the economy of one country separately from the world economy, break up the world economy distributing it in isolated spaces, without any connection between them. 

Your national vision of the productive forces gives them inevitably an endless power, since they have no need to be measured in comparison with those of other countries in the world economy arena but have simply to develop the national economy. Thereby, the backward productive forces of one country can make such a miracle as overpassing the productive forces of the imperialist powers. From that to the Stalinist “two-stages” theory of revolution only a few steps remain. “Minimum and maximum programs” as you have proposed for Haiti are already a consequence of this political degeneration that is eating from inside our minority.

In that way, the members of the public fraction of FLTI are prepared to sign with both hands what Stalin said. The arguments of the public FLTI fraction are the same that Stalin used, since it is the same theoretical matrix: the national productive forces can be developed in isolation and in their development can reach the most advanced of the productive forces. While Stalin used this pseudo-theory to prove that it was possible to develop the economy of a poor worker state technically, the revisionists today use it to justify that a backward country, exploited and pilfered by imperialism can become imperialist.

Thus, they end up being the continuers of “socialism in one country” but today under the theory that can be called “imperialism in one country”.  For that reason, when Tonghua exploited you did not take it into account. You knew about that event, but you only wrote about this historic fact when the FLTI knew about it and transformed it into a combat program for the international proletariat: “Stand up with the Chinese workers of Tonghua and Lingzou! This is the way to fight in order to keep the jobs! This is the way to fight against the privatization plan! As in Tonghua, Lingzou, as in Mexico, this is the way!” “As the treacherous leaderships sold out the jobs in Kraft Argentina, in GM and in the dismissals in Europe, this is not the way!”

The minority only intervened to say that the stop of the privatization imposed by the workers was “a concession of the red Mandarins to the masses”.  In a letter you wrote:

“The workers at Tonghua won because the state backed down to halt the privatisation. This is a victory but it is not part of a generalised challenge to the ruling CCP… The reformist settlement at Tonghua is possible because China is not facing a pre-revolutionary situation. The Chinese ruling class doesn’t need to privatise steel. The Tonghua plant is profitable again as it has modernised and exploits the ore supplied by the DRKP. It has interests in Australian mining also. It will probably be restructured as the state plan is to concentrate China's steel production into 5 or 6 massive plants. So our focus has to be not to paint a false picture of the class struggle in China but to try join forces in a united front for workers control of steel production. “ (CWG Letter, 1/12/09)

Has the Chinese state really given “a concession to the masses”? Could the minority tell us what would have happened if dozens of thousand of US workers would have hang up the manager of GM, and the government would have given back all the gains that the AFL-CIO had sold out?

Today, you repeat what the social democracy repeated more than 100 years ago and Stalinism has echoed since 1924. You affirm that there were a great advance of the productive forces, and therefore the epoch of peaceful reforms conquered in the parliament and the strikes authorized by the state have come back and the Lenin and Trotsky apothegm that reforms are a by-product of the revolutionary struggle is no longer valid.

Now, we understand why you hid Tonghua and you did not mention it in our document on the World Situation.  Because you have never taken it as a part of a revolutionary program, because you have never ever said that this was the way “for more Tonghuas and not Krafts”, that is, for revolutionary struggles to get everything and not for the submission to the boss state and its labour minister.  You kept silent because this was not your program!

In your real program, servants of market socialism, the fight is not to defend the jobs left in the state companies that the Chinese Mandarins want to privatize and the world imperialism wants to swallow. For you the fight is only to reform the capitalist restorationist regime in China, as this regime defends the “state companies” as England or Hitler did when it was convenient to them and when it was no longer useful they privatized them, this process has begun in China. For that reason a Chinese CP boss was strangled and massacred BY THE CHINESE WORKERS WHO HAVE A CORRECT VISION OF THE CLASS STRUGGLE.  And if there are any bosses who oppose to the privatization, it is because they are afraid their head could roll  as the head of the boss in Tonghua and Lingzou. 

According to you, the Chinese regime would be so perfect and potent that the only task you propose against this opprobrious and terrible regime of Hu Jintao and the Chinese Mandarins, against their policy to sell out and privatize is, according to your own words: “So our focus has to be not to paint a false picture of the class struggle in China but to try join forces in a united front for workers control of steel production” And that “if the state supported the halt of the privatization”. Are you proposing as FLTI policy in China a united front with the communist party of the Chinese Mandarins, murders and killers of the Chinese working class because it is against the privatizations? If it is in this way, we make it clear: A workers united front with the slave-owner bosses, NEVER! United Front with the privatizing bosses, NO WAY!

You, as a public fraction have to realize where this position is leading you.  Any serious militant has to think where its own position leads him and if this position is applied what implications it has, if for the proletariat or against it, if these implications make the proletariat trust in its own forces, if they help them to take out the blinds the treacherous leaderships put on the workers’ eyes; if these positions call the proletarians to combat or if they throw sand towards their eyes.

Don’t you realize that your program, theory and strategy end up being the fifth wheel of the 5th International of Hu Jintao and Chavez? Don’t you realize that your position is to tell the Chinese workers that the restored China of the maquilas, of the slave workers, is resolved with state economy in a united front with the party of the Chinese Mandarins? Don’t you realize that you support market socialism adorning it with “workers control” of the “state owned industry”? Don’t you realize that you end up being the continuers of Bukarinism who want to reform and give a “progressive” course to market socialism?

This is to put the proletariat on its knees before capitalism…but with “workers control”, in a “united front”… with the party of the red businessmen!  Please, realize where your empiric-criticism is taking you: to unify Trotskyism with the bourgeois restorationist nomenklatura of the Chinese Mandarins.  We do not act subjectively, we seek the truth and for that reason we ask you to return to Marxism, and realize the bankruptcy to where your current positions are taking you.

In 89 Mandel and his Unified Secretary fought for a “Party of Jaurés (that is, a pacifist and reformist, though a good-willed one, as he was murdered when the 1WW began) and Lenin”, as LCR they resigned the proletariat dictatorship.  You with your positions are proposing the “Party of Trotsky and Hu Jintao”. We totally disagree.  From our point of view, your position makes you end in the left wing of Hu Jintao and his 5th International.

A Cliffite fraction organized in order that the Latin American and African proletarians do not assault the imperialist bourgeoisie to the cry “Gringos Go Home!” and  “Anglo-American, Out of our countries”


The FLTI minority told us that in Latin America: “You do not understand that the exploiting power is not USA, but China” (Letter dated on 16/12/09).  “The exploiting one is not the Anglo-American, but the Chinese”. You say this about Africa.  You affirm this when Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe are plundered through unpayable foreign debts of the imperialist international banks that are the greatest plunderers of the world. In Latin America these foreign debts were assumed by the military dictatorships that in the 80’s took loans for 300.000 million dollars. Today these debts have 10 times more their value and imperialism has already extracted through them more than 10 trillion dollars, causing the worst suffering for the masses.

In this way, you tell the Latin American workers to abandon the cry of the Bolivian Revolution on 2003-2005: “Out gringos! No payment of the foreign debt!” “Out Anglo-American who sells expensively the minerals to the red Mandarins who then leave them cheap for the same companies of the Anglo American financial capital.  Anglo American buys them in China to sink the salary of the Chinese, English, North American, South African and world working class”.

 The only thing that can prevent China from being divided in a future imperialist war is that the Chinese workers begin an uprising, set up their fighting organs of direct democracy and self defense, unify their ranks, from the slave workers of the maquilas to the better paid workers of the state companies that today are threatened with the loss of their jobs and get into maneuvers of political fight by hanging up managers of the maquilas, the red mandarins and expelling USA, not only from China but the entire Asia.  Because the Chinese revolution is Asian, Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean and Japanese. In short, getting into open political struggle against the regime of terror of the red mandarins, managers and junior partner of the imperialist, the Chinese workers would take the path towards the combat to restore the proletarian dictatorship under revolutionary forms, making China (which is a countertendency of the crisis) a bastion of the Asian and world revolution.  The FLTI minority is enemy of this program.

What Trotsky warned in his criticism to the International Communist of 1928 was that Stalinism, taking the same theoretical matrix than the social democracy, was preparing himself to betray. The theoretical matrix of FLTI minority is the same of Stalinism: nationalism, national socialism.  And this is what we are going to discuss facing the international worker vanguard.

The professors of the chatterbox coming from university seek to accommodate the events of the reality into their theory.

The minority ignores the China’s place Nº 130 in the list of countries according to the GDP per person and you only focus on the size of the Chinese economy, which overpasses that of Japan. In the last period of 2009, for example, China has a GDP of 4,6 trillions dollar which was higher than the Japanese one (4,2 trillion of dollar)… but Japan is inside China because it is the owner of maquilas and transnational companies relocated there! Thus, you try to accommodate the reality according to your pseudo-theory, making up that China has imperialist monopolies, when it only has national monopolies.

It seems that you have no idea what the monopolies are, and for that reason you do not distinguish between a national monopoly of a backward country from an imperialist monopoly which takes part of the control of a determined branch of production. There are a lot of examples for national monopolies. There were monopolies in the Latin American countries before the privatization in the 90’s and there still exist today.  Thus, in the 80’s the Argentinean YPF had the monopoly of the oil extraction in Argentina and exported to the world market ruled by the so-called “7 sisters” that control the entire oil and gas branch. That is to say, YPF had a sector of this world market, without competing with the imperialist dominant monopolies of the oil branch of production.

In Mexico, in the late 30’s, Cardenas state-ized the Mexican oil, setting up a national monopoly. And even today the state monopolies exist in Mexico such as that of services –water, post office, so on- such as Luz y Fuerza (Energy) del Centro, that today the Mexican regime of the FTA wants to privatize.    

A national monopoly controls a little part of the market and the branch, as long as those that have the control of the whole branch of production allow it: the imperialist monopoly controls the world production. Thus, the national monopolies work in fact as parts, linked to the trusts and cartels that control the whole branches of production as a nut is part of a watch.  For that reason, we will never see a national monopoly confronting with international monopolies, disputing branches of production. 

This is what happens with China. The current Chinese national monopolies, which are the state companies, earn surplus value that benefits the transnationals established in the South East -to which the state companies sell supplies in order to produce- and the great financial oligarchy which takes the Chinese national savings through the control of the Chinese banks. Thus, these Chinese national monopolies are at the service of the imperialist trusts, which are international, and as Trotsky said imperialism does not suppress the competition, but puts it on the knees. 

The professors of the chatterbox swamp of the UK-US Left -who typically come from universities- do not understand anything about the Marxist theory on economy and don’t care either. Anyway, they distort it at every step.  It seems that they only walk around with a big book by Samuelson under their arms. Let’s remember that Samuelson is the knight of the military Keynesianism and is always used by USA to get out of its crisis. Surely at this moment Obama is taking classes from Samuelson’ students, as he gave classes of economy to the USA presidents in the 60’s-; for these UK-US professors Lenin, Marx and Trotsky are not understandable, they cannot digest them and they prefer to fake their positions and destroy them.  In the July Congress, the minority tried to argue that China was imperialist because of the fact that its Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) outflows -and you call them “capital exportation”- were bigger to the FDI inflows.  According to them, this process is done generally in the imperialist countries. At the same time you argued that China was imperialist because it has nationalities and ethnicities that it oppresses.

Therefore, you should say that India is imperialist because only in 2006 the FDI outflow of the main Indian companies (without counting the state or others companies), reached 10 thousand million dollars and the total FDI outflow reached the FDI inflows. So, it is the same that happens in China.  Also, India has oppressed nations such as the Tamils.  India also has a GDP that grew solidly from 2003 to 2008 at an 8.7% per year.  Also, Goldman Sachs affirms that in 20 years India would be the third world economy, behind USA and China.  With that data and with the “opinion” of the experts of US imperialist financial capital that the professors take as indicator, what are you waiting to declare India is an imperialist country?


It is a real neo-Pabloism that revises Marxism on the Chinese question

As it could not be otherwise, this new revisionism changes its positions with the evolution of the continued rounds of the world economic crisis, keeps adapting to the different moments of it like a lackey of the social democracy and the union bureaucracy of the imperialist countries.

In 2007 the Shanghai financial bubble exploded (a stock market totally controlled by the financial capital of Hong Kong, Singapore, Wall Street, Japan and HSBC), with commercial banks which subsidized with losses the investments of all the imperialist companies in China and they financed with losses and with the bankruptcy of all its banks in 2001 a obsolete state industry that produced inputs for the production branches controlled by imperialism that got cheap supplies from it.  Of course at that moment, no Pabloist impressionist could even dare to raise the head and talk about a Chinese imperialism with all the broken Chinese banks, with 320 billion dollar in totally unpayable loans, with millions of slave workers in the joint ventures and a stock exchange market under the absolute control of HSBC and Morgan super banks which was created by the Chinese market socialism in 97. 

Here and there they cried: “from 2003 up to now China is the only one that has grown”.  Now that all the imperialist powers are sunk in recession, now China in the middle of its expansion would be taking into advantage the crisis of the other imperialist powers, a new imperialism that went out to buy with its “surplus ” -called “financial capital” according to the minority and the revisionists- everything in front of them in the zones belonging in the spheres of influence of USA and Europe.

In 2007 the impressionists, especially those that were servants to the “anti-capitalist” parties of their own imperialism, announced the ruin of China. Some of them even said “China can be socialist before it can be imperialist”.  But they had never before gone as far as to say that China can be imperialist without wars, without fascism and without smashing the world revolution and the international proletariat.

Now, the new revisionist fashion is that China is a new imperialism, and therefore a new engine has emerged disputing the world with its own international financial capital based on the current ruin of the imperialist powers, their recession and crack; it emerges as a power in the 21st century disputing the world as Germany did it in the First and Second world war but this time in a peaceful way.

The eclectics, as is normal for impressionist revisionists get shocked by the events of the reality.  They take each event out of the structure, give it a limitless value, and changes it in a matrix and then tries to accommodate all the events of the reality -everything that is written in cyberspace, anything said by any charlatan around the world- to this idea in their heads.

Thus, the impressionist becomes an idealist, that is, a great eclectic because he needs to justify the unjustifiable, inventing all the time mythological figures, as the centaur, the summit of eclecticism in order to try to justify and explain in real life the idea that he himself has created. 

6 months ago, our impressionists did not know if China was going into recession after the Shanghai crisis in 2007.  So, they affirmed that China was a contradictory country, half semi-colony and half imperialist for its 20 billion dollars of the foreign direct investments, for a surplus in its coffers of 1,6 trillion dollars, for investing in Morgan super bank or Citibank in crisis part of its capital (now called “financial”) and for buying raw material in all the spheres of influence of USA.  Now, from being a kind of centaur during the last boom of the Chinese consumption, China has gone to be openly imperialist and disputes the world to USA.

All of this is called “dialectic thinking”.  Without following any law that rules the historical processes, i.e. any theory, the empiric and pragmatic Anglo-Saxon savants want to convince the revolutionary Marxists of their point of view in front of new events they have tried to answer enthusiastically. 

Poisoning the consciousness of the proletariat; we affirm that revisionism tries to justify the actions of reformism first and then of counterrevolution. From there, whoever does not fight against revisionism, does not fight against the class enemy and abandons the programmatic positions conquered in the previous revolutionary process and the FLTI Trotskyists are not willing to do that. Then, we will see how Merlin and his alchemy make a rabbit get out from a top hat, in order to make up an imperialist China.


Chapter 4


China: In defense of the programmatic legacy of the Fourth International and its founders.
The laws of genesis, movement and the current structure.


We will start by defining China’s structure with a Marxist method, i.e., by its genesis; trying to approach this new phenomenon emerged in the 21st century. For us this phenomenon is just a transitory capitalist country in a frank process of semi colonization; it has been conquered by the world economy after the counterrevolutionary blow against it by the Chinese restorationist bureaucracy in Tiananmen. The process of capitalist restoration was delivered by the own Stalinist (here Maoist) bureaucracy, which in the ‘80s became from indirect agent into counterrevolutionary direct agent of capitalist restoration, like in the USSR and all the former workers states. Today they act as direct gendarmes of US and Japanese transnationals.

Just like the USSR gave away their natural wealth to the world division of labour, or like the Eastern Europe became semi-colonies or direct colonies with their subordination to the European and US imperialism, China put its comparative advantage, its slave labour force, to the world economy.

As we see today, neither China nor Russia are allowed to become imperialist, in a world already politically, economically and militarily dominated by the imperialism. Even more, Russia today is so, so isolated that there is nothing more left of the old Russia which territory was from the plains of Siberia up to Eurasia. One by one, all the former soviet republics of the former USSR, have remained on the US side, with US military bases, all placed in the former Muslim republics and with the Eastern Europe, including now Romania, entering to NATO. 
Can anybody believe that the Czar’s imperialist Russia would allow to lose Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine, the oil routes of the Caucasus (Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan) and the Euro-Asiatic republics? Russia is reduced to the “Moscow county”, oppressing some small nationalities and making a genocide at the service of the imperialism as in Chechnya or in Dagestan.

Russia claims today: “We have the right to defend ourselves with nuclear weapons against whoever attacks on us”. This is a joke of the coward Russian bourgeoisie, agent of Germany. They took almost 90% of the territory that the Czar oppressed and the ones that the USSR occupied away from it. The German company BASF plunders the Russian oil. And when there is nothing more left, it claims its “right to a nuclear defense”. This is a bullyness of the national bourgeoisie as the ones that Chavez does, or that of the Korean restorationist bureaucracy in order to get food. It is a blackmail of the lackeys nationalist bourgeoisies. We insist, in 1989 the world was already conquered. Today, the Kremlin is isolated, and China must do what the imperialist policy and the world economy says.

The same way the finance capital fixed its aim in the Middle East for oil supply, in Latin America for the commodities, or in the plundered Africa for the minery, what always the world market got from China was the slave labour force. Even in the 19th century, where the working class of China, together with the coloured workers built the infra-structure and the railways of the rising capitalism. And this is called world division of labour in the world economy controlled by the imperialist gangs since 1914.

This is how Trotsky stated it in “A school of Revolutionary Strategy”:
 “Capitalism is a world phenomenon. Capitalism has succeeded in embracing the entire terrestrial globe; and this manifested itself most acutely during the war and during the blockade when one country, bereft of a market, was producing surpluses, while another, in need of commodities, lacked access to them. And today this interdependence of the dismembered world market manifests itself here and everywhere. Capitalism, at the stage attained before the war, is based on a world division of labor and a world exchange of products. America has to produce a certain quantity of grain for Europe. France has to produce a certain quantity of luxury goods for America. Germany has to produce a certain quantity of cheap consumer goods for France. This division of labor is in its turn not something constant, something given once and for all. It takes shape historically; it is constantly disrupted by crises and competition – let alone tariff wars. And it is restored over and over again only to be again and again disrupted. But world economy on the whole rests on a lesser or greater division among the respective countries of the production of corresponding necessities. Now it is this world division of labor that has been severed at its roots by the war. Has it been restored or no? This is one aspect of the question.”

The victory of the workers’ revolution, despite and against the Stalinist bureaucracy, in 1949 interrupted that subordination of China to the world market as a provider of slave labour force. It was disrupted not by “fees”, “competition” or “crisis”, but because of the revolution, which prevented the world economy from using China removing its national independence out of it and occupying that nation for that purpose.

With the capitalist restoration, China contributed that huge source of reservoirs that is its slave human labour, the most important and the most valuable of all the commodities. Yes, a commodity, which value is given by the cost of its reproduction. China gave the commodity Human Labour Force, the cheapest of all the world market. This is where China is going. So does Vietnam, and so does the Castroite bureaucracy want to go with the Cuban workers making 18 dollars per month to make Cuba a new maquila.

China was dragged by the whirlwind of the capitalist economy almost 2 centuries ago. Capitalist economy was on an ascendant stage and the bourgeoisies were looking for new markets, new raw material sources and new zones to get slaves. British, French and German bourgeoisies found this huge reservation of slave labor force –which China was at the time as it is today - their paradise. At that moment there was a rotten dynasty ruling China, a country as big as a continent. Immediately, the European capitalists launched war after war to force this dynasty, its court and bureaucracy to open China to the world trade.

It is proved for those who say that there is only violence in the imperialist capitalism that capitalism was born “splashing around blood and mud” as Marx would say. In the same way as England took power over China, its “daughter” (USA) took power by guns of the 60% of Mexico. A couple of years after this bloodbath and mutilation, Mexico was occupied by the French troops of Luis Napoleon (also called Napoleon III) to force it to pay for foreign debts and even impose a kinglet from a German court, Maximilian. But the united front of the pro-British bourgeoisie, supported in the hate of the Mexican masses against the invader French troops used a native lawyer of the landowners (Benito Juarez) and expelled the weakened French troops. During those days Napoleon was more worried about Bismarck than the kinglet Maximilian, who was shot after the last soldier of the French Foreign Legion abandoned him.

Mexican and Chinese workers ended up working as day-laborers in US “Far West”, to set up the infrastructure that the US big bourgeoisie needed to unify the industrial East with the West, and to intervene from California in the huge trade and business deals that Asia meant and still means. If we could hear the voices under those rails where millions of Chinese, Blacks and “Chicano” slaves are buried, they would tell you how capitalism was never peaceful, either back then or now; but obviously they would use too strong words for the delicate ears of these professors.

AS THE FOURTH INTERNATIONAL ALREADY POINTED OUT IN 1938 China was inserted in the world labour division under capitalism as a semi-colony. Today, far from changing this status –as the minority want to make us believe- and becoming “imperialist” China is about to get back to that status. That will happen unless a socialist revolution restores the dictatorship of the proletariat under revolutionary ways: “China, a backward semi-colonial country, has been the victim of imperialist rapacity for more than a century. Imperialist guns ended China’s age-old seclusion and isolation, introduced modern industry and capitalist forms of exploitation into the country. The imperialists came to China first as traders. But with the rapid advance of industry in the West, and the growing accumulation of surplus value as a result of ever more intense labor exploitation, it was only a matter of time before China came to be regarded not only as a commodity market but as a lucrative field for the investment of capital as well. China’s inexhaustible supply of cheap labor proved a magnetic attraction for foreign capital. In a series of wars against which the decadent Manchu Dynasty proved impotent, the imperialist powers grabbed Chinese territory, established “concessions” in China’s principal cities, and wrested from China a series of “privileges” designed to protect their trade and investments. By limiting Chinese import duties to five per cent ad valorem, they assured the competitive position of their products in the China market. By controlling the collection and disbursement of Chinese customs revenues, they insured the payment of China’s rapidly-mounting foreign debts. By establishing the principle of “extra-territoriality” (capitulations), they gained exemption of their business enterprises from Chinese taxation and their nationals from the operation of Chinese law. The unequal treaties in which these “privileges” were embodied were the sign of China’s reduction to the status of a semi-colonial country”. (“The War in the Far East and The Revolutionary Perspective”; written by Li Fu Jen (Frank Glass) for the Congress of the IV International 1938)

As the IV International correctly said China was always seen by the imperialist powers in the world economy –both in the reformist and imperialist times- as a supplier of: a) slave labour force to the world economy; b) free taxes territory for importations or exportations from the imperialist powers (such as southern Asia or China today); c) Free Zones with slave labour force and with an industrial army of reserve of one billion Chinese in the deep of China; and d) the existence of a direct agent of the world imperialism, nowadays the new Chinese mandarins: the Stalinist-Maoist bureaucracy transformed into bourgeoisie.

This “new Chinese dynasty” is just the Stalinist scum which evolved as bourgeoisie in the imperialist companies, conquering the Joint Ventures in China, where, in the joint boards with the international finance capital, it started to become a propertied class and to have the right to inherit. That scum was, it is, and it will be nothing more than just that: a direct agent of the imperialism. And if it wants to stop being that, the furthest bomb it will fall will be in its ear.

In some way, today’s Russia, disposed of all the spheres of influence and carved up by the imperialist powers, has a lot more of autonomy in international politics than the mandarin’s China. The native Russian bourgeoisie has its fate linked to Germany and to be a great oil exporter. But it had to accept being surrounded by 120 military bases and missile shields of NATO, all of them placed in Russia’s former spheres of influence. This world economic crisis is about that there are too many imperialist powers. We will see new tensions, because China and Russia have to be subjugated with double and triple chains (even bigger than the ones that have today) to the economy and the politics of the international finance capital.

Before the ’49 revolution, the imperialist powers, by controlling the Chinese taxes paid by exports and imports, guaranteed they would always be paid for the foreign debts contracted by of the Chinese nation, which fed the imperialist Banks established within China. And when China tried to took any tax control, protectionist measure or increase its own customs rights, its labor forces were sieged and China was invaded. That was, is and will be the history and the role of the Chinese nation in the world, which has been already divided by 2 imperialist wars.

As the IV International said: “CHINA’S INEXHAUSTIBLE SUPPLY OF CHEAP LABOR BECOMES A MAGNETIC ATTRACTION FOR FOREIGN CAPITAL INVESTMENT”. In the Second World War, Roosevelt and Churchill demanded that Chiang Kai-Shek and his Kuomintang be seated in the allies’ table and give them veto power (like Stalin had) in the Unite Nations even above France. In that way, the imperialist front of the US-UK allies planned to go out from the 2WW, with Russia and China inside.

In the last instance this was what concentrated the double character of 2WW. A proof of it was that in the 1943 Conference, De Gaulle participated as a second class exiled general, at the same level of the Kuomintang.

USSR escaped from the claws of the allies after 2WW, not thanks to Stalin’s merits but despite that bastard bureaucracy servant of the imperialist front; namely, thanks to the heroism of 20 million Russian workers and peasants that gave their lives for the sake of crushing the Nazi Wehrmacht and taking up Berlin.

Imperialism couldn’t go up till the end in using that magnetic attraction of Chinese slave labour force (already used by Japanese imperialism too), because of the revolution made by workers and peasants, despite the attempts of Mao Tse Tung of imposing a government of national unity with the Kuomintang. The rise of this revolution and its expansive waves made generals like Mc Arthur run away beyond Parallel 38 in Korea; but this revolution was contained as part of the plan for “peaceful coexistence” in Asia.

The prognosis and the characterization of China and its place in the world division of labour are exactly as the IV International predicted: showing that the imperialism is reaction all along the line, and that if the political revolution does not achieve victory in that worker state that has already born deformed in 1949, the bureaucracy would come in restorationist and into a new propertied class, direct agent of the imperialism, as it happened indeed.
Against our minority who liquidates the 1938 Congress of the Fourth International, we defend ourselves and make as ours completely the resolution on the class struggle and the war in the Far East written by Li Fu Jen (Frank Glass) for the 1938 Congress of the Fourth International. And over this basis we call to found the party of Chen Tu Hsiu, of the Fourth International, in China.

Our minority must choose: either with the 1938 program of the Fourth International, or with the program of the Fifth International of Hu Jintao and other traitors of the international proletariat. They must define themselves.

The “Chinese miracle” has the same features that the old “Korean miracle”, or the old “Chilean miracle” of which it was talked in Latin America. Everybody was amazed of Chile’s growth in the ‘80s and in the ‘90s and its huge investments, even its associations with the US capital of the JP Morgan and Citibank made with the surplus of the copper exports which was put in the privatizations in Argentina, in Bolivia and all around Latin America in the ‘90s (with this, our minority might have called Chile an ‘imperialist’ nation).

We, the Trotskyists claimed that the “Chilean miracle” is called Pinochet and Chile’s dominance and the proletariat suppressed by the regime of the bonapartist boots and the dictatorship sabers at the service of the ITT and Rockefeller. Chinese miracle? It has a name: the Pinochetist regime of the bayonet and the boots of the counterrevolutionary army of the “red businessmen” of this murderous scum of the working class at the service of the HSBC and the Morgan Bank.

This is the genesis and structure of the current China, where capitalism was restored in ’89 till nowadays.

From the point of view of the genesis of the capitalist restoration in China we must state that the period of decomposition of the workers state began with the Nixon-Deng Xiao Ping pact (’75-’89), it was a period similar to that in Russia called of “Perestroika and Glasnost” (’86-’89). 1989 was the year of the victory of the bureaucratic counterrevolutionary blow (Tiananmen) that massacred workers and students, opening the path to the full capitalist restoration in China.

We can affirm that because in the former workers state there was no right of legacy, the bureaucracy got to the subterfuge of sending their sons to the directory boards of the joint ventures in Southern China in order to get through that the legacy of properties. Their children –“communist youth”- as partners of the transnationals directory boards were the guarantee to plunder the state industry; so those SOE sold cheap raw materials and inputs – subsidized by Chinese banks that ended in bankruptcy. Then the right of legacy was imposed when the “red business-men” became legitimised partners of the transnationals and their plundering of China. 

In a discussion of Trotsky against Craipeau, the IV International pre-announced what would happen if a Menshevik government took control of the USSR. Then Trotsky said: “Should a bourgeois counterrevolution succeed in the USSR, the new government for a lengthy period would have to base itself upon the nationalized economy. But what does such a type of temporary conflict between the economy and the state mean? It means a revolution or a counter-revolution. The victory of one class over another signifies that it will reconstruct the economy in the interests of the victors.”

Correct! Again the prognosis and the theory of the Fourth International passed the test in history, and again those who speak in its behalf betray its program, legacy and theory. It happened in 1989, in ‘68-’74. It also happened in 1952 and it happened during the war.

The winners of the capitalist restoration have been Reagan, Thatcher, Bush, Clinton, JP Morgan, HSBC, the 5th French Republic, the Japanese Corporations and Germany; they transformed the bureaucracy in direct agents; they took fresh blood from the new maquiladora (China) that has become in supplier of: a) cheap materials guaranteed by the state companies that get subsidies from the bankrupt banks and broken state (that guaranteed and will guarantee super-profits to Wall Mart, HSBC, Morgan Bank, etc.) and
b) slave proletariat, as there is also in Vietnam and Korea. All that was not only used to create an expansion cycle that only lasted 5 or 6 years, together with wars, parasitism, fictitious expends. The cycle lasted until 2007 when the profit rate fell down again.

In 1999 the revolutionary fraction that broke with PTS, (the TBI) stated that after the capitalist restoration in the former workers state there had emerged “capitalist transitory countries, because they aren’t defined yet as semicolonies. Most of them keep a big degree of independence, i.e. they are not subjugated to political and economic pacts that tie them to imperialism, while others like the Eastern Europe countries have entered NATO and the process to become semicolonies is more advanced.

They are similar to those countries –like Egypt and Argentina- that at the end of 2WW got with nationalist bourgeois leaderships a relative independence from imperialism for a short period of time. [...] the country of relative independence; whether the country gets its full independence, that in order to do that the workers socialist revolution must triumph, or imperialism would triumph and turn it into a colony or semi-colony.

. [...] But we also state that this imperialist triumph isn’t defined yet because [...] bourgeois counterrevolution, despite moving forward nationally in those countries it hasn’t defined yet the confrontation with the revolution internationally; counterrevolution hasn’t been imposed all over the world but on the contrary this confrontation isn't solved.
[...]. Therefore [...] our definition is provisory: they are capitalist transitory states or former workers states in liquidation. That is why we must update the revolutionary program to put it at the same level of the current situation and –as we will see- of the task of restoring the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat in those countries, because of their genesis.

[...] The provisory definition of the former workers states -degenerated and deformed, like the former workers states in liquidation, capitalist transitory, means that even if the dictatorship of the proletariat is over –i.e. there is no more workers state- imperialisms haven’t been able to defining the location of those states in the world labour division. That is to say, imperialist powers haven't been able yet to impose the catastrophic defeat to the masses of those states and to defeat enough or co-opt their own proletariat, which would allow them to impose definitively the capitalist restoration, transforming the former workers states in liquidation in colonies or semicolonies,( incorporating them into) a new world labor division”.  (Thesis on the events of 1989 and the update of the revolutionary theory and program and the end of the century”, Chapter II, Thesis 4 and 5, September 1999).

Today, one decade after defining that process (which is 20 years old) of the combination of the state economy with Free Zones for plundering of the labour force by the transnationals which are in China; of expulsion of land; of extracting super-profits which are capable of sustaining the shortfall of the imperialist parasites; we have to affirm that, because of the betrayal of the leadership of the international proletariat to the world revolution, this transitory capitalist state has become more and more like a semi-colony, which they seek to strangle now with double chains.

As the one that cooks a steak from one side and then the other, this time, with the crisis and the world crisis, China, pressured to re-value its currency, to act as an importer, to give its markets of capital to the imperialist banks for plundering, new bubbles, and new direct financial business, will be forced to be an importer and buyer. A new sucking and plundering mechanism of the Chinese nation, which will lead inevitably to expulsion of the land and to privatize the profitable state companies so they go to the hands of the international finance capital. 

Against all of what the chatterbox, servants of the imperialism, of the HSBC, of JP Morgan Chase say, we assure that China is only 10 kilometers away from Argentina, Brazil, India, Colombia, Venezuela, Pakistan and 10 million kilometers away from New York and Berlin.

Revisionism hides the sucking of the fresh blood of the Chinese working class by world imperialism. China is neither imperialist nor an engine, just a Counter Tendency in the world economic crisis, always servant to the transnationals.

The “Chinese” miracle is the generalized bankruptcy of the savings of the state that were used to finance all the investments of the TNC installed there. Like Le Monde Diplomatique says in its edition of September 2009, as regard the bankruptcy of Chinese banks in 2001: “banks subvention permanent deficits of the state companies and the new products of the new mercantilization. The uncollectible amount of 320,000 million dollars, which is 34% of the total loan”. In 2001 the Chinese state -which is currently called imperialist by the pseudo-Marxist chatters - “it only has 200 billion dollars in reserves”, after being the biggest exporter since 1975 until 2001.

As Trotsky said, at that time the Chinese state and its state banks assumed the cost of the bankruptcy. Those banks gave subventions to the state companies so imperialist companies could have super-profits. Thus, in 2001, the Chinese state opened the investments to the state banks and the private capital in a 25%. British HSBC bought 3 entities. Swiss UBS, Royal Bank of Scotland and even the Sovereign Government of Singapore (Tomasek Holdings) entered with Goldman Sachs into the Banks of China. Bank of America bought in 2005 the 8% of Construction Bank and within the category of provincial banks –in cheaper purchases- BNP Paribas (France) bought the 20% of the Nanking Commercial Bank. The list went on until nowadays, when Bank of America –with 11% of the stock package- is the second investor in ICBC (Industrial and Commercial Bank of China), which is the biggest bank in the world due to capitalization stock-market and deposits.

So the international finance capital drives business of the credit cards in China and the stock market founded in 1991 in Yeng Tseng through its majority of stocks in provincial state banks. Since imperialist financial capital controlled all the banks, it transformed that little stock market in a branch of Wall Street and London. At the same time that stock exchange is linked to a huge real state speculation that is about to blow up the same or even worse than Dubai’s; it already exploded in 2007 and it was one of the preparatory convulsions that were the beginning of the world economic crisis.

Bank credits are in the hands of the international finance capital; now 76% of them aren’t destined any more to finance (losing money) the settle of imperialist companies. With the Chinese bank system completely controlled by world finance capital 76% OF THE BANK CREDITS IN SHANGHAI HAVE GONE TO REAL STATE, AS AN EXTENSION OF NEW YORK STOCK MARKET, like Le Monde Diplomatique said in September 2009. Companies like Mattel, Wall Mart, Mercedes Benz, and Carrefour diversified their investments, not in the production –where profit rate kept falling and falling- but to Shanghai real state bubble, which acted as soul mate of the stock-market bubble, even more than in USA.

When we, the Trotskyists, say that China is a big maquila that is being put to produce for the world economy the revisionist feel outraged. Worse ever now, since China, cooked in both sides by the finance capital, will be put down to its knees to re-valuate its currency and become a big importer, together with the consumption cycle which was opened. We state that the 30 dollar- wages of the Chinese working class -who work in US and other imperialist powers’ maquilas – were what softened the enormous price increases in the productive process caused by the climbing to 140 dollars per oil barrel in the expansion cycle of the world economy (2003-2007) and the USA huge commercial deficit.

That way of accumulation run out of gas and blew up in 2007. The new balance point that US capitalism is trying to reach, in the middle of the mess of the world economy, means that USA must buy less because financial capital already has eaten the domestic savings of the whole country, both companies and households; it also needs to devaluate the dollar and set itself up as exporter. Meanwhile, China, either if it likes or not, will have to increase its consumption (as we will see later), keep subsidizing US deficit and revaluate the yuan a 22%, following closely the devaluation of the dollar.

Thus, China is trapped as a creditor of the devalued USA bonds, which it can’t sell for being afraid of depreciating its initial investment and sinking the price of dollar even more in the world market; by doing this USA would become more competitive and China will sink itself one million more times. Therefore “imperialist China” (Wall Street puppet as we call it) had no choice but to take 600 billions dollars of their reserves and give them to the transnationals’ banks, controlled by the imperialist banks, so they give loan to the companies and particulars in China to open a consumerist cycle. Thus, Carrefour and Wall Mart opened 5,000 branches in China to sell millions of cars, washing machines, TVsets, computers, etc. 

Imperialism? Aren’t they ashamed by deceiving like this the world proletariat and slapping in the face the Chinese proletariat? They are a bunch of brazen liars who write from the luxurious offices of the labor aristocracy and from the offices of the professors of New York and London, heirs of the worst of Pabloism and Cliffism. China, imperialist? In the crisis, China is one more million times on its knees before London, Wall Street, Frankfurt and Paris.


“China is a banker and creditor of USA” cried out the revisionist parrots. But it has inside the country 600,000 factories of the imperialist companies that invested 1.1 trillion dollars in the country, including the stock market. USA didn’t save its banks by putting fresh money, as those stupid people that are holding tight Obama’s left ear; but by printing treasury bonds backed by the dollars of the Chinese exportations. We have seen lackey governments, servants to imperialism. But like this one of the Chinese mandarins, just a few in the history.

To keep the expansion cycle in the middle of the crisis and in order for the transnationals to keep their business, China must put fresh money: 30% from the public funds of its reserves (like Argentina did now, withdrawing 6,000 million dollars of its reserves to pay the foreign debt this year) and 70% in bank financing.

Banks are mostly in hands of Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and HSBC (already including their commissions) lent -with no back up from the funds received by the state- to their own companies installed in China, their credit cards, their transnationals; creating in China, this time, again a fake debt of 3.7 trillion dollars. Now Chinese foreign debt –thrown by imperialist banks against its state- becomes a problem, as big as a problem as that created for Greece or Dubai.

China is today a capital funnel, which will be over-debt to subjugate it even worse than Latin America in the 80’s and the 90’s.

The current role of China in the world labor division
The pragmatic transformed into a 19th Century reformist goes back in history and can’t tell parasite usurer imperialist financial capital from commercial capital


During the last expansion cycle China was an exporter and importer for the sake of the transnationals. Now China is a buyer and importer in the new world labor division imposed by the cheap dollar in the world economy. USA with a devaluated dollar, in a regular way is making so far European powers pay for the crisis and forcing China to put in the world economy in crisis –at the service of imperialist powers- not new financial capital but SUPER-PROFITS, which are 1.8 trillion dollars that the Chinese state has as reserves. These reserves are the huge amount of surplus value taken from the Chinese proletariat and diverted by the Chinese bourgeoisie –junior partner to world imperialism- to pay for US deficit: one share goes to buy US treasure bonds and the other –as it has happened so far- goes to the transnationals’ banks with 600 billions from those reserves to increase consumption, which meant the huge expansion of the domestic market… in order that the transnationals can sell.

Thus, the transnationals have sold 12.8 million of cars, which meant an increase in the production from 42% and 96% in November. Imperialist companies and joint ventures with the Chinese bourgeoisie have sold 185 million units in home appliances (including fridges and smaller electrical appliances). They have also sold 7.2 million notebooks.

All this is made based on a market of the new middle class and labor aristocracy of 200 million people that started a frenetic consumption as companies offer payment by installments thanks to the 600 billion dollars given by the Chinese state.

The biggest deployment of big supermarkets like Carrefour or Wall Mart is to sell in China cars made there by imperialist companies like GM, Toyota, BMW; the home appliances by Westinghouse and Phillips; and Apple, Lenovo, Sony computers.

The number of Master Card, Visa and American Express credit cards (which failed in Europe) increased 40% in China in the first months of 2009, while in USA their use fell a 40%.

To make it clear: within the current US recession the transnationals have sold 12.8 million cars.

 “China is imperialist”, they cry out like parrots of HSBC and Morgan Bank. But China doesn’t do business; the transnationals do, big chains of supermarkets do; big car companies, the big industries of consumer goods, credit cards companies like American Express do.

Both in the world economy expansion cycle (2003-2007) where China was exporter like in its current position of consumer, China is a real CT of the tendency of the profit rate to fall in the world economy. The only thing we see there, is 200 million slave workers –most of which are about to lose their jobs- and 1.2 million outcast rural workers and poor peasants that live on a subsistence economy and act as a reservoir of labor force to sink the wages of the Chinese workers and the world working class.

These people don’t get anything of what financial capital means, that as Lenin said is parasite capital, i.e. AN USURER ONE!!!

What China is exporting is the super surplus-value taken from the Chinese proletariat, transformed in the world market in commercial capital, buying with fresh dollars commodities, minerals, etc.; they even give some credit in order their suppliers guarantee those raw materials to them and not to others, like it happened with iron, aluminum, soy, vegetable oil and commodities that they need to make imperialist transnationals’ maquilas work. They also do here and there some exchange with currencies that have no value in the world market like the peso, the real and the yuan, in a trade balance between semi colonial countries. To make a mess with this average exchange of currencies without back up in the world economy and thus, to call this a domination of the Chinese finance capital is a slap to Marxism.

This is a commercial capital submitted and subjugated to the domination of imperialist in the branches of production of world economy, to the prices of commodities and minerals that are set by transnationals in the world market. Those same transnationals also require from China to have big oil companies to guarantee the amount of oil needed in order that the transnational companies in the country work and also for China oil companies to extract oil from places where imperialist oil companies don’t go because of the investment risks like in Somalia, Afghanistan, and Iraq.

The Transnationals are which keep for themselves the world trade with most part of such commercial capital for selling oil, minerals and commodities with overvalue to China; with that they appropriate the majority of the oil and rural rent of the planet through its transnationals, big oil, cereal and bean companies.

Otherwise how could you explain that since 2003 in the world market commodities, raw materials, minerals and oil had their highest prices? If it wasn’t to supply with a super-rent extracted from the Chinese commercial capital that goes to buy goods and food for its maquila for the transnationals that are within the country.

The reformist hasn’t understood anything of imperialism. China acts as a transitory capitalist country that has on its territory the biggest concentration of the reservoir of industrial labor army; located in the world labour division as buyer of raw materials, with a whip on its hand supported by the Chinese mandarins which is manager for the sake of the imperialist powers.

Around mid 19th century Europe was occupied by Napoleon, who closed the commerce to England that was just coming from the industrial revolution. Its national borders were crashing with the closed European commerce, with the boundaries of the island and the industrial revolution; all that imposed a limit to British market.

That is why England went around the world with cannons and a bold commercial bourgeoisie to sell massively their products even at gunpoint. They occupied spheres of influence of the decadent Spain and Portugal Empires in America, Africa and Asia with true avid distributors –even producing with no profit, that is with a loss for some years- and they built a portfolio of clients in those 3 continents, mainly in Latin America.

Even to get those clients they gave some credits in currency; while England also got supplies from Latin America buying goods, stealing silver and tin from Bolivia; trading with the meat salting houses from Rio de la Plata; the sugar cane from Brazil; or cotton from USA; just to set some examples.

England, without being imperialist, invested in USA -on behalf of US companies- the equivalent of today’s 150 million dollars to build railways, in order to unify this huge internal market. The labour force used were Black and Chinese slaves, subjugated to Slavism during capitalism; those were the forces that built modern capitalism in the 19th century. This “foreign debt” was later on disowned by US companies which didn’t pay it. That was commercial capital.  

Now we are going to explain how financial capital works to these erudite professors who don’t understand how capitalism works because they never suffer it. As Lenin said it is parasite capital; it doesn’t export commodities any more, but capital to get super-profits in a world economy controlled by trusts and cartels in all the branches of production.

That means that financial capital is usurer and parasite. It gets credits from the banks that it controls with annual rates of 2 or 5% and gives loans at 40-50% to colonial and semi-colonial countries. After those countries enter in default like it happened in Latin America in the ‘90s or like it is going to happen in Eastern Europe, this usurer finance capital appropriates the entire infrastructure and the companies of the state. 

That is how all the bureaucracy of Kremlin and former workers state of Eastern Europe transformed from indirect to direct agents of Citibank and Morgan Bank. It did the same with Maoist Chinese bureaucracy but as Trotsky said “with Ford’s tractor”, flooding with goods –i.e. technologies- the isolated and backward China. That is how Chinese restorationist bureaucracy gave slave and relatively qualified labor force to transnationals to produce as a big maquila; it had to be capable of reducing the tendency of reproduction cost of labor force to increase, which was re-valorizing with the European reconstruction (after it was destroyed by the war) and because of the increase of the constant capital and labour productivity in USA –which was linked to the military industrial apparatus-. World economy needed imperiously to reduce the value of the labor force that was gaining value together with the capital during Yalta period; it also needed to recover at any cost the former workers states as new markets. Otherwise world capitalism was sinking for the tendency of drying-up its sources, markets and profit rate.

When the banks of financial capital from the metropolis buy valueless bonds of the foreign debt of the semi colonial countries to then buy with those same bonds –at nominal value- valuable state owned companies in the countries that imperialism dominates (after plundering those countries with usurer interests), they also create their regional markets like Mercorsur, co-opt India and Pakistan and even China, which has millions of exploited. That is made by USA with 5 military commands and 900 military bases all over the world; together with the rest of the imperialist powers disputing side by side to this usurer finance capital the spheres of influence.

We are talking about finance capital that only went to an investment cycle –after the crisis in the ‘30s- producing, and making fortunes and recomposing the profit rate during the war by producing destructive forces, i.e. forces to destroy men and nature.

That financial capital wasn’t invested in USA like British capital in the 19th century, but in Europe after it was destroyed in the first and in the second world wars.

Commercial capital of the 19th Century destroyed civilizations, even backward modes of production to subjugate them to the emerging capitalism, generalizing the advance of the productive forces that were brought by world capitalism and economy, which capitalism subjugated under its commerce and included the previous modes of production like Feudalism and Slavism in the backward countries.

During imperialism is just the opposite. It doesn’t export civilization but barbarism. It doesn’t export commercial capital of commercial trade M-C-M’, but on the equation Money + Money’ (fictitious value, bubbles, etc) = D’’ (money, surplus value plus superprofit). In this formula the export of finance capital to the colonies and semi-colonies is settled. It never goes only to the productive process, as the Keynessian or other developist servants of the bourgeoisie believe. It is a lie. The finance capital goes to the stock exchange, to the finance circuit, to speculation, to re-create loans, to finance military bases, coups, direct agents, plunderings, robbery of raw material. This will be never understood by the pseudo-left wing Keynesians.

Imperialism is parasitism, that is to say that with its money it creates fictitious value: each dollar of those 8,000 investment funds which went on bankruptcy in 2008 leveraged 60 or 80 dollars fictitiously in the four blocks of Wall Street. Then it shares coupons for the parasite to clip and withdraw earnings. It fabricates non-created values by the human labour. Then it sells those to a bigger price in the semi colonial world, which is kept in backwardness, pluder, from where it extracts super-profits to keep its industrial military device for wars. That is why Lenin’s definition which states that the imperialism is a bunch of parasites who live out of clipping coupons over the basis of the slavery and subjugation of thousands of millions of slaves in the colonial and semi colonial world is marvelous.

We introduce you to the barbarism, fascism; the epoch of crisis, wars and revolutions. The “imperialist China”, the myth of the boogeyman and the “Chinese monster”, made up just to justify superior adventures of China’s colonization, deserves to be separated from the revolutionary Marxist movement and denounced before the international working class.

The Chinese “surplus” capital is so servant of the transnationals that goes with Money (M), buys Commodities with an over value (C’), since it has a surplus value created by financial capital in future markets like oil, soy, etc. to get super-profits) like minerals, iron, etc.-; and when it sells these products to the transnational companies installed in China, instead of getting a bigger amount of money in order to profit from the bourgeois commercial transaction, that is a M’, it gets an amount of money which is inferior (D-), i.e. Chinese state sells commodities at a subsidized price. The Chinese capital sends the commodities and raw materials at a lower price from that it bought them. That is what the Chinese state is for, to subsidize the transnationals which produce from China.

“It makes dumping”, it “subsidizes”, cry the reformist, as if we were in the times of the free trade. Yes, it does subsidize, but it subsidizes to Wall Mart for it to sell cheap commodities (clothes, toys, etc.) from its 600 plants in China to its supermarkets all around the world, or for Lacoste to put a crocodile worth 10-cents on the shirts in their mother companies.

Take it easy, defenders of the free trade. The free trade has gone and will never return, because imperialism controls that its servants and minor agents pay them the royalties, patents of Opel, Volvo, Kodak, Fuji, Polaroid, Sony, which were left to the Chinese Joint Ventures to produce for the world market. All of them, as we’ve seen, are obsolete production lines, already amortized thousands of times by the international finance capital. But always there must be one trillion dollars in US treasury bonds in the reserves.


China and Japan. On the colonies and the imperialist powers

Our revisionists insist: “but Japan also bought US T-Bills”. Yes, but it did not export toys, cloth, shoes, but “Machine-Tool”. And, because of the development in robotics and in high technology, its productive apparatus also was attached and it was symbiotic (with the micro-chip production) to the US military industrial device. This allowed Japan to develop robotics, optic and machine-tool and even compete with USA in some branches of production in the world market, even in the productivity of labour, e.g. with Toyotaism against Fordism. This allowed Japan to get a high productivity of labour, for instance in the auto industry where it has even surpassed USA.

This people who cover up Obama are hiding that USA had to give Japan big concessions. It didn’t only throw two atomic bombs in order to keep it unarmed and preventing a new war to start against himself (as Germany did when it was isolated and part of its territory occupied after the Versailles Treaty). It was Japan, an imperialist power with a huge potential in its productivity of labour.

So, learning from the experience of Germany in 1930s, USA in the post-war period linked its military industrial device to entire branches of production of Japan. At the same time it had to make a big concession to its imperialist junior partner: USA HAD TO LEAVE IN JAPAN ALL THE TECHNOLOGY OF THE INVESTMENTS IT MADE.

So, all the Hi-Tec auto industry in Japan was made with the patent and with the technology that General Motors and Ford were forced to leave in order to sell cars in Japan. The Japanese Hi-Tec robotics were developed at first producing microchips for the US industrial military device and its air force. That was the society between USA, the dominant imperialism at the end of the Second World War, and Japan, a minor imperialism defeated in that war, who USA won’t let to arm itself again, because it would dispute USA its key influence sphere: THE PACIFIC OCEAN.

So Japan was linked, as a minor imperialism, with USA. Both China and Japan bought and buy US treasury bonds. But is this the relation that China has with USA in all the branches of production of the world market? Come on!… From insanity and ripping off the proletariat is the last thing from where one returns.

This agreement between USA and Japan entered in a crisis in mid 90’s. But after 10 years of deep recession of Japan (that in the ‘90s was dislocated from the development of the technological companies which acted as an advancing motor of US economy), this agreement was re-established in the joint plundering of China, where Japan acted, in the first place, as the big loaner for the investments made in the expansion cycle in 2003-2007 in China. It was there where, linked by loans of the JP Morgan and the HSBC, the Japanese finance capital entered (which after 10 years of recession lending money at 0% in the 90s) in 2003-2007 lending money at 4-5% yearly rate.

It is so much like this that one of the biggest business deals of all the transnationals in China, as it was proved in the big bang of the crisis in 2007, was to invest most of its “portfolio” of investments in a financial cycle by buying Australian dollars. What does this mean? That the imperialist parasites got loans in Yens at 4%, then they bought Australian dollars getting a 12, 15 or 20% return, and then they bought the Yens back and run away. Thus they stole 150,000 million dollars from Australia. And this was the first heart attack, together with the crisis of Shanghai’s stock exchange, of the opening of the world economic crisis in 2007.

Japan wasn’t only the big loaner just for having an overproduction of finance capital which couldn’t materialize in the productive process, but also, it relocated, as USA, big part of its plants inside China, making societies to produce cheaper than in Japan at Yen value. The land, the property and the production in China is cheaper.

The Japanese capital gets much more value in China than producing in Japan. In China it has water, land, food, a devaluated currency for better export, get super-profits and getting out of the recession. The same thing happened to England, who did not care in being the greatest agricultural producer of crops when she ruled the world. She left that first place to Argentina, Canada, even to USA. Why subsidize (as France does in order to keep the Fifth Republic) one million peasants with 500,000 dollars a year if she could get cheaper wheat and food from its colonies?

Today, the imperialist yellow press, always willing to attract petty bourgeois quack doctor impressionist and intellectuals, has the following headline: “China is about to overpass Japan as second GDP of the world”. This brings us back to our memories when in the mid-80s Japan bought the Empire State and the Twin Towers with its overflowing Yens and Superdollars received from the export to the US industrial military apparatus. In that moment their headline was: “Japan buys the Twin Towers, the Empire State, and… the USA”. How long did that lie last? Until a 10 year recession started in Japan. The Sillicon Valley left no trace of the Japanese production.

The relation between USA and Japan is a relation of convenience between two imperialist powers: one ruling and the other one that accepted a society as a minor shareholder with the condition of not arming, accept military bases in its soil, do not dispute USA its spheres of influence and go with it to all its adventures, even helping it to cover his shortage by buying US treasury bonds. That is an agreement between two imperialist countries: one of them a ruling imperialism and the other one a minor one, associated to the ruling one.

China, buying the obsolete bankrupted production line of Volvo and Opel only to produce one car, under “technological” control of General Motors and Ford, and having to pay patents, it is just a small subjugated republic of no significance, even if it also buys US treasury bonds.
Why China, if it is so imperialist as Japan, does not demand that USA, for all the bonds China buys, leaves China all the technology for the “clean” production, instead of having to kneel down in the Copenhagen summit in which Obama told “we give you a loan for you to buy it”?
Whoever makes the oppressor pass as the oppressed, and the oppressed pass as the oppressor is a vulgar servant of the imperialists.

Let the “independent” China try not to buy US treasury bonds. Let it try not putting fresh dollars in USA getting for them papers with no backup. Now that there is crisis and recession, Why this “imperialist” country does not have free independent cash? Can anybody believe that the federal reserve of Germany, the Bundesbank, the BNP Paribas, the federal reserve of France would accept to leave one trillion dollars at US’s disposition to cover its shortfall?
Today, following Greece, we saw Spain, Portugal and Italy fall in a market crac. And we see France and England totally in debt. We see minor imperialisms as Greece subordinated to the IMF control!!! As we affirmed in our foundational documents, the crisis put into question and will make Maastricht blow up, proving the reactionary utopia of the unified capitalist Europe. The only chance to get a unified Europe is throughout a Socialist Federation of Workers Republic from Russia to Portugal.

Why Germany, with the Bundesbank, does not save the European powers’ debt, if the whole Europe is about to go down? Why doesn’t it subsidize with a trillion dollars from its exportations?  Because the relations between the imperialist powers are like that. The one that went down, it went down, it is about to disappear as an imperialism, and welcome that. The one that pays is a colony.

Why, if China is disputing the world to USA, does not leave it to go down instead of subsidizing it with one trillion dollars per year? The conscious workers are already aware that the revisionist chatterboxes of the Anglo-Saxon left are political scammers. You cannot lie that much to the proletariat without being agents of the London City, the HSBC, the JP Morgan bank. We discovered that servants of the bloody Obama and JP Morgan and the crown of the British Queen. Stop covering for their left pocket!

We insist, Japan did the numbers and saw that buying 200,000 million dollars in US treasury bonds, and working getting associated with USA in production of the military industrial device (which is the biggest deficit in USA) is a good business deal. And this is worth, to Japan, every single penny of the 200,000 million dollars they used to buy US treasury bonds. With this, Japan also has secured himself oil by USA, and it also reduces its military investments, since it has a very good military base in Okinawa, and closed the deal of peace. Even all these, in the ‘90s, its major partner sunk it down in 10 years of recession.

We affirm that the day Japan decides to stop playing this symbiotic role and linked to USA, or  the day that the world crisis provokes a split in that symbiosis of the productive process, and Japan is left isolated, that day the path to a new inter-imperialist war, at least for the Pacific Ocean, would be dangerously opened. Would it be opened because of China? For the definitive spoliation of Russia, China and the colonies, the path to new interimperialist wars will be opened, that is to say, for the possession of colonies, markets, raw material sources. If the revolution does not stop this, it will be sooner than later be in the agenda.

Only from there, Japan can choose to be an imperialist country, associated, for now with USA, which in productivity of labour is light years away from China. Because the day that Japan decides to play an independent role (as France and Germany in Europe) in the Pacific Ocean, where 500,000 US soldiers died in the only war that USA fought, that day the path to war, we insist, will be opened.

Mankind is dangerously approaching to barbarism and to new wars. But it is not said that the proletariat won’t stop them before with the success of the proletarian revolution. Nothing is written yet. This prognosis is decisive for the Marxists in the 21st century. Nobody touches the Pacific of the USA. And the Atlantic is shared with Germany, with the condition that they accept a secondary role. If they get to a higher role too independent and of opened disputes, things must return to order.

France and Germany have advanced a lot in Latin America in their deals with the “Bolivarian” bourgeoisies and with Brazil. Today, USA is coming back to get what belongs to it, as the big creditor of all the nations of Latin America with the subjugation mechanism of the external debt and the IMF, the instrument that is now being used to kneel down Spain, its former partner in Latin America, from which USA will take off it all the deals and business that has in Southern America, like those of the Repsol, etc.

This relationship of forces is the result of the Second World War and 1989 which defined it historically, where a vigorous Germany rose, which re-unified itself and went out to dispute, as France, The Atlantic and Europe.  “Japan also has US treasury bonds” they cry. Even though both China and Japan have bonds, they are not comparable. We will unmask this irresponsible method later. Japan and China do not have a “close gender”. One of them, Japan, is an elephant, a mammal. The other one, China is a table, i.e. an object. Although both have four legs, that is both buy US treasury bonds, they are not the same.

One of them is an imperialism that, as a result of the war, can only by a Siamese junior partner of USA because its geo-strategic location in the Pacific. The other one is a cheap semi-colony full of bosses paid by the transnationals. The “dynamic Marxists”, the eclecticals, do not understand a single word of this. For the empirical, everything comes as a chaos, like Hegel said, and it tries to simplify with a “concrete Marxism”. “Concrete, concrete”, said the Morenoites, when actually the “concrete” turns out to be the most abstract and furthest away from reality, as Marx and the dialectical materialism would say.

So today we see the Chinese commercial capital to “go to buy in the world” to get raw materials, differently to what all the imperialist powers do. Many times, this capital guarantees a commercial transaction, even as in the pre-capitalist period! Argentina or Brazil put 10 million Argentinean Pesos or Brazilian Reales in the Chinese central bank, and China puts its equal value in Yuans in the central bank of Brazil or Argentina. It is currency without any value, since they are to back the commodities’ exchange. Nothing more. Because the world trade does not use Yuans, nor Pesos, nor Reales. These currencies deposited are the guarantee for not ripping off among different countries in the exchange of commodities.

It is a barter of currency, barter of commodities. For example, a commercial balance signed by Brazilian real or Argentinean peso equivalent to yuan. It is clear pre-capitalist mercantilist economy of 16th, 17th and 18th century. It is the closest China gets to the equation C-M-C (Commodities-Money-Commodities). That is what Bolivarians and Hu Jintao call “market socialism”; and the friends of London City and Wall Street called it “imperialism”.

China is in a situation of relatively “independent” (but increasingly semi-colonized) country as long as it buys what the world economy, its maquilas and international financial capital that controls the planet need. But with the limits previously fixed of any semi-colony administered by foremen paid by transnationals, to whom those foremen must account actions for and don’t change the script if they don’t want that the missiles in Hong Kong fall in Shanghai; or what it is even worst, to suffer such a devaluation of the dollar that will ruin the Chinese reserves –which are in unvalued paper, i.e. the US treasury bonds-. This makes China a semicolony even more than Russia, Argentina or any other country with their reserves on their Central Banks under the control of its respective parliaments.

China’s reserves depend more on USA that Argentina’s reserves impeded by USA and Wall Street vulture founds. This is called imperialism by New York left! Pragmatic people don’t give up. They cry once and again: “But now China is going out in a buying spree!”

Of course that China has to go out to buy. That is its role in the world labor division. Because in order to produce 12 millions cars that the transnationals sell they need great amounts of steel, plastic, copper, aluminum, lithium, etc. from the world market; as they also need the necessary materials to produce so many computers and fridges. 

But who really buys? Who puts the money? Volkswagen, Westinghouse, Phillips, Sony, Wall Mart, Carrefour, HP? No. The Chinese state has to buy to make the living capital (labor force) work and such living capital makes the dead capital (machinery) work. A slice of that is what Chinese bourgeoisie keeps, but a very thin slice because what the Chinese state sells is subsidized, because its nationalized companies and basic branches of productions have the lowest labour productivity in the world.  

 Mines in ruins that bury thousands of miners yearly, iron factories that collapse and industrial ovens that blow up prove that the current buyer China must end with the deficit-ridden obsolete state companies and close them, like it happened with the banks in 2001. All this is to guarantee new business opportunities for mine, steel, etc. imperialist companies in the middle of the world recession; also to allow them to recompose the profit rate by rebuilding the former Chinese state owned industry.

That was Tonghua, the equivalent to the bankruptcy of the state Banks in 2001; i.e. the privatization of the big steel companies that are profitable based on the dismissal of hundreds of thousands of workers. The estimate is that in China has started a process of privatizations that will cause the layoff of 60% of the workers. Against such a process the workers of Tonghua and Lingzou rose up, which made the apparatus of the Chinese mandarins and CP red businessmen shake.

 “But China buys minerals”. Yes, all kind of minerals and food. But does being a buyer mean being imperialist? Buying doesn’t make you “imperialist”, it only shows that you are inserted in the world labor division, because even the USSR had to buy.

We state that for the transnationals to take profits by selling consumer goods (cars, home appliances, computers, food and drinks to be sold in Wall Mart and Carrefour in China) it is necessary that the Chinese state buys in Africa, South America and Asia soybeans, food and other commodities, lithium, magnesium, cobalt, iron, steel to give cheap supplies to Wall Mart, Carrefour, Hewlett Packard, Sony, BMW, GM, Toyota, Fujifilm; Chinese mandarins are junior partners of those companies in the exploitation of their working class. But who sell all those raw materials, soybeans, minerals, etc., are the imperialist companies installed in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Just to set an example let’s take Chile (and we could mention any other country) which has increased its annual copper production of from 1 billion tons of copper in 1995 up to 6 billion in 2005. Chilean companies produce 1 billion tons and between 3 and 5 billions tons are produced by the imperialist copper companies there, which are the ones who sell to China. Imperialist agro-industrial companies do the same with Argentinean soybeans, soy by products and vegetable oil; as agro-industrial and mine MNCs do with natural wealth in Africa.

The imperialist companies in China act as seller of supplies; in the semi-colonial world they act too as sellers of raw materials; and as they control key branches of the world economy, they are the ones who win.


Tendencies to leveling and inequality as acting in China today.

We have been saying against the Alchemy of the university parrots of the Anglo-Saxon left that China is inserted in a world economy and its role is that of supplying fresh blood; it acts as a CT to the crisis. We state that capitalism combines different degrees of economic development in the world economy, and that can’t be understood without noticing the tendencies to leveling and inequality that act in relation to uneven developments. There is a tendency to leveling, which means that most backward countries reach the most advanced capitalist technology, as it happened with Southern Asia, China, etc. But in this imperialist time –in which the redeeming role of capitalism is over- what develops- even in the places where the highest technology has been reached- is the most absolute contradiction, which opens an ever widening gap between the different kinds of countries because of the control that imperialist countries impose over the semicolonial countries.

On this issue, Trotsky explains:

“… the entire history of mankind is governed by the law of uneven development. Capitalism finds various sections of mankind at different stages of development, each with its profound internal contradictions. The extreme diversity in the levels attained, and the extraordinary unevenness in the rate of development of the different sections of mankind during the various epochs, serve as the starting point of capitalism. Capitalism gains mastery only gradually over the inherited unevenness, breaking and altering it, employing therein its own means and methods. In contrast to the economic systems which preceded it, capitalism inherently and constantly aims at economic expansion, at the penetration of new territories, the surmounting of economic differences, the conversion of self-sufficient provincial and national economies into a system of financial interrelationships. Thereby it brings about their rapprochement and equalizes the economic and cultural levels of the most progressive and the most backward countries. Without this main process, it would be impossible to conceive of the relative leveling out, first, of Europe with Great Britain, and then, of America with Europe; the industrialization of the colonies, the diminishing gap between India and Great Britain, and all the consequences arising from the enumerated processes upon which is based not only the program of the Communist International but also its very existence.

"By drawing the countries economically closer to one another and leveling out their stages of development, capitalism, however, operates by methods of its own, that is to say, by anarchistic methods which constantly undermine its own work, set one country against another, and one branch of industry against another, developing some parts of world economy while hampering and throwing back the development of others. Only the correlation of these two fundamental tendencies -- both of which arise from the nature of capitalism -- explains to us the living texture of the historical process.

"Imperialism, thanks to the universality, penetrability, and mobility and the break-neck speed of the formation of finance capital as the driving force of imperialism, lends vigor to both these tendencies. Imperialism links up incomparably more rapidly and more deeply the individual national and continental units into a single entity, bringing them into the closest and most vital dependence upon each other and rendering their economic methods, social forms, and levels of development more identical. At the same time, it attains this "goal" by such antagonistic methods, such tiger-leaps, and such raids upon backward countries and areas that the unification and leveling of world economy which it has effected, is upset by it even more violently and convulsively than in the preceding epochs. Only such a dialectical and not purely mechanical understanding of the law of uneven development can make possible the avoidance of the fundamental error which the draft program, submitted to the Sixth Congress, has failed to avoid.” (Leon Trotsky's The Third International After Lenin, Part 1, 1928)

This is what we see in China. A tendency to level out due to investments of the imperialist powers in different branches of production of goods and a tendency to inequality that pushes China more and more to suffer subjugation to the imperialist powers, which are the ones who get the real benefits in the expansion cycle.

Something similar happens in India. There, the imperialist investments in the high technology companies were 22.82 billion dollars in 2007; in the mean time 70% of the population is left to poverty in the farms. They only received 17% of the GDP.

The history of Asia in the last 100 years proves this tendency to leveling out and inequality. Tendency to leveling: it went from being one of the most disconnected, pre-capitalist economies to the creation of an Asian capitalist market, that was disputed by US and European masters; to the industrialization of tax free zones in the hands of imperialists with a high concentration of the industrial proletariat –proletarizing millions of peasants- as it happened in Southeastern China during ’20s and ‘30s and then again in the ‘90s. The tendency to inequality is expressed by: the association of certain imperialists with certain native bourgeoisies to compete against each other, like it happened in the ‘80s. Back then, there was on one hand the restoration agreement signed by Deng Xiao ping and Nixon; and on the other hand, the “Asian Tigers” were settled under the control of Japanese imperialism, which were sunk later on, because USA defeated Japan in the branch of production of the consumer goods. Both agreements –that dislocated entire countries as it happened in South Korea with the assembly lines of the Chaebols; and made huge productive forces retreat as well as the freedom of the nation with the capitalist restoration in China. The inequality within the Asian countries increased significantly; opposite poles of poverty and wealth emerged, like it is the rule in Capitalism, as Engels said.

That is what happened with the tendencies of leveling that caused the huge imperialist investments on China since 1975 until nowadays; and because of the huge super-profit extracted from the proletariat a middle class layer consisting in 400 millions of consumers was created and re-created for the world economy who benefit from the surplus value taken from the proletariat of its own country. This process increased the inequality, because there are still 1.2 billion outcasts who are about to lose their lands and jobs; they live with less than 30 dollars per month in an economy of subsistence, in a state of generalized starvation. Created by this situation according to Foreign Affairs there were 250,000 revolts. This process doesn’t put in the same level Chinese exploited masses with USA’s, but with the African and Middle Eastern workers that were incorporated to the world labor force in the hands of the imperialist companies; but because of the global MNCs and their servants the treacherous worker leaderships who don’t tell the US, French, British proletarians that their lives and wages depend on the victory of the Chinese revolution, the wages of the latter have sunk.

China in the world economy is obliged to pay for patents and royalties to the parasites of international financial capital


For many years and through the WTO and other institutions the imperialists fought for China not to fake the patents anymore, as they used to do it in its epoch of worker state. In this battle, they have advanced a lot because what “Chinese imperialism” does today is to buy old patents from the trusts in crisis, as GM or Ford.  Thus, the agreement with OPEL of GM was that China only was to produce 2 models.  Apart from buying old patents to the trusts, China is pointed out what to produce and what not to produce.  This is really outrageous! The “imperialist China” is treated as a vulgar cheap semi colony since a semi colony does not manage patents because it does not have the highest productive forces that are only in the hands of the central countries; the semi-colonies have to pay huge amounts of money for the obsolete patents of the Sector II of the economy, like Brazil does by paying 26 billion or Argentina by paying 6 billion dollars.

In addition, “Chinese imperialism” has to buy the patents of the “green technology” that US imperialism has developed and gives loans taken from its treasury for the companies of the trusts in the South East so they can adequate themselves to the new “green technology”. Today, USA, against those who say that in 10 years the world would be over, has the technology to “cure” it, making a great business from it. 

The almost US$600 billions paid by China from its reserves in 2009 to the Chinese Banks -that are in a 20 to 25% a property of HSBC, Morgan, BNP Paribas, etc.- have turned into 1.1 billion only in the first semester of 2010 and less than the fourth part was given to build infrastructure to guarantee the MNCs the circulation of goods around the country. The other fourth part was to give credit cards and loans to the Chinese middle class and bourgeoisie in order to be able to boost consumption.  In this way, the trusts’ business of consumer goods was guaranteed.  The rest has gone to real state and the stock market.  The imperialists took the funds of the Chinese state reserve via the speculation, the interests of the inflation in the prices of infrastructure building and through the sales of their MNCs articles in China.

In this way, imperialism plunders and oppresses the Chinese nation, with its junior partners the red Mandarins, mere managers and foremen of the joint ventures. In this way the “bypass” works. It is a system similar to the way the super banks of the financial oligarchy plunder Latin America through the foreign debt, where they take the average of US$ 200 billion per year.  And the minority, revising Marxism, insists that China is one of the greatest financiers and creditors of the world when the truly creditor is USA and its IMF. In this way, Greece -close to the debacle is sent  to the IMF so the latter tells it how to pay for the debt, as if it were a poor semi colonial Republic.

In this way, by plundering the world, the hedge funds- one of the tools of the world financial oligarchy- experience a little recovery for this countertendency while their speakers cry: “We are getting the way out of the crisis! There is a light by the end of the tunnel!” There is a light, but the light comes from a train engine that is driving from the opposite end.  Under the heat of the speculations, new attacks of the crisis are been cooked that imperialism will try to download on the masses with higher attacks, inflation, counterrevolutionary coups and if the international proletarian revolution does not destroy the rotten system and is defeated, it the path towards the war will be opened.

Unlike other imperialist powers, USA can do this because it could smash its working class with big blows, expelling the immigrants and accomplishing the submission of the working class to Obamania. Germany, on the other hand, seeks to keep the labor force quiet by promising to keep jobs and lowering wages, as Merkel has said. This leads to an increase of the surplus value rate and the exploitation to take advantage of the world market niches that behave as countertendency to the fall of the profit rate. And Japan is preparing a great recession so it is able to discharge the burden of its crisis over its own working class. It has located its companies in China so it can lower the production cost and improve the productivity, making the Chinese economy pass to Japan, except that China is the country Nº130 according to GDP per person.

The WTO is a directory board of the transnationals and the world financial capital where the foremen and administrators of their business are let inside in order to give account for the business they make around the world.  Thus, the MNCs and the finance oligarchy can control that China and its foremen, the counterrevolutionary Chinese Mandarins who became a new Kuomintang, cannot steal anything of what they manage.  Over there, USA and other imperialist powers have sold and continue selling to China obsolete patents so the state companies can produce, with backward technology 10 to 25 years old, home appliances, cars and other consumer goods, etc.

Let’s challenge our intellectual academicians: study how the royalties and patents get out from Japan, the European imperialist powers and USA, and study how the balance of payments get out from the main banks in China or any semi colonial country and you will see who exports capital per unit per royalties and patents in the world market.

You will see that Kodak, GM, Ford, Fujifilm, the medicine companies, Caterpillar and other machines-tools makers have given to the Chinese “imperialists” obsolete technology, which is already outdone in the productive process of the imperialist powers, so China can keep paying for 20 years more patents, as any semi colonial country in the world.  This is the place left to the native bourgeoisies together with administering the masters’ businesses in China.

The law of uneven and combined development and the international conditions for the surge of imperialism in 1914 that explains imperialist Russia. And the international conditions that explain an open the implementation of a process of semi colonization by the imperialist powers in China today

The Russia of the Czars as a backward capitalist country could end up being the last link of the chain of imperialistic dominance, as Lenin said. There are volumes and volumes of Marxist bibliography to demonstrate that that backward capitalist country of the autocracy ended up being a backward imperialist because of the international conditions (we will already go deeper over this question); because of its relationship with the international finance capital that acted fusing the bank and industrial capital of the late Russia around an autocratic state that concentrated the biggest railroad-net and army of the planet to oppress nations as a jailer, as minor partner of the European imperialist -mainly English and French- capital,

For the minority China is not imperialist in relation with its productive forces and its links with the world economy and the international finance capital. But it has ended up being imperialist because of national conditions. That is to say, because with the help of imperialistic investments and from a statized economy it inherited it gave birth to a "miracle", the so called “Chinese miracle." We have never seen such revisionist homage of talkative pseudo theoreticians to the pseudo theory of “market socialism”, which poses that a strong nation as China would have arisen because of national conditions.

We will undertake the task of demolishing this anti-historic and pseudo-scientific falsehood, and the falsification of comparing present China with the Russia of the Czars, WHICH AS A MINOR PARTNER OF THE BOARD OF THE BRITISH AND FRENCH FINANCIAL CAPITAL OPPRESSED IN A JAIL A SET OF NATIONS AS LARGE AS THE WHOLE EUROPEAN POPULATION AT THE BEGINNING OF 20TH CENTURY and that, with the Anglo-French imperialism was in a dispute with Germany and Japan for the possession of Persia (Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan) most of which are, adding Turkey to them, territories occupied today by USA.

We apologize to the reader for putting in advance this question,  but what we are reaffirming is that we are before theoretical continuators of the theory of “socialism in a one country", this time trying to justify the emergence of imperialism in a single country isolated from the world economy and from the international conditions. In all its documents and writings our minority affirms that life gave birth to some events that Marxism could never have foreseen. They are the theoreticians of anomaly, of the exceptionality. They are who say that “it is not necessary to lean on 70 year-old quotations to demonstrate the facts of the reality." So practical and concrete these pragmatic Anglo-Saxon people are, so anti-scientific that to justify their revision, they affirm that “nobody in Marxism could predict how things would happen 60 years after dying."

This is such an anti-scientific pragmatism against the scientific socialism that not even Burnham and Shachtman had gone so far. It is a brutality as saying that nobody could predict that an apple would fall form a tree 100 years after Isaac Newton defined the law of the graveness. That is what they are saying. TALKATIVE PEOPLE!. Because the question is not how things are predicted and given. For scientific socialism the question resides on which are the laws that rule the historical processes, that is to say the theory, you gentlemen, so enthusiastic of the dynamic and the concrete things!

It was time ago that pragmatism, a mixture of rationalism and empiricism, became the national philosophy which the whole North American working class was imbued with. We insist, the key is not to revise this or that question of Marxism that could have been mistaken, developed in an incomplete way, or to trying to explain and to intervene in new processes not foreseen by the founders of the method and the theory of Marxism.

The question is that, being a science, Marxism has theories; it has revealed the laws that rule the historical process. Dialectical materialism, Historical materialism, the criticism of the political economy, dialectics and the Marxist philosophy, are able to explain the anomalies and the exceptionalities which in this imperialist epoch ARE NOT GIVEN BY OBJECTIVE, ECONOMIC FACTORS OR FOR THOSE OF THE CLASS STRUGGLE, SINCE THE OBJECTIVE CONDITIONS FOR THE SOCIALIST REVOLUTION ARE NOT ONLY ALREADY MATURED BUT THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY ROTTEN, BUT BECAUSE OF THE CRISIS OF REVOLUTIONARY LEADERSHIPS, BECAUSE OF THE OVERABUNDANCE OF TREACHEROUS LEADERSHIPS, THAT, IN THE LAST INSTANCE, EXPLAIN ALL THE ANOMALIES AND HISTORICAL DISENGAGEMENT AND DESINCRONIZATION OF THE OBJECTIVE AND SUBJECTIVE FACTORS.

It is on the basis of that theory and that method that it is necessary to revise Marxism when the reality overcomes it or when it is changed, to adjust the theory to new historical events, but within its own method, within its own laws. Starting from the most advanced steps conquered by the precedent science, and not because of the concrete reality, pragmatic gentlemen. Marxism does not advance this way nor does any science! You are quack doctors who play with the life and the blood of the world proletariat.

Our theoreticians feel a need to be innovative in Marxism. For them this is “dynamic Marxism". For them, ours is subjective and sectarian, and attached to old mistaken forecasts.
Against such pragmatism, Trotskyism, in defense of scientific socialism, defines that it has laws and theories as all the sciences and branches of the science have.

We affirm that the field of science, and also of Marxism, is full of alchemists, talkative witch doctors that once and again are wanting to experience “a dynamic Marxism coming from the new concrete realities". They repeat this as a litany every five lines in their documents.
This is pragmatism, because it does not define from the theory and from the laws that rule the historical processes and it does not adjust them starting from the new historical facts, to allow to understand them, to transform them and to overcome them.

This Anglo-Saxon left wants to experience with its new formulas. The so expensively acquired experience of the world proletariat has crystallized in the form of a definitive doctrine, living Marxism, and of theories as that of the permanent revolution, the law of uneven development and the law of combined development, those of the dialectics and the historical materialism.
It is from there that every current has to demonstrate what has changed and what has not, to enrich it, to contribute to it, to make it take steps forward.

The period of the emergency of imperialism about 1910, with the surge of its first deep tendencies that gave birth to it, as the Anglo-Boer and Russian-Japanese wars that advanced the imperialistic epoch, found those advanced capitalist countries that because of the control and the expansion of their trade, or because of the development of their internal productive forces and the performance of work, had developed enough productive forces as to collide and to become suffocated, constrained within the borders and their national markets, in position of ending up becoming imperialist nations.

This combination of elements that gave birth to two phenomena, intertwined one with the other, and that originated this imperialist epoch, this phase of agony of big capital which is imperialism. As Trotsky marvelously affirmed and affirms (against the brutes of the "novelty" and the “anomaly” of the “concrete life") that cycle of organic accumulation of capital from 1880 at 1914 gave two historical phenomena that marked the more concrete development of the whole 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century: the clash of the productive forces with the national borders and the emergence of monopoly and financial capital that needs to be exported to be realized. And, at the same time, what it has caused was not the invigoration of the proletariat in a cycle of 30-year expansion, but its historical weakness, because bound to the emergence of the imperialism inevitably the workers aristocracy and bureaucracy developed that were bought by the crumbs of the super profits of the monopoly and the finance capital extracted from the spoliation of the colonial and semi colonial world.

Not every capitalist country could end up being imperialist in 1914, but only those that combined these elements of clash of the productive forces with its national borders, and of having spheres of influence to obtain super profits, “causing socialism to split” according to Lenin.

The war in 1914 was a rivalry between the old rich colonial empires, such as Great Britain or France, and the big thieves who arrive late to the partition of the world, such as Germany or Italy. England had imposed the “British pax”, and with its fleet between 1815 and 1914 played the role of “police of the seas”. But at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century, Germany, armed with a modern technology, started to advance towards the first place in Europe. Beyond the ocean, even a most powerful country emerged, USA, an ancient British colony. So the path to the First Inter-imperialist War was opened by that rivalry between England and Germany.

Germany reached the conditions of imperialism in its national borders and it found itself that the world was already divided, and it went to cause two world wars to redefine the world’s dominance. That is what Lenin and the theory of imperialism means: that the world is already divided, and the one that wants to divide it again, has to do it as Germany did, bombing the planet, or as USA, winner of the Second World War, did on the shoulders of the British decadence. It is already divided and it is divided again through wars. That is the theory. That is the law of the historical process.

The Second World War was prompted by the corset imposed to Germany in the First World War with the Versailles treaty, but mostly because USA needed the war the most to finish dominating the world. What we state here is what The War Manifesto of the Fourth International, dictated by comrade Leon Trotsky, states in 1940.


Only because of international conditions Russia could become the weakest link of the imperialist chain of domain

The most backward European country, as Russia was, could end up being the weakest link of that chain of imperialistic domination, we insist again, not because of the own Russian conditions, or because the Czarina's or the Czar’s intelligence, but because of international conditions, since their bank and industrial capital had joint and fused with 40% of investments from the British and French finance capital, to associate in the world economy TO OPPRESS THE SPHERES OF INFLUENCES THAT THE GREAT RUSSIA ALREADY HAD, kept by bombs and shots to oppress it by an army of 4 million people and a railway net that covered it from tip to toe.

As Trotsky says in his works “The History of the Russian Revolution” and “Results and Prospects” -that we will mention later because there is talkative people that has stopped practicing their study-, it was that society where the Russian imperialist bourgeoisie entered as minor partner and on behalf of the international finance capital to oppress that jail of nations, inherited from the previous capitalist period; and at the same time to receive a percentage of the earnings in return, as the one that corresponded to it from the World War I, keeping Persia (today Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan) and Turkey!, as a partner of the international finance capital, what allowed the most backward country in Europe to have the biggest metal factories and the largest amount of workers in 1904 and 1905, and that gave origin to a concentrated proletariat able to lead the proletarian revolution in that country.

 “India participated in the war both essentially and formally as a colony of England. The participation of China, though in a formal sense "voluntary," was in reality the interference of a slave in the fight of his masters. The participation of Russia falls somewhere halfway between the participation of France and that of China. Russia paid in this way for her right to be an ally of advanced countries, to import capital and pay interest on it — that is, essentially, for her right to be a privileged colony of her allies — but at the same time for her right to oppress and rob Turkey, Persia, Galicia, and in general the countries weaker and more backward than herself. The twofold imperialism of the Russian bourgeoisie had basically the character of an agency for other mightier world powers.” (Trotsky, “The History of the Russian Revolution”; Chapter 2, Czarist Russia in the war).

What do we want to define with this? That the national conditions of the emergency of every country that emerged as imperialist were given and determined by the international conditions of the economy, the politics in a world level and the war (that is their continuity by other means), not by national particularities.

Yes, Russia, the most backward country among all the advanced capitalist countries, when being fused with the English and French finance capital, one of the most advanced and concentrated industries in Europe, sustained by an expensive government, the autocracy that guaranteed for yearss and for the most part for its French-English partners the dealing of the booty from the looting and the spoliation under an army of 4 million soldiers.

Can the apologists of national imperialism and of the anomalies tell us which are the nationalities that the great China oppresses directly as the Russia of the Czars did with Ukraine, Georgia, Latvia, Bielorrusia, Armenian, the Muslim terrible peoples? Associated to which financial capital is it? Can the Kautskyist pacifists of the left of the City of London explain what happened to that empire, junior partner to France and the English warships, in the Russian-Japanese war when it dared to take the Kuril islands that were under the influence of Japan? What happened to Russia was a beating and a monumental war imposed to Czarism because of its daring to take a couple of islands that connected it with the Pacific. What anomaly are you talking about?

What you are saying is that the anomaly is that China is disputing the whole world to USA like a power in decadence without a single shot. That is really what one can call… an “exceptionality”!

The state-economy kept as a “conquest” by a government of the restoration, kept as a “conquest” fused to the joint ventures exploiting slave workers, generated a financial capital that expands around the world transforming the whole world into a great anomaly: the world of peace and progress, the end of the wars. They neither fight for a small island nor for the whole world. Many times the revisionists of the Marxism say “we revise everything", and they revise it. But there is not a worse revisionist than the one that revises everything and keeps silent, and hides that he is doing it.

This is how Trotsky considers the question, with an internationalist vision of the emergence of imperialism and the weakest link of the imperialist chain of dominance (Russia):
“Thus, the main thing was not that Russia was surrounded by enemies on all sides. This alone does not explain the position. Indeed, this would apply to any other European country, except, perhaps, England. In their mutual struggle for existence, these states depended upon more or less identical economic bases and therefore the development of their state organizations was not subject to such powerful external pressure.”(…) “It was not the Tatars who compelled Old Russia to introduce firearms and create the standing regiments of Streltsi; it was not the Tatars who later on forced her to form knightly cavalry and infantry forces, but the pressure of Lithuania, Poland and Sweden.” (…) “As a consequence of this pressure on the part of Western Europe, the State swallowed up an inordinately large part of the surplus produce; i.e., it lived at the expense of the privileged classes which were being formed, and so hampered their already slow development.” (...) ”Capitalism seemed to be an offspring of the State.” (...) “Russian thought, like the Russian economy, developed under the direct pressure the higher thought and more developed economies of the West.” (…) “In order to be able to survive in the midst of better-armed hostile countries, Russia was compelled to set up factories, organize navigation schools, publish textbooks on fortification, etc..”(…) “There is no doubt, however, that the autocracy played no small part in transplanting the factory system of production on to Russian soil.” This allowed the settling of the autocracy and its pacts with the emerging of the English and French finance capital who gave Russia an expensive state for, as Trotsky said: “able to develop great energy in carrying out systematic repressions. The enormous distances of the country had been overcome by the telegraph, (…) and the railways render it possible to throw military forces rapidly from one end of the country to the other.” This enormous advance separated Russia from their more backward European neighboring counties, which, as Trotsky said “they barely knew telegraphs and railways”...“The army at the disposal of absolutism was colossal – and if it proved useless in the serious trials of the Japanese War, it was nevertheless good enough for internal domination” of that Jail of Nations that Tsars controlled.”

And sharpening his definition of the metamorphosis of the imperialist outcome of Russia, back in 1905 in Results and Prospects, Trotsky says: “Not only the Government of France before the great Revolution, but even the Government of 1848, knew nothing similar to the Russian army of today.”...“While exploiting the country to the utmost by means its fiscal and military machine (because it exploited other oppressed nations), the Government (Czar) brought its yearly budget up to the huge figure of two milliard roubles.”...“The financial and military might of the absolute monarchy overwhelmed and blinded not only the European bourgeoisie but also Russian liberalism, which lost all faith in the possibility of trying conclusions with absolutism in an open measurement of strength.”

These conditions, Trotsky said, were the only ones that made that the only way out of absolutism was not liberalism but the proletarian revolution. The imperialist epoch has started. Russia had imbrications with the French and English finance capital, and to a lesser part, with the German’s. 

  About this, in “The History of the Russian Revolution”, Trotsky states:
“But it is just in the sphere of economy, as we have said, that the law of combined development most forcibly emerges. At the same time that peasant land-cultivation as a whole remained, right up to the revolution, at the level of the seventeenth century, Russian industry in its technique and capitalist structure stood at the level of the advanced countries, and in certain respects even outstripped them. Small enterprises, involving less than 100 workers, employed in the United States, in 1914, 35 per cent of the total of industrial workers, but in Russia 17.8 per cent. The two countries had an approximately identical relative quantity of enterprises involving 100 to 1000 workers. But the giant enterprises, above 1000 workers each, employed in the United States 17.8 per cent of the workers and in Russia 41.4 per cent! For the most important industrial districts the latter percentage is still higher: for the Petrograd district 44.4 per cent, for the Moscow district even 57.3 per cent. We get a like result if we compared Russian with British or German industry. This fact – first established by the author in 1908 – hardly accords with the banal idea of the economic backwardness of Russia. However, it does not disprove this backwardness, but dialectically completes it.

"The confluence of industrial with bank capital was also accomplished in Russia with a completeness you might not find in any other country. But the subjection of the industries to the banks meant, for the same reasons, their subjection to the western European money market. Heavy industry (metal, coal, oil) was almost wholly under the control of foreign finance capital, which had created for itself an auxiliary and intermediate system of banks in Russia. Light industry was following the same road. Foreigners owned in general about 40 per cent of all the stock capital of Russia, but in the leading branches of industry that percentage was still higher. We can say without exaggeration that the controlling shares of stock in the Russian banks, plants and factories were to be found abroad, the amount held in England, France and Belgium being almost double that in Germany.”

Those international conditions that shaped Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century due to its association with the English and French finance capital for the control of the oppressed nations that Russia itself oppressed as a junior partner and also for dominating spheres of influence as Afghanistan, Persia (Iraq and Iran) and Turkey… What do they have to do with current China of the commercial bourgeoisie who get a commission for the slaves they let to the imperialists?

We are before people that compare an elephant with a table, a sheet of paper that flies for a moment with a bird; that is to say they compare the backward Imperialist autocratic Russia to China which has its veins opened for the imperialists to suck from it all its blood, as it happened and will still happen with Latin America, Africa and all the semi colonial world, if the proletarian revolution does not stop it.

Thus, a group of pragmatic and eclectic people, without the law of uneven and combined development, without the theory of world imperialism, that is, outside the laws of scientific socialism and the Marxist theory; a group of alchemists and witch doctors are coming now to conduct experiments with the proletariat and try to convince us that, for national causes, an “imperialist China” has came up for the exceptional advantages of having state companies totally backward and the lowest productivity of labour in the world.

And these pragmatic quack doctors try to convince the Marxists to abandon the Marxist theory, which means to stop being Marxists, to please the HSBC and JP Morgan Chase. Those banks have juicy colonial enclaves in China (Hong Kong and Taiwan) from where they have bought all the Chinese bureaucracy and its children during the post-war period. The same they did with Gorbachev and the soviet bureaucracy; just as the Fourth International predicted.

We have to tell these people that they have to stop experimenting with Marxism. It is very unlikely that any serious businessman let any alchemist to experiment in his factory’s lab as he does not know science. Besides, the labs in the factories are carefully apart from the production line. That is why we can’t allow any witch doctor to conduct his/her explosive experiments in the workers movement, because the life, the wages, the flesh and blood of our class is at stake. For us, the science of the scientific socialism is the theory and the laws that rule the historical processes, and the theory-program of the permanent revolution.



Chapter 5
Annex 1
Neo-Cliffism of London and New York Vs. Trotskyism  and Marxism Vs. Revisionism in the class struggle in Latin America

 January 9th, 2010.-
 Comrade Dave:

 Committed to his theory of Imperialist China, you ended up riding on the coattails
of the popular front, of Hiu Jintao and of the Fifth International

It is necessary to finish right now with the falsifications done to the Trotskyists
You fabricate a position to the opponent in order to win a discussion; this is petty bourgeois nonsense.

Scarcely finished was the counting of the votes in elections, when we were sending the first report in our letter on December 11th, 2009 to all FLTI on this fact, that later we adjusted and enriched with the discussions in the Latin-American conference and extracted it as declaration, which has just been published by Workers Democracy of Argentina, and soon in Workers Democracy of Bolivia. When your letter of critique came to us, amazed us enormously, not for some contribution that you could do in your letter; but for the nonsense, falsifications of our positions, and of how you have changed abruptly  your program for Bolivia and Latin America. Undoubtedly, as it affirms the SCI, your letter and the documents of the minority put into question all the resolutions and documents voted in the congress of foundation of the FLTI. Because really, the Chinese question opened enormous political, strategic and programmatic differences.

In Dov's letter of 16/12/09, you affirm that: "…Thus, if the fundamental differences between the majority and the minority cannot be resolved, we will end up on the opposite side of the barricades when diplomacy gives way to other means of conflict as the tension between the imperialist blocs rises". With this affirmation, the minority hides that the relations between China and the imperialist powers have already stopped being "only" diplomatic, already there is a military offensive. Hong Kong is an imperialist enclave established in the heart of the mainland China, which is defended militarily by the bases of the OTAN established in Taiwan and Okinaw. On this basis, it has been already established a pact between the bourgeoisie of the Chiang Kai Shek of China and of Taiwan.

In politics, the one who keeps silence, he grants. And you, in your entire document, do not say anything of the military bases of the OTAN in Taiwan and in the whole Pacific Ocean. It is the same thing that not to speak about the French imperialism and his troops of occupation in Guadalupe; or not to speak about Malvinas in relation to Argentina and the whole Latin America. You have to be defined on this question, or you will stay openly supporting to your own imperialist bourgeoisie, denying the premise of Marxism that “No people that oppresses another people will be able to liberate itself ".

And in the same document you continue: “Don’t you see that the Bolivarian regimes and the SCI are both telling the masses the same thing: “China is not a threat, don’t worry about it. It is not China that exploits you, but MAINLY the Yankees.” The Bolivarians are saying this to deceive the masses, to better exploit them. As Chinese imperialism is penetrating Latin America and Africa, Chavez and company scream: “Fight the Yankees, build the Fifth International” while they try to fool the masses who are increasingly exploited also by Chinese imperialism.” (Our boldfaces) What the SCI says is similar (except the question of the Fith). There is neither Chinese imperialism nor Chinese presence in Latin America and Africa, says the SCI to us. And the comrades Munzer and Shaheed announce that they refuse to say " Out  Chinese imperialism of Latin America and Africa! " of course, unlike the bolivarian regimes, the SCI is not betraying consciously to the working class for a small part of the profits in hands of the imperialism."

Let's suppose for an instant that his Chinese imperialism exists and that we do not see it. That you are right and we are wrong. But nonetheless, we raise as program for China the restoration of the dictatorship of the proletariat under revolutionary ways (thing that you cannot say). We say to the workers: For the third Chinese revolution to stand up once again for bread and for land! That this is the only way to end with the submission to the slavery and to the penuries to which they have been submitted by the bourgeoisie of the "red mandarins", those Chinese allied to the imperialist powers. Down with the governments of the new slaver bourgeoisie of China and North Korea given birth by Stalinism! We say to the workers of USA that it is necessary to fight! for work for all, for the sliding scale of wages and working hours! Equal pay for equal work: the same salary of the high layers of workers of USA for the Mexican workers and of the whole Latin America! Down with the Mercosur of the transnational companies, and the ALBA of the Bolivarian bourgeoisies! Military bases out of Colombia!

Why don’t we have to say to the Bolivian workers and of Latin America that the imperialist Yankee bourgeoisie is not the one that oppresses them? If the deeply anti-imperialist feeling of the Latin-American proletariat correspond to it and for that reason the Bolivarian bourgeoisies, junior partners of the imperialist monopolies, had to pose of anti-imperialists, antiYankees to be able to expropriate the Bolivian revolution and the anti-imperialist combats of the continent with the farce of the "bolivarian revolution", since the bourgeois property was under question, fundamentally that of the US imperialism.

Because the Yankee imperialism has got the semi colonies of Latin America tied with double and triple chains, it ties them with political agreements of OAS and military agreements in the TIAR (Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance) that forces to all the semicolonial countries of Latin America to defend USA in the view of any attack. In addition, the Yankee imperialism has also the military bases of the North American army and the OTAN in the whole Latin America that will be used against workers before the threat of the revolution. Latin America is tied to the financial international capital - that is precisely usury, with the fraudulent foreign debt that meant that the imperialism gave 300 billion dollars to the Latin-American countries in the 70, in order to regain them in 10 years, three times its value. In that way it plundered the nations of the semicolonial world for 20, 25 years; until in the 90s the capacity of payment became exhausted. Imperialism with the Brady plan kept with everything, that is to say, kept with all the state companies as the guarantee of the charge of the unpayable foreign debts, with 30 to 40 % of interests. This goes beyond the fact of some imperialist power disputes this or that branch of the production in its semicolonies.

Imperialism already charged us with interests, 50 times the foreign debt, which then its servants, the native bourgeoisies, make masses pay for it with inflation, massive layoffs, low wages, hikes in the public services (electricity, transport, telephone, etc.) and high taxes. And now, with the brutal economic world crisis, again imperialism has returned to his "backyard" to suck much more than before the blood of the workers by the payment of the fraudulent foreign debt that, without doubt and thanks to the defeats imposed on the proletariat combats by the treacherous leaderships, will be paid as usual by workers with major super-exploitation, inflation, hikes and high taxes while the  Bolivarian bourgeoisies rub the hands since they are doing business. And you claim that we hide this to the workers saying that "imperialist" China plunders them and sucks their blood, bones and muscles while these servants of Yankee imperialism make fortunes? We are not going to do so. It is up to you if you do so.

WHY are you so determined to DENY YANKEE IMPERIALISM! They want us we say to the Bolivian workers that Yankee imperialism is not the one that overexploits them, that Yankee Exxon and the French Total Fina do not plunder them the gas, the hydrocarbons and now the lithium. But you are like the GB of France that did not want we to say "Gringos out!" and want we to kneel down before to the labour aristocracy and bureaucracy, so we split the Collective of the five and we would break it again. We are side by side the Bolivian workers who accurately identified their enemies and overthrow the two servants government of the Yankee imperialism, shouting: Gringos out! Out the imperialist transnationals, gas for the Bolivians! Down with the murderous Banzerist caste of officials trained by Yankee imperialism in West Point! "Imperialist" China: my ass!!!

You say to the North American proletariat that "the blame for their conditions increasingly worse, their low salaries, lack of work is put on the Chinese workers", and so you end up hiding the real enemies (the enemy is at home!). And the Chinese workers are telling that their "imperialist" Chinese bourgeoisie has developed so much the productive forces that can give them concessions peacefully! You embellish the Chinese "imperialism" and to Hu Jintao before the masses! Thus, in the USA you end at the feet of Obama and in China at the feet of the "red" mandarins.

How shameless you are! To you, who sent you to the FLTI? Hillary Clinton sent you.

With your position about Bolivia you liquidate the lessons and the program conquered in the congress of the FLTI of July. Not only on the Bolivian revolution, but also of the lessons on Honduras, Greece, Madagascar, the vision on the moment of the world situation that we express in the OOI 12 that it was approved by you in the congress, as well as the lessons on the class struggle in USA expressed in "The butchers disguised as Obama"; let alone on the Chinese question you respected and fulfilled the resolutions. But, it is not the most serious thing, the serious thing is that you do not dare to say it frankly and honestly.

We returned to read our report and your letter of 16/12/09, and in nowhere of that report we raised what you affirm: " The comrades say that the increasing popularity of Morales is backed by the French imperialism (Totalfina) and the regime already is entering in conflict with the North American imperialism, that the business done between the MAS and the fascists of the “media Luna” and those in Colombia to try to save the popular front will collapse. Therefore the workers must prepare for pre-revolutionary situations and continental opened civil wars. We have no agreement with the principal prominent figures or with the times in this scenario. We do not see any immediate need for USA in going to a war against France in any place, especially in Latin America. France nowadays is balancing between the USA and China and Russia."

First, we do not say that the popularity of Morales is backed by French imperialism. Do not invent positions, we do not say it. We affirm that the collaborationist directions of the COB and FSTMB sold themselves and led the working class to the foot of Morales, even introducing the COB to the CONALCAM of the MAS. That liquidated the political independence of the working class, and the ultimate expression of this is that they led the mine vanguard to a political alliance with Morales' MAS for elections under the false illusion that with workers deputies and ministers they would be nearer to conquer their claims and better living conditions.

But, also, your national Trotskyist vision has provoked you total amnesia! You forgot that Morales acquired "popularity" thanks to the fact that all the reformist directions and the renegades of the Trotskyism, with a politic centralized from the FSM, supported Morales, some of them like PO of Argentina calling on the working class to vote Morales in the elections of December. They are who imposed a siege to the proletariat, submitting the working class of the continent to his own bourgeoisie country by country (these are some of the lessons we express in many declarations of the FLT which the Congress of the FLTI has adopted as your foundational program). The renegades of Trotskyism supported Montes of the COB by giving re-prestige to it in the ELAC of 2008, so that then they sell out the Huanuni miners to the brutal repression launched by the Banzerist murderer army. What are you saying Dave? The "popularity" you talk about comes from such fact.

Secondly, Can you tell us from where you have taken that we affirm the regime would be already entering in conflict with the North American imperialism, and that we say that the business done between MAS and the fascists of the “media Luna” and those done in Colombia to try to save the popular front will collapse? This is a lie!! We say the opposite thing, that Morales and Linera supports a counter-revolutionary pact with the fascist “media Luna”, drafted in Washington and in Paris, - and not in Pekin - and they are the guarantors of all the business of the international bourgeoisie. It is what we have said before, later and now; and what you disavow today. For you disappeared the pact. You are who, as you do not see the counter-revolutionary pact of Morales with the “media luna”, do not see the real role of the popular front and for it you neither denounce it nor combat it.

It is not as you say that the bureaucracy can retain the workers because the workers are cheated by the promises of the Bolivarian regime of Morales to complete García Linera's program of capitalist development as the first step towards the socialism … with his "strategic society” with his new Chinese banker. What you have to explain to us, then, is who supports the fascist “media Luna? We affirm that the counter-revolutionary pact supports it with Morales - agent of the French Totalfina and the Spanish Repsol - supported by the UNASUR of the Bolivarians and blessed by the OEA and UNO.

Thirdly, you write in your letter, later on: “In other words, the majority perspectives see the popular front as reaching the end of its role in preparing for the fascist counter-revolution …" and then you write later on " But we disagree that the popular front is nearly exhausted ". Can you tell us from where you extracted that we write that the popular front is prompt to end? This is a falsification of our positions. We are not going to allow it to you any more. Stop inventing things that we say and really we do not say.

We, by contrast, affirm that it has been set up a Stalin-Laval pact in Latin America and worldwide level, that is, a continental and global popular front with the "Bolivarian" bourgeoisiess, the new Chinese Kuomintang of the agents of imperialism, the remains of Stalinists and social democrats, and with the renegades of Trotskyism who legitimize them and disguise them as red with the IPT and NPA; as the deepening of the global economic crisis,( as we pre-announced in editorials OOI 12 part 2- taken as part of program of the FLTI Congress) the Yankee imperialism - reconstituted their major state with Obama -comes to the offensive by your backyard with new  counterrevolutionary coups as we saw in Honduras, strengthening the counterrevolutionary-pacts.

But the sparks of the Latin-American revolution were not extinguished completely, under the heat of the crisis and the whip of the capital Mexico is setting on fire with the strikes of the workers of electricity, Peru today threatens with opening the way to the revolution breaking the dikes of contention of Stalinism. This is like that, since to go on to new offensives, the imperialism needs to defeat the proletariat without leaving any flushed spark of the proletarian revolution.

For us the strengthening of Morales responds to this fact, thus, he demonstrated to fulfill very well his role in Bolivia and now he is needed in Peru, with his "indigenism", to prevent any possibility of the proletariat -by overcoming the Stalinist directions and maoístas- from opening the revolution, re-opening the Bolivian revolution and ending for firing the whole dry pasture in Latin America. But, for doing so, they must to go to a major centralization of the treacherous directions with Chávez's V Internacional because these old directions were already used as squeezed lemons; And because the bolivarians spent doing business at the cost of the workers bones and blood and keep discrediting and undressing themselves as what they are: creeping bourgeoisies that do business for the sake of their imperialist masters and only defend their own slice of the business.

Against your scandalously national vision of the popular front and class struggle; contrary to what you affirm, it was the same “media Luna” who called to strengthen the government of Morales, because they do not still have any other option except to continue supporting him. the same politicians of the “media Luna” raise it as Dorian Mediana of UN (National Unit, formed by politicians who come from the MNR): "We are going to start with a task of inspection, because we understand that the 64% (obtained by the MAS in the elections of 2009) has not meant to deliver a blank check to the government (our boldfaces), but a wide support in order he fulfills what has promised." (The Reason of 10-01-09). Because they ONLY put up with him! It is not the government that they want and need, they want to recapture the control of their business, even though the Latin American proletariat do not allowed them to do so. It is pure national- Trotskyism on your part, because Morales is been strengthened to contain Peru.

You have a national vision that prevent you from seeing in Bolivia that all the bourgeoisies, all the fractions of imperialism, have done no more than strengthening Morales and the popular front, as long as he guarantees the control of half of the country on the part of the fascist “media Luna”, and keeps the miners tied, and preserves the banzerist officials' caste.

The real enemies of the masses are the Yankee, French, Spanish imperialisms and the Bolivarian bourgeoisies, not the Chinese "imperialism" that you invented. It is the same national Trotskyist vision you have on the combats of the workers of Tonghua and Linsawq in China that are the expression of the setback of the combats of the proletariat in Greece, Guadalupe, Madagascar imposed by the treacherous leaderships; because you do not see that after the partial defeats of world the working class, the workers fight only could acquire a political content to obtain something. As Trotsky said: " The Marxist general thesis: the social reforms are not any more than the by-products of the revolutionary fight, in the epoch of the capitalist decline it has the most hottest and immediate importance. The capitalists cannot give anything the workers, more than when they are threatened by the danger to lose everything. " (Where will go France?) There must be servants of the red mandarins, to say, as you, that this Chinese bourgeoisie gives concessions in a peaceful manner.

You falsify reality and resort to a method of fantasy. The movie is called: "Alice in Wonderland" or "Impossible mission II"

You raise that: " Rather, we see the US preparing for a future war with China and its allies in Latin America -the Bolivarian regime." With your vision for nothing sensible not even Marxist of the reality, of a military confrontation in the future, between the Bolivarian allied of your "imperialist" China against the Yankee imperialism, what you are saying is that we are facing a future political war of bourgeois fields.

The impressionist tends to invent the reality. It fixes an object, an idea and then makes turn the entire environment around it. How is there a war of the Bolivarians with their "Chinese imperialism" against USA? If what exists is A PACT where they all bite something, while they submit the nation to the plunder. With Bolivian gas they supply throughout South America: Brazil, Argentina, Chile, etc., and all the multinationals established in these countries. The regime of the pact is ideal, because it allows all the bolivarians and imperialists to do business between each other and all of them against each other. Rather, in the past, when the pact was breaking and a war of bourgeois fields burst out in Bolivia, the world left was looking for another side, by refusing to call to crush fascism; and now when the pact has been closed and strengthened to extreme degree, they seek and invent the irreconcilable differences between the popular front of MAS and fascism. It is necessary to be a servant of the popular front to say it!

What a shame it is on your part, Dave! what war of bourgeois fields you want to convince us, if the V international, the bolivarian bourgeoisies, and bourgeoisie of the Chinese "red mandarins" with the renegades of the Trotskyism covering them by the "left", were the guarantors from the UNASUR - and the supporters- of the counter-revolutionary pact between the fascist “media Luna” -agent of the Yankee Exxon - and the government of Morales-Linera - agents of the French Totalfina and the Spanish Repsol-( for that reason Morales during the fascist uprising ran to meet his master Sarkozy and the representative of the Russian Gazprom to discuss new explorations of hydrocarbon in Oruro and the Altiplane). This counterrevolutionary pact was imposed against the proletariat and exploited masses of Bolivia, on the base of the shed blood of workers and the poor peasants of the east in hands of the fascist bands and of the banzerist army; and in the west of the combative miners of Huanuni murdered also by this killer army. This counter-revolutionary pact was blessed for the OEA and the ONU, commanded by the Yankee imperialism; as we raise it in the OOI 10 that you reaffirmed in the congress of the FLTI and with which we reach South Africa.

This pact guarantees the intervention of the banzerist army in the political life; and the fascism of “media Luna” agent of the Yankee imperialism GUARANTEES THE CONTROL OF 50 % OF THE TERRITORY. Because, to tell the truth, Bolivia was already divided and distributed: between the Yankee Exxon whose interests are represented by the fascist “media Luna ”, which remained the 50% of the country, where precisely the concentration of gas, of hydrocarbons and the best fertile lands are located and are in the hands of the landowners and of the Rosca. On the other hand, the French TotalFina and Spanish Repsol, control the Altiplano and the government of Morales and Linera administers the business. And for all this did not run the blood of any Bolivarian bourgeois, but of the workers and poor peasants.

The impressionist is so enthusiastic about his "Imperialist China", that forgets the pact among Castro- restorationist bureaucracy with Obama (with Cargill and Monsanto behind) and with all the Bolivarian bourgeoisies, to finish the restoration of capitalism in Cuba

ALBA: a capitalist market to receive Restorationist Castro-bureaucracy.

You and your allies renegade the lessons of the Bolivian revolution, the lessons of the coup in Honduras and of the combats of the proletariat in Peru. There is no front of Chinese imperialism with the coward bolivarians that is preparing a war against the Yankee imperialism. What exists is a great conspiracy against the Peruvian, Mexican proletariat to finish defeating the Bolivian revolution and Latin-American revolution, and even against the North American proletariat, who put in danger all the property of the real imperialist monopolies, fundamentally the Yankee, and to aim a historical defeat with the capitalist restoration in Cuba. For it, not by chance, in your letter and in all the documents of the minority Cuba does not exist, since one does not speak about Cuba if one does not raise that the castrist bureaucracy is carrying out the capitalist restoration negotiating with Obama, and before such bureaucracy already sol out the business of nickel and tourism to French imperialism.

Precisely, the counter-revolutionary pacts imposed in Bolivia, Colombia and Cuba, are those that later allowed Yankee imperialism to go on to the offensive in his “backyard", to carry out the bonapartista counter-revolutionary coup in Honduras and to impose their military bases in Colombia. Because imperialism needs to combine pacts with counter-revolutionary coups for finish liquidating the Latin-American revolution in order to finish imposing the capitalist restoration in Cuba.

The bolivarian bourgeoisies that pose of "anti-imperialist" are all as the clown of Zelaya who tried in a belated way to bargain a major slice of the business to the Yankee imperialism and ended up under its discipline, negotiating with the man-coup who were massacring the Honduran working class who was resisting the blow, tied of hands thanks to the fact that all the reformists, included the renegade of Trotskyism, subordinated the working class to the " democratic front ".

With this position of political war of bourgeois fields, you end up within the “democratic front” that is proclaimed by all the renegade of Trotskyism.

The Castro-bureaucracy has done everything at hand to contain, abort and defeat the revolutions and the workers fights in the continent. It has deployed a politics of counter-revolutionary pacts, has set up or supported pacts as those of Uribe-Chávez, the government of Morales-Linera and fascism, to complete the restoration and become bourgeoisie right now. You do not say anything that there is an enormous attack against the Cuban masses. The nickel is given to the imperialists, agreements are prepared by Cargill and Monsanto to produce soybean, the ration coupons are reduced in the middle of the world crisis (as they did in China before 1989) in order to erase any trace of consciousness established by the gains of the revolution even rooted among the masses. For then, before any worker protest they can squash it with the Cuban army, whose top leadership has the control of the principal business of the island.

It is not, at first, in the course of a military intervention that the restoration of the capitalism in Cuba is prepared, as you affirm in the second part of your document of 13/11/09; but with the Chinese and Vietnamese model, that is to say, with negotiations with the Yankee imperialism; as Trotsky said on Russia: " By the numbers of the exports and of the imports, the capitalist world us demonstrates that there are other means of co-action that those of the military intervention. As the productivity of the work and of the social system in his joint, are measure up on the market of the prices, the Soviet economy is rather threatened by an intervention of capitalist goods cheaply that by a military intervention … " And then it follows, "Bujarin does not admit the predominance of the forces of production any more than in his military technical aspect. It does not want to understand that the tractor Ford is so dangerous as the cannon Creusot, with the difference of which the latter cannot act any more than occasionally, while the first one does constant pressure on us. In addition, the tractor has behind to the cannon as last reserve." ("Stalin, organizer of defeats)

But this does not mean that the restoration of the capitalism in Cuba is pacific, as neither was in China nor in Vietnam, which is what your allies of the minority were saying in their document presented and defended in the congress of July. The Tiananmen massacre followed by a persecution against revolutionary workers city by city and people by people resulted in approximately 2.000.000 dead men. In case of Vietnam, after the Vietnamese masses defeated the Yankees, was attacked in 1979 by the Chinese army to settle the restorationist pact of Deng Xiao Ping and Nixon of 1975; But also and above all to demoralize the world proletariat with this defeat. On the base of this war the bureaucracy of Ho Chi Minh and Mao of China opened the speed race for who of them attracted more foreign investments and offered slave labour force. And your allies reached the point to say in the Congress of July that the restoration was pacific! They are swine, they would deserve to have been in Tiananmen or in the Vietnamese border when they the bombings of China were falling in order that they see what "pacific" was the restoration of capitalism!

In the politics of pacts, counter-revolutionary blows are prepared that the Castro-bureaucracy is going to launch, and because of it they must defeat the North American workers by submitting them to Obama. In conclusion: you do not pass the proof of the Cuban question either.

You affirm in your letter that: " In Bolivia the main rivals are not the US and France. The Brazilian SOE Petrobras is by far the biggest player and Brazil is a semi-colonial member of ALBA”  what you are saying is a joke! Brazil is not of the ALBA, is of the Mercosur! What ALBA associated with a supposed Chinese "imperialism" you are talking about? This already looks like the “War of the galaxies “or " The history without end "! The ALBA is only a gather of native bourgeoisies doing business for the sake of their imperialist masters. The ALBA belongs to the old Andean agreement organized around the business of gas and oil to which then the other native bourgeoisies have joined.

In Brazil, Lula is only a junior partner of French imperialism, and simultaneously he took advantage to do business with USA. It has business with France in the military industry and the armament production, - which does not mean that Brazil is an imperialist power-, besides, it is the biggest exporter based on the technology provided by France, to which he has bought submarine ships and technology Aerospatiale. Petrobras is an agent of the TotalFina, that like all the imperialist monopolies, is the monopoly that really does the business; imperialist monopolies leave the national state in charge of the costs of the exploration, the investigation, etc., that is, the most expensive issues of the exploitation, and pipelines but refinery is done by them taken the super-profits. 

You believed the craps of chavism. All the oil rent of Venezuela goes to play  in the gambling of Wall Street. You are chatterers; the most bourgeois servant and partner of the Yankee imperialism is Chávez, who sells oil, before to Bush and now to Obama: he is the second exporter to USA. Chávez together China faces the Yankee imperialism, and simultaneously it supplies them with oil ... can someone explain this, please? Chávez that we know sold out the exploitation of the Orinoco to the Yankee oil monopolies and now he gives USA the oil to massacre in Palestine and in Afghanistan. The 80% of the oil rent is not controlled by this creeping bourgeoisie, that is, such rent ends up in the treasury of USA. US imperialism controls the most important branches of production in the semi colonies. You belived the crap of the “Latin-American unity " of Chávez and Castro that keep chattering and posing of "ant imperialists" and they were the first ones in congratulating Obama when he was taking up office in USA.

A total revision of the fight against the popular front in the Bolivian revolution:
Breaking with the denounce against the pact that prepares new fascist hordes

As for what you raise of: " It is the success of the Bolivarian project to take more state control of the economy and to benefit from increased revenues that allows it to distributes crumbs to the masses (Venezuela style to health, education and pensions) and 'buy' Morales' popular support.”

This position is a lie. The success of Morales was imposed because the treacherous leaderships of the workers organizations subordinated the working class to the popular front and led his workers organizations to be appendages of the government. Morales did not give anything to the workers or the poor peasants, he gave neither even crumbs to the masses! Precisely it is because the proletariat does not take the power and the bolivarian bourgeoisie expropriated the revolution that today the peasants remained without their land, the workers without work, with starvation wages and scarcity of life. You believed the crap of the bond "Juancito Pinto", such wretched alms that the government of Morales gives the hungry children of the workers and poor peasants. Seriously do you think that US$ 20 annually is a grant? Why do not you live with 20 dollars per year in a hut without light, not even water, not gas in the middle of the Altiplano? It is not any concession, not even it manages to be wretched alms. And you know it perfectly Dave, because you saw with your own eyes the wretched conditions of the Bolivian proletariat. What lack of understanding on the part of the illustrated teachers before the starving masses and without teeth!

The government of Morales and Linera – we say it again , agent of the French Totalfina and the Repsol – did not govern, or was imposed buying masses with crumbs; it was imposed by brutal repressions against the left wing of the proletariat, that is, the miners of Huanuni, reaching the point of murdering to two miners in the blockades of Caihuasi's with his officials banzerist caste, such a thing stimulated the fascist “media Luna” to raise its head and carry out the fascist putsch. Today the “media Luna”, that is to say, the Yankee imperialism, gets rid of the fascist politicians like Manfred Reyes Villa - who declared himself to be in the "exile" – since from the time being,  it does not need to attack  the proletariat with fascism, but on the contrary, they need to strengthen the counter-revolutionary pact with the popular front.

You tell us that this opens the prospect of the US using Colombia to attack Venezuela” when Chávez ended up with hugs with the fascist Uribe - direct agent of the Yankees-, after massacring the FARC in Ecuador and the whole resistance, as symbol of the counter-revolutionary pact in Colombia. By the hand of the Castros they negotiate with the Yankee imperialism the total selling out of Cuba to the capitalist restoration. For that reason, they have already established an agreement between the restorationist bureaucracy and Obama to subordinate the whole continental proletariat to the "democratic" bourgeoisie, that is to say, to put it  at the feet of Obama.

These pacts prepare the coming of fascism, the counter-revolutionary coups as in Honduras; they prepare the conditions for new fascist mobs or putchs as in Bolivia. What you and the minority do not understand is the logic of the popular front and fascism.

What the impressionists cannot understand is the law that acts with the counter-revolutionary pacts, in relation to the role the popular front plays. Trotsky defined it: "When the bourgeoisie it obliged to sign a pact with the workers organizations by means of their left wing, it needs more than ever his officials' body to do counterweight, since it is about the protection of the private property, that is to say, of the most important thing." (" Letter to SI, about the Popular Front in Spain, on July 27, 1936.- our translation TN-).

Everything else is an invention of you. You see a "Chinese imperialism" in alliance with the bolivarians ready to face US imperialism, when it is a business of everybody with everybody and everybody against everybody. The other issues are an invention, science fiction that leads you to deny the combat against the popular front and do not prepare the proletariat in Latin America and North America to face Obama's offensive, let alone to face the offensive the US and English imperialisms are preparing together with the "red mandarins” against the proletariat and exploited masses in China.

Because what we have taken as lessons from the Bolivian revolution is that facing the beginning of a great revolution, imperialism and the bourgeoisies of South America, alarmed because they saw that the property of the whole international bourgeoisie was in question, appealed to the government of popular front of Morales and Linera -direct representatives of the French Totalfina – so that such government numbs the proletariat and administers its imperialist business; Since imperialism as any bourgeoisie hides itself and hides its business out the eyes of the proletariat. That is why, imperialism used and uses the popular front and he fascism as two agents who fulfill different functions for strangling the revolution: the first one to extinguish the fire of the revolution by maintaining ferrous control over the workers organizations and repressing the left wing of the proletariat, leaned on the banzerist army; and the latter, by terrorizing the proletariat with fascist gangs and preparing itself to squash the proletarians if they escape from the control of the popular front. But, from the business point of view, they never stopped being junior partners of imperialism, Morales and Linera of Petrobrás, that is, of Totalfina, that is to say, of French imperialism and Spanish Repsol. Meanwhile the bourgeoisie of the “media Luna” is an agent of the US imperialist monopolies like Exxon and British Petroleum. Where are the financial capitals of your Chinese "imperialism"?

But also, as we affirm in the OOI 10, " On the subject, Trotsky said: “The government of Stalin-Caballero , ( the government of the popular front , N.E d.) tries at all costs to give its Army the character of a democratic guardian of the private property. This is, in essence, the popular front. Everything else amounts to hollow phrases … precisely for that reason the popular front prepares the triumph of Fascism .
Anyone who has not understood this is deaf and blind (...).Without a proletarian revolution, the military victory of the democracy means only a detour in the way of Fascism… ” (Leon Trotsky.Is the victory possible? ”, 2 3 / 0 4 / 1 9 3 7 ).

The State is reduced in last instance, to a band of armed men, who defend the interests of the exploiter class against the exploited ones. In Bolivia, the essence of this band of armed men is the banzerist officials' caste that was educated and formed in the crushing of the revolution of ' 52, as we raise in the book "Bolivia, the betrayed revolution ": " This government (the of Paz Estenssoro) was controlling with his left hand to the working militia of the COB and with his right hand it was sending West Point 500 officials of the army - who had been defeated by the worker revolution - to rearm from there to the officials' caste on which it  would rest then to enter to blood and fire and defeat the Bolivian proletariat." This army is the one who supports, in last instance, the "not minimal" interests and business of Yankee imperialism and his junior partners of the Rosca oligarchy of the fascist “media Luna” in Bolivia. For that reason, it still supports the government of Morales since he have saved its property.

You and the minority with what you affirm in your letter on Bolivia and Latin America, end as servants of the popular Front and of Morales. Since the pact that you do not see strengthens the “media Luna” and prepares the coming of fascism. If you were the French section in 1939 you would be hiding that the popular front delivered the government to Pétain, gave him the keys of Paris to that "marshall, savior of France "... who ended up opening the doors to the Hitler of Paris.

With your position in Bolivia you end at Morales feet, who gave the key to the Media Luna to control with the terror of its fascist bands in the eastern, from Pando up to Santa Cruz; while Morales controls with fist of iron the proletariat of the Altiplano. All this is blessed by Petrobras, Repsol, TotalFina, and Exxon who distribute the business much better now than during "Goni" Sanchez de Lozada government.

And we repeat again we don’t see neither in Bolivia, not even Latin America –or any other country- any Chinese financial capital. You confuse the administration of the native bourgeoisie of the super-profits that belong to imperialism, -from where they get a slice- with financial capital. The only imperialist monopolies that compete in Bolivia are the French Totalfina, Spanish Repsol, US Exxon and the UK British Petrolium. Petrobrás is just front men of French Totalfina, precisely that is an imperialist monopoly, it has a flag. Could you tell us when appeared your Chinese "imperialist” monopoly? On the contrary, in Bolivia there is no Chinese financial capital. Actually just the opposite, we see that China has more "investments" in Peru and in other countries where Yankees imposed FTAs.

We see China as the great buyer both subsidized raw materials to the 600.000 imperialists transnational installed there as well as still being maquiladora; cheap raw material that gets from the semicolonies like Bolivia, Chile, Peru, etc. Bolivarians do not sell anything to the Chinese because they only administrate imperialist monopolies business; those who sell China are actually imperialist monopolies installed in these countries. In the semicolonies of Latin America, productive forces, production branches and banks are controlled by imperialist monopolies: the oil and gas are of Chevron Texaco, Exxon, Shell, Repsol, Totalfina; water of Lyonesse des Eaux or Bechtel; the soy  beans and cereal production is controlled by Cargill and the Asgrow; telecommunications by French Telecom, Spanish Telefonica, AT*T; cars production by Ford, Chevrolet, Renault, Volkswagen; banks are owned by Citibank, Boston, Santander, etc., just to set up a few examples. The main employer in Latin America is imperialism; the native bourgeoisie are only its junior partners. We repeat the question: which is the "imperialist" Chinese monopoly with which Bolivarian are associated? For example, in Chile, in 2009 there were extracted 6.000 million tons of copper. 1.000 million from mines owned by Chilean state; other 5.000 million tons from mines exploited by US, English, Canadian, Australian imperialist monopolies among them the Anglo American. These five billion tons of copper, gave monopolies 11.000 millions dollars of bottom line (earnings after interest and taxes). And this only with copper, that is to say without counting gold, manganese, etc… I.e., imperialist monopolies are those who keep the super-profits from the plunder of the copper in Chile! And these are the monopolies that sell China.

Where is leading an impressionistic and pacifist vision of your Chinese "imperialism" in Latin America

As we told you in our letter of 12/11/09, the 7 military bases imposed by the Yankee imperialism in Colombia (with the acceptance of the Bolivarian) and now conquering Honduras as its counterrevolutionary head beach in the continent, they aren’t to prepare a military clash against your China "imperialistic"; are to massacre the Latin American working class if thy manage to overpass the control of the treacherous leaderships; if they manage to break the counterrevolutionary pacts. 

We are still waiting that you tell us which are the Chinese military bases; because a real imperialism (not invented), it has zones of influence; controls entire branches of the production in the world economy, has imperialist monopolies and set up military bases to defend them, as France, USA, England or Japan do, under US umbrella. Can you tell us how it disputes the "Chinese imperialism" the influence zones to the USA in Latin America? Even the most insignificant imperialism has military bases spread around the world. Can explain us how does China to prepare the war against USA without military bases?

With your pacifist vision of imperialist China you forgot that this Bolivarian bourgeoisie are the same that gave to Yankee imperialism troops to submit Haiti. Morales, Lula, Kirchner and Lagos (Chile) put and keep their troops in this country. Bolivarian and Yankees commanded by the Pentagon occupied Haiti. What logical explanation can you give? The minority doesn’t write a word on Haiti nor Vietnam because they do not feel part of the Haitian workers and of the masses; because there wasn’t one single Bolivarian bourgeoisie that does not massacred the Haitian masses, together with the Yankee troops.

You have to tell us if you keep endorsing what you signed yesterday on Bolivia and the revolutionary lessons, and you reaffirmed in the Congress of foundation of the FLTI. Because with your position exposed in your letter of the advance of your Chinese "imperialism" disputing USA its influence zones Latin America; you deny the combat we fought together against the popular front and fascism which strangled the Bolivian revolution, after it was expropriated by the "Bolivarian revolution" of Chavez, Lula, Castro –all of them are direct agents and junior partners of French imperialism- and supported by the WSF and all renegades of Trotskyism, which are centralized world widely. You apparently, did not even read what you were signing in the Congress and voted the program opportunistically.

According to you and the minority USA and France are no longer the main imperialist powers that dispute Bolivia and Latin America; and now China is behind Morales and the Bolivarian, displacing the Yankees on its influence zones. Can you explain us how China did to get into US businesses without the Yankees kick them out, as yes it did with France, marking its influence zones with bombs? Because it disciplined Chavez with bombing Ecuador, in order to then massacre the Colombian resistance; it disciplined Morales with the fascist putsch on August, 2008; this way disciplining these and all the Bolivarian agents of the French imperialism.

We reaffirm our position about the situation in Latin America. I.e. the one raised in the OOI 12, where we state that Yankee imperialism was two years on crisis, also its chief state and it was swamped in Iraq, that is to say, it was carrying out its "war for oil" in Middle East; under those conditions competitors imperialist powers -France, Spain essentially- with New Deal policy or of "good neighbor", got in US backyard to do business by associating with the native bourgeoisie of the semicolonies. We stated that, "This way France and Spain, with a policy of New Deal or good neighbor, they did excellent businesses in Latin America, US "backyard", while on their direct colonies and influence zones, holds bonapartists governments and ferocious dictatorships; as France does in Algeria, Northern Africa and its "overseas territories" controlled by the guns of the Foreign Legion." The native bourgeoisie (the Bolivarian) took advantage of these inter-imperialists gaps to do business with all, as junior partners of the imperialistic powers.

World bankruptcy and the outbreak Wall Street stoke market, set on the imperialism’s agenda recover the control of its semicolonies, raw materials and natural resources that it extracts from there as well as its super-profits; and once re-constituted US chief state, with Obama's assumption imperialism came back to get everything in its backyard. That is what we state on the OOI #12: “But while preparing their change of government and Obama taking office, during 2007-2008, USA imposed limits shooting to their imperialist rivals. USA shot rivals to stop their advance over his zones of influence defining that he would centralize the attack against the masses and distribute business.
  
That was proved in Georgia, the massacre on the Colombian resistance in Uribe’s hands, the fascist putsch in Bolivia and lastly in Palestine, with the Zionist army massacring in Gaza.
  
Thus USA scared the masses and forced native bourgeoisies –who were flirting with the other imperialist powers- to impose counterrevolutionary pacts to force the masses to surrender. That is how US imperialism guaranteed be the one who divides business throughout the world and, in last instance, be the one who disciplines the working class and exploited masses…". That is how USA imposed to France -under its conditions- a French-US pact to guarantee that US imperialism be the one who distributes business and discipline the working class. USA achieve this after the treacherous leaderships contained the highest processes of the revolution, supporting the counter-revolutionary pacts in Bolivia and Colombia, and subordinating the proletariat to the bourgeoisie of the continent, the “democratic front”, the "Bolivarian" revolution, etc. Because of these, strangle the revolution in Bolivia has an international character and the new political situation there is only a refraction of a politics too. Bolivia was as a hinge in the Latin-American situation and now it is to, but this time of the counter-revolution.

Comrade Dave, what you affirm in your letter is the contrary, the opposite to what the congress of July took as its foundational program, as the lessons that concentrate the fight against the popular front and fascism; lessons that we extracted in the FLT and later was taken by the FLTI. You with your new position on Chinese "the imperialism" would not endorse those documents.

This way also how we posed in the Foundational Congress of the FLTI and then we expressed it in the resolutions on Honduras in point 5: "In Latin America we are seeing the results of the French-US provisional agreement forced on French imperialism by US imperialism to regain control of the sub-continent as its “backyard”. A first act of this new offensive was signalled by the Summit of the Americas early this year in Trinidad-Tobago, where Obama, supported by all the “Bolivarian” bourgeoisies laid out very clearly his policy to complete capitalist restoration in Cuba. The Honduras coup is a new act in this offensive where the US using its two handed policy –either through the continuity of Micheletti and his coup makers, or by means of an agreement between Zelaya and these same coup makers– wants to turn Honduras into a beachhead for further counterrevolutionary actions in Latin America, i.e. an intervention in Cuba, or Guadeloupe or any country where the masses rise up against their exploitation and oppression.” All your position expresses having totally impressionist and national vision. You and the minority can change position whenever you want; however one thing is to raise political differences and another very different is to liquidate the whole program conquered. The minority, for us, is a liquidator minority of the foundational program of the FLTI and denies all the revolutionary lessons that we extract from to the most important acid tests of the world class struggle.

Marxists know that raising things and then deny them is how an empiric acts, that is a way of always having a retreat ready. That is why we do not believe you when you state that you endorse the resolutions of the Congress of the FLTI.

The minority liquidates the Marxist conception of the world labour division

The minority sees everything by a totally nationalistic lens and does not see that there is a world economy, where capitalism is based on world labour division and on the exchange of manufactured goods, also international, as Trotsky raises in "A school of revolutionary strategy" (1921): "Capitalism is a worldwide fact. It has managed to dominate the entire world, as could be observed during the war, when a country was over-producing, without having any market that was consuming his merchandise, despite that other needed products that were inaccessible for it. In that moment, the interdependence of the different parts of the world market, was making feel for all sites. The position capitalism put itself before the war was based on world labour division and on the exchange of products. It is necessary that North America produces certain quantity of wheat for Europe. It is necessary that France produce certain quantity of luxury objects for North America. It is indispensable that Germany produce certain number of vulgar and economic objects for France. Nevertheless, this world labour division isn’t always the same, is not ruled. It was established historically, and sometimes it changes due to crisis, competitions and rates. But, in general, the world economy is founded on the fact that the production of the world distributes, in major or minor proportion, between different countries. This world labour division was shocked, until the roots, because of the war. Has it been rebuilt or not? That is one of the aspect of the issue. ".

With your totally national Trotskyist vision, and your Chinese "imperialism", you and the minority liquidate the world labour division and the role that has China on it. Before as goods exporter and goods consumer; now as the greater buyer, importer of raw materials to supply the imperialist monopolies installed there and as importer of consumer goods produced in the USA, for that great Chinese domestic market. There is nothing of "new imperialist power" in China; on the contrary, China plays the roe as a Counter Tendency of the world economic in crisis.

China as buyer is a true and enormous conquer of all native bourgeoisies of the continent and the imperialist powers; that is why, all the bourgeoisies celebrate, because they can sell soybean, milk, gas, iron, commodities and consumer goods; this is precisely why today bolivarian governments make fortunes, while they sink more and more the working class in the misery. This one is the great imperialist victory of the ' 89, the fresh blood of the former workers state, injected to sclerotic veins of the capitalism in decomposition. And you call that imperialism?

Your revisionism on the Chinese question, has take you to fail in passing any of the acid test, which also are Bolivia, Peru, Honduras, world economic world, Cuba, etc. You and your allies in Madagascar end up to the feet of the popular front, as the 5th wheel of the car of the treacherous leaderships centralized in the counter-revolutionary 5th International of the Bolivarian and the Chinese "mandarins", with the renegade of the Trotskyism, which cover the left flank; they all together have put a fence to the revolution in Madagascar, like they imposed before to the Bolivian revolution. That is why you don’t say anything of Madagascar nor of Greece, can’t stutter one single word on revolutionary key on these acids test, since those issue questioned your invention of "imperialist China". You and your allies of the minority do not pass the test. With your revisionism –not only of the foundational program of the FLTI, but of the revolutionary Marxism- you have moved to opportunism. This way you end up like theorist of the 5th International: as the fifth wheel of the car of the popular front and Chavez new international. You break with the program of the political revolution in Cuba, that is to say, you break with the International 4th and his theoretical and programmatic legacy. In the middle of 4th International and Chavez’s counterrevolutionary 5th, there are also intellectual impressionistic bunglers, as wings of left of the V.

Revolutionary greetings
LTI (Bolivia)

Annex 2: Letter to NOR

10-12-09
Comrades of NOR,
We have been studying your letter of polemic with the group from Cuzco. We agree with you on the conception of the revolutionary party and the Marxist praxis, and also in the action program for the working class in Peru.
With this letter we want to open a reflection and exchange positions on a very important issue that you mention in your polemic with Bloque Marxista, i.e. the former workers state and capitalist restoration. This debate, especially in the Chinese question, as you will see in our papers, is still an open debate within the ILTF.
We think that the Marxist position on this matter –as we had said before- will be conquered as part of the combat for unifying the strings of revolutionary Marxism –destroyed by reformism and renegades of Trotskyism first with Termidor and then with liquidationism within the international Trotskyist movement-. During decades, mainly since ‘90s, they revised revolutionary Marxism to justified their degeneration and betray. From here we would like to pose our positions and nuances, contributing with our theoretical and programmatic conceptions; based on what we are looking for is the Marxist truth and the best program for the international proletariat.


On the Stalinist bureaucracy in the degenerated or distorted former workers state and the capitalist restoration.


Straight to the point: we think that the capitalist restoration was not peaceful and we also have nuances with your affirmation that the proletariat due to an “involution” on its consciousness allowed a relatively peaceful restoration. This was part of the debate of the ILTF Congress. As Trotsky said the fate of the workers state was defined in the international class struggle. As you will see in our resolutions we claim that the capitalist restoration had been already prepared during ‘80s and that in 1989 the restoration was not peaceful because it was imposed by the bureaucracy smashing the political revolutions in 1953 in East German, Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968, Georgia and Ukraine; the defeat of the revolutionary upheaval of 1968-74 was a qualitative change, where the Stalinist bureaucracy put all their forces to prevent new triumphs of the world proletarian revolution. Then bonapartist counterrevolutionary bureaucracy led by Castrism sold out and led to a defeat the Centre American revolution over the flesh and bones of the workers and peasants like in Nicaragua and El Salvador; by the hand of Jaruzelsky who from Poland scabbed the huge strike of the British miners selling Margaret Tatchert coal, they broke the strike and imposed a huge defeat on the proletariat.  The smashing in Tianammen-China was a decisive event where the bureaucracy had certain flexibility allowing the student movement’s demonstrations but when the proletariat intervened with its factories committees, the counterrevolutionary bureaucracy launched an offensive massacring hundreds of thousands of workers and students; it was so big that massacre that even today there is no figure of deaths and the bodies are still found in far villages of China.


Not only that, the result of the capitalist restoration opened a period of a huge counterrevolutionary offensive like the invasion of 21 armies commanded by imperialism against Iraq in 1991, or as we saw in Balkans in 1999 with thousands of deaths, as well  fratricide wars in Armenia and Azerbaijtán. The invasion of the Red Army transformed in white army to Chechnya meant that this nation was left without masculine people due to a real counterrevolutionary genocide, these are only some examples. From our point of view, the capitalist restoration was not peaceful, nor before, nor during, nor after the events of the ‘89s.


Till ‘80, the bureaucracy was bonapartist, that is, it had only a single counterrevolutionary nature but it fulfilled a dual function: it acted to defend its privileges and therefore, defended the bases of the workers state whose control was precisely the source of its privileges, however, it acted its way, that is, sinking them more and more. The bureaucracy did not defend the bases of the workers states only for fear before the proletariat but because from the workers states they get their privileges as a bureaucrat caste.  The bureaucracy stopped fulfilling this role since the end of the “boom pos-war” and the beginning of the world economic crisis and the defeat of the revolutionary general rehearsal of 68/74, with which the pact of contention of the world revolution of Yalta and Potsdam ended. In the ‘80s a new pact is imposed between the counterrevolutionary bureaucracy and imperialism: the pact of capitalist restoration where the Stalinist bureaucracy entered the field of capitalist restoration  with its weapons becoming direct agents of imperialism with Yeltsin and Gorvachof like men chosen directly by City Bank and IMF in their meetings. A regime of restoration of capitalism was imposed on the former workers states imposing a absolute decomposition of them.


The processes of ‘89 took place after  huge defeats of the proletariat imposed previously as we mentioned before, with CP controlling the exploits of Asia and provoking wars between workers states like China and Vietnam in 78/79 that meant a tragedy for the international proletariat; with the parties that spoke in the name of Trotskyism in a deep process of degeneration supporting Stalinism. The crisis of revolutionary leadership of the proletariat kept deepening at extreme grades being a key factor for the development of those historical events. In 1989, delayed political revolutions took place, under the shape of generalized spontaneous mass processes of resistance before the restoration plans of the imperialist powers and the bureaucracy already in the field of restoration in the ‘80s. They were upheavals against that restorationist pact, against a bureaucracy no longer bonapartist but a bureaucracy that looked for consciously an alliance of a new kind with the world imperialist bourgeoisie, the liquidation of the workers states so that it became a new bourgeoisie.


The spontaneity of the masses was marked by the previous process, by the action of the Stalinist bureaucracy already transformed in restoration agent, that in its different wings they became more and more direct agents of imperialism, due to the process of decomposition of the productive forces in those states, and for the crisis of the Fourth International that for decades of centrism, opportunism and adaptations was unable to be at the level of the revolutionary theory, strategy, and program of its foundation. The consequence of all these, was that those generalized revolts expressed an acute immaturity of the proletariat of the East, that intervened when the west proletariat was hit by the offensive of Reaganism-Thatcherism in the central imperialist countries.

The crisis had exploited from the periphery to the center of the former USSR, that is, it started in Germany where the imperialist bourgeoisie had get a fast victory with the imperialist unification. “Socialism in one country” of Stalinism, besides the measures of “restoration without war” (“restauración en frío”) left the productive forces of USSR in an absolute crisis, the world crisis accelerated this process and USRR became a worker state in absolute decomposition totally in debt. The conditions for the capitalist restoration were created. 

In ’89, the masses rose up against the hatred restorationist bureaucracy because they could not stand continue living under those conditions. But as a difference according to what Trotsky stated, in 1989 the of the relationship of property were no longer in the conscience of the masses, on the contrary, they identified those relationships of property like the cause of their misery resulting of the decomposition of the worker state. This false conscience was prepared by the counterrevolutionary leaderships in general and Stalinism in particular, leading the revolutionary generalized upheaval 68-74 to the defeat, that is, preventing the victory or qualitative advances of the world proletariat revolution. Since the bureaucracy became direct restorationist agent and closely linked the workers states to the world economy dominated by imperialism, a major sinking of the living conditions was provoked as well the destruction of the conscience of the workers and masses of those workers states who mass intervened in 1989. Those workers and masses hated the restorationist bureaucracy with the just will of living better, but with the illusion that coming back to capitalism they would achieve the standard of living of the advanced capitalist countries. All this thanks to the counterrevolutionary role of the bureaucracy during 60 years. 


At the beginning of the political revolution in 1989, the proletariat of those workers states acted dissolved within the whole people. They did not intervene with their methods and self-organizing. That is, the soviet did not emerge, the organism of dual power of armed workers against the bureaucracy and labor aristocracy and there was not a revolutionary leadership at the head of those processes, a key question for the victory of the political revolution. On those spontaneous mobilizations at first, the counterrevolutionary leaderships got on, that is, the wings recycled as “democratic” or the ones of the “democratic” pro- imperialist petty bourgeoisie that aborted the revolutionary processes and allowed the imposition of the counterrevolution. For that reason, the 89 processes were the most revolutionary they could because of the character of the leadership they had, leaderships that in the previous period imposed the decomposition of the bureaucratized workers states before that a new upheaval of political revolution took place. We can say that the revolutions in the ’89 were delayed political revolutions because of the crisis of leadership and previous defeats. Imperialism had hit before with the defeat of the 68-74 upheaval and the restorationist pact of the ‘80s.

This is the relationship we see among the masses, their conscience, the bureaucracy, capitalist restoration and the crisis of the Fourth International that was founded to intervene in a decisive way in those events, but the Trotskyist movement was at the feet of Stalinism or social democracy.


On the Chinese revolution

First, we believe we are facing a serious theoretical debate. You do not put in question the program, but point what seems to be a real fact, of the life, not of books, that would put in question the permanent revolution.
We do not believe you renounce to the permanent revolution. The question is about a past event and its character. In the following lines we will have to be “supported by the books”, that is, to follow a Marxist method to be able to be guided facing the facts and these complex facts do not make us enter a labyrinth. In the light of the permanent revolution, of Marxism, we can define and defend our position on China.  We want to sate the Chinese question from the uniqueness (exception) stated like hypothesis in the Transitional Program  of the Fourth International that according to our understanding is in direct relationship with the Chinese question:
  “Is the creation of a worker and peasant government by the traditional workers’ organizations possible? Past experience shows, as has already been stated, that this is, to say the least, highly improbable. However, one cannot categorically deny in advance the theoretical possibility that, under the influence of completely exceptional circumstances (war, defeat, financial crash, mass revolutionary pressure, etc.), the petty bourgeois parties, including the Stalinists, may go further than they wish along the road to a break with the bourgeoisie. In any case one thing is not to be doubted: even if this highly improbable variant somewhere at some time becomes a reality and the “workers’ and farmers’ government” in the above-mentioned sense is established in fact, it would represent merely a short episode on the road to the actual dictatorship of the proletariat.”

You say the Chinese revolution questions the Permanent revolution. We think that this is not the case. The Chinese revolution reaffirms the permanent revolution and the Trotskyist program of 1938, that was precisely forged drawing lessons of the Chinese revolution of 1925-1927. Your theory that in China was set up a peasant state based on the state capitalism puts in question several issues that must be solved in a Marxist way. We are delightful with this debate between revolutionaries that fight for their convictions.
First, if we talk about state capitalism, in fact we are talking about state-ism (the difference between state capitalism and state-ism will be developed later), that is, the taking of some sectors of production on the part of the state, keeping the capitalist exploitation.  Secondly, talking about a peasant revolution based on the state capitalism, your are talking about a democratic bourgeois revolution. Third, we would be stating a new problem on the imperialist epoch, saying that is possible a petty bourgeois dictatorship based on capitalist basis, that is not a dual power, nor Kerenskismo, nor a bonapartism sui generis, that for their characteristics lasts a very limited span of time, but a dictatorship of one class

The Peasant state should confront the bourgeoisie and proletariat, setting up a state capitalism. That means a state neither bourgeois nor worker. Expropriating the bourgeoisie, the peasant and bureaucracy was able to set up a peasant state.
According to us, it is about confusion as regards the state, the epoch and the dialectic of the class struggle in the imperialist epoch.

The imperialist epoch does not allow a petty bourgeois dictatorship


The Marxist strategy has to start from the epoch characterization.  The imperialist epoch develops based on a world economy and this is the basis where the international proletariat struggle settles down, it is not based on the moral encourage but on the material basis. The proletariat as world forces is opposite to the imperialism.
The imperialism admits transitory situations.  It admits dual power, it admits semi-independent countries, but you are not talking about a transitory situation but a bourgeois democratic revolution and the instauration of the petty bourgeois dictatorship.
It has passes the epoch of the great democratic revolutions.  Establishing a world economy, the capitalism has unified the interests of all the exploiters in one.  The exploiters of the imperialist countries have their junior partners in the developing countries.  The petty bourgeoisie has shown to be impotent to replace the bourgeoisie in order to resolve the problems of the democratic revolution that still remain in the developing countries.  There are plenty of proves; the petty bourgeois democracy, that the Mensheviks were in the past, today their most characteristic parties are the left wing of the WSF and have kneel down to imperialism and their junior partners.
The petty bourgeoisie is impotent; it is totally split for interests and relations with the class.  It is a class that is the rubbish of the pre-capitalist epoch, because the only 2 classes who are characteristics of capitalism are the working class and the bourgeoisie.  The only thing it can do is to choose between two paths: to be submitted by the bourgeoisie or that its exploited layers form an alliance with the proletariat.  This defines that petty bourgeoisie cannot impose its class dictatorship.  The only time in history in 1793, it was able to do it only opened the path to the absolute domain of the French bourgeoisie.

In this combat, the revolution does not allow intermediate stages, since it means the revolution abortion.  There are not “peasant revolutions”, i.e. “democratic revolutions” that lead the petty bourgeoisie to the power.  The historical experience has shown that the few democratic conquests achieved if they are not conquered by a socialist revolution, very soon they will end.  In the same way, Lenin and the Third International draw the lessons of the impossibility of an intermediate democratic revolution:
“In a bourgeois society with already developed class antagonisms there can only be either the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, open or disguised, or the dictatorship of the proletariat. There cannot be any talk of an intermediate regime. Every democracy, every ‘dictatorship of democracy’ (the ironical quotation marks are Lenin’s) is only a veil for the rule of the bourgeoisie, as the experience of the most backward European country, Russia, showed in the epoch of its bourgeois revolution, i.e., the epoch most favourable to the ‘dictatorship of democracy’”.
(Permanent Revolution chapter 7)
“12. … in capitalist society, whenever there is any serious aggravation of the class struggle intrinsic to that society, there can be no alternative but the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie or the dictatorship of the proletariat. Dreams of some third way are reactionary, petty-bourgeois limitations. That is borne out by more than a century of development of bourgeois democracy in the working-class movement in all the advanced countries, and notably by the experience of the past five years. This is also borne out by the whole science of political economy, by the entire content of Marxism, which reveals the economic inevitability, wherever commodity economy prevails, of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie that can only be replaced by the class which the very growth of capitalism develops, multiplies, welds together and strengthens; that is, the proletarian class.” (Bold ours) (Thesis and Report on Bourgeois Democracy and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat March 4, 1919 )

There are three determined classes: the bourgeoisie, the proletariat and the petty bourgeoisie.  But only the proletariat and the bourgeoisie mean social forces that when the class struggle become sharpen, they can impose their own way.  This is from the theoretical point of view and the international class struggle has already proved so. Drawing lessons of the Chinese revolution in 1925-1927, the Trotskyist left Opposition could define that in the developing countries: “the theory of the permanent revolution signifies that the complete and genuine solution of their tasks of achieving democracy and national emancipation is conceivable only through the dictatorship of the proletariat as the leader of the subjugated nation, above all of its peasant masses.”

Trotsky defined in his thesis of the “permanent revolution” the auxiliary role that the peasant had in the proletariat revolution.  And he denied in his thesis 5: “However, the latter showed, and under circumstances that exclude any kind of misinterpretation, that no matter how great the revolutionary role of the peasantry may be, it nevertheless cannot be an independent role and even less a leading one. The peasant follows either the worker or the bourgeois. This means that the ‘democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry’ is only conceivable as a dictatorship of the proletariat that leads the peasant masses behind it.” (Bold ours).
And in the thesis 6 he stated on the peasant role and the impossibility of a petty bourgeois state and intermediate dictatorship. “A democratic dictatorship of the prolelariat and peasantry, as a regime that is distinguished from the dictatorship of the proletariat by its class content, might be realized only in a case where an independent revolutionary party could be constituted, expressing the interests of the peasants and in general of petty bourgeois democracy – a party capable of conquering power with this or that degree of aid from the proletariat, and of determining its revolutionary programme. As all modern history attests – especially the Russian experience of the last twenty-five years – an insurmountable obstacle on the road to the creation of a peasants’ party is the petty-bourgeoisie’s lack of economic and political independence and its deep internal differentiation. By reason of this the upper sections of the petty-bourgeoisie (of the peasantry) go along with the big bourgeoisie in all decisive cases, especially in war and in revolution; the lower sections go along with the proletariat; the intermediate section being thus compelled to choose between the two extreme poles. Between Kerenskyism and the Bolshevik power, between the Kuomintang and the dictatorship of the proletariat, there is not and cannot be any intermediate stage, that is, no democratic dictatorship of the workers and peasants”. (Bold ours).

That is to say, only the Chinese working class leading the poor peasant was able to expropriate the bourgeoisie and led this revolution to the victory.  The Chinese revolution did not constitute an intermediate revolution, nor bourgeois nor proletarian, petty bourgeois peasant.  It is a proletarian revolution.  The imperialist epoch does not allow the existence of transitory states, nor bourgeois or proletarian.  The proletariat is the only consequent revolutionary force.  Its exploited allies, like the semi-proletarian layers of the rural areas and the city, do not have enough forces or the consequent to put ahead the struggle against imperialism.  The imperialist epoch does not allow a state of the petty bourgeoisie.  It does not allow it because the petty bourgeoisie does not have any independence, not the autonomy strength to confront imperialism.

What class interests did Chinese state defend after 1949?

A state responds, beyond the party in the government, to the class it represents. A bourgeois Bonapartist government or regime, even when it disciplines totally bourgeois parties, even the own businessmen, it only represents and defends the class as a whole.  Bonapartism and fascism are just examples of that.  Fascism, for example, applied the state-ism, imposed a police dictatorship, where the bourgeois parties representative of imperialism were illegal.  But they never stopped defending the bourgeoisie as a whole.
The Chinese state did not defend the “peasants” as a whole because there is no a peasantry.  Peasants as well as petty bourgeoisie are divided in layers, on one hand, the peasants that exploit some workers or poor peasants who rent the land.  On the other side, the poor peasants do not exploit anybody.  There are semi-proletarian peasants who rent or sell their labour force for seasons.  This can be found in the Agrarian thesis of the second Congress of the International Communist.

What layer of the peasants did defend the state born after 1949? As far as we know, this Chinese state nationalized the land, ended with the private property of the rich peasants, organized collective farms, i.e. it did the same the old USSR did in one act.  It was on the side of the poor and semi-proletarian peasants. But in order to give the poor peasants the collective farms it had to expropriate the whole bourgeoisie.  The peasant needed and demanded the land, the end of the exploitation by the landlord.  In order to give that, the proletariat had to state-zing the banks, apply the monopoly of foreign commerce, nationalize the industry… i.e. the democratic revolution was combined with the socialist revolution.

While the poor peasant and semi proletariat peasant exist, obligatory there will be concessions of certain kind, even not to go forward the socialist program during years in the countryside, and apply a petty bourgeois one. This happened in 1917, when Bolsheviks carried on the program of the socialist-revolutionaries. He existence of collective farms- and they did not belong to the state- is a concession to the peasantry.  The socialist program imposed to Mao by the masses combined democratic-revolutionary tasks with socialist ones.

The combinations of the tasks and the existence of a state that have that program, does not mean a mixed state. In 1919, Lenin stated that USSR that did not collectivize land yet, was a worker state. Meanwhile the dictatorship of proletariat ruled, the concessions that the proletariat is forced to give does not deny the class character of the dictatorship. Remember that after the taking of power, Kautsky kept saying that in USSR there was neither socialism nor dictatorship of proletariat. He said that in October there was a mutiny of soldiers and a peasantry government.  He took particularly facts of October hidden its class character.
The problem of China could not be solved in the bourgeois field, let’s not say even peasantry. The agrarian question was solved through the agrarian revolution, the national unity and freedom from imperialism was conquered only through the socialist revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat. That is, the class interests that the Chinese state defended pos 1949 were proletarian.

On State capitalism:
After the general reflections on the impossibility of a petty bourgeois dictatorship, a petty bourgeois state, we want to make some contributions on the so called State capitalism.  In “The Revolution Betrayed” Trotsky defined what it was the state capitalism and he made the difference with the bourgeoisie state.  As it is an important issue in this debate, we want to quote it exactly:

 “An attempt has been made to conceal the enigma of the Soviet regime by calling it “state capitalism.” This term has the advantage that nobody knows exactly what it means. The term “state capitalism” originally arose to designate all the phenomena which arise when a bourgeois state takes direct charge of the means of transport or of industrial enterprises. The very necessity of such measures is one of the signs that the productive forces have outgrown capitalism and are bringing it to a partial self-negation in practice. But the outworn system, along with its elements of self-negation, continues to exist as a capitalist system.
Theoretically, to be sure, it is possible to conceive a situation in which the bourgeoisie as a whole constitutes itself a stock company which, by means of its state, administers the whole national economy. The economic laws of such a regime would present no mysteries. A single capitalist, as is well known, receives in the form of profit, not that part of the surplus value which is directly created by the workers of his own enterprise, but a share of the combined surplus value created throughout the country proportionate to the amount of his own capital. Under an integral “state capitalism”, this law of the equal rate of profit would be realized, not by devious routes – that is, competition among different capitals – but immediately and directly through state bookkeeping. Such a regime never existed, however, and, because of profound contradictions among the proprietors themselves, never will exist – the more so since, in its quality of universal repository of capitalist property, the state would be too tempting an object for social revolution.
During the war, and especially during the experiments in fascist economy, the term “state capitalism” has oftenest been understood to mean a system of state interference and regulation. The French employ a much more suitable term for this etatism. There are undoubtedly points of contact between state capitalism and “state-ism”, but taken as systems they are opposite rather than identical. State capitalism means the substitution of state property for private property, and for that very reason remains partial in character. State-ism, no matter where in Italy, Mussolini, in Germany, Hitler, in America, Roosevelt, or in France, Leon Blum – means state intervention on the basis of private property, and with the goal of preserving it. Whatever be the programs of the government, stateism inevitably leads to a transfer of the damages of the decaying system from strong shoulders to weak. It “rescues” the small proprietor from complete ruin only to the extent that his existence is necessary for the preservation of big property. The planned measures of stateism are dictated not by the demands of a development of the productive forces, but by a concern for the preservation of private property at the expense of the productive forces, which are in revolt against it. State-ism means applying brakes to the development of technique, supporting unviable enterprises, perpetuating parasitic social strata. In a word, state-ism is completely reactionary in character.
The words of Mussolini: “Three-fourths of Italian economy, industrial and agricultural, is in the hands of the state” (May 26, 1934), are not to be taken literally. The fascist state is not an owner of enterprises, but only an intermediary between their owners. These two things are not identical. Popolo d’Italia says on this subject: “The corporative state directs and integrates the economy, but does not run it (‘dirige e porta alla unita l’economia, ma non fa l’economia, non gestisce’), which, with a monopoly of production, would be nothing but collectivism.” (June 11, 1936)
Toward the peasants and small proprietors in general, the fascist bureaucracy takes the attitude of a threatening lord and master. Toward the capitalist magnates, that of a first plenipotentiury. “The corporative state,” correctly writes the Italian Marxist, Feroci, “is nothing but the sales clerk of monopoly capital ... Mussolini takes upon the state the whole risk of the enterprises, leaving to the industrialists the profits of exploitation.” And Hitler in this respect follows in the steps of Mussolini. The limits of the planning principle, as well as its real content, are determined by the class dependence of the fascist state. It is not a question of increasing the power of man over nature in the interests of society, but of exploiting society in the interests of the few. “If I desired,” boasts Mussolini, “to establish in Italy – which really has not happened – state capitalism or state socialism, I should possess today all the necessary and adequate objective conditions.” All except one: the expropriation of the class of capitalists. In order to realize this condition, fascism would have to go over to the other side of the barricades – “which really has not happened” to quote the hasty assurance of Mussolini, and, of course, will not happen. To expropriate the capitalists would require other forces, other cadres and other leaders.
The first concentration of the means of production in the hands of the state to occur in history was achieved by the proletariat with the method of social revolution, and not by capitalists with the method of state trustification. Our brief analysis is sufficient to show how absurd are the attempts to identify capitalist state-ism with the Soviet system. The former is reactionary, the latter progressive.” (The Revolution Betrayed Chapter 9)

Thus, let’s take the following conclusions:

The “integral” state capitalism does not exist, since the huge differences between layers of the bourgeoisie would not allow such a concentration of capital in the hands of the state. Only the proletariat with its own dictatorship of class is able to concentrate the means of production through its class dictatorship.
What it has existed in history is state-ism. In the ‘30s, fascism and the “democratic” imperialism used it; and we can see it today in the nationalization of the millionaire lost of Fanny Mae and Lehman. We have seen it in the nationalizations done by the bourgeois nationalism of Peron, Nasser, Salvador Allende, Velasco in Peru, etc., that was a way to bargain with imperialism a slide of profit.

On this last question let’s think about the issue. You say state capitalism. If in China after 1949,a process of bourgeois nationalism that put in practice state-ism started? But in China the bank, the industry, and the foreign trade was nationalized and a planned economy was imposed. A national bourgeoisie does not do this. The petty bourgeois peasantry afraid of the finance capital is unable to do this. Forced by exceptional circumstances, the petty bourgeois leadership of the Chinese CP did it despite their will. But this is a historical exception.

China: from the civil war to the worker state. The proletariat’s role

The question of whether the peasantry took power or not it is a historical issue we must analyze seriously. This is a historical problem all petty bourgeois and bourgeois historians and the reformist left tarnished. Isaac Deustcher in the fifties, in his Trotsky´s biography, rejoiced seeing the Chinese revolution and the working class role in the opposite way of the permanent revolution repeating like parrots the pseudo analysis of the bourgeois press and academies. In the name of Maoism and its fairy tales “the peasantry took the power developing after the capitalism and then the socialism”, millions of Asian revolutionary workers were taken at the feet of the popular front with the consequences of terrible defeats as in Indonesia in 1965. The biggest Maoist party in the world and the leadership of the unions, after making pacts with the nationalist Government, opened the road to the Fascist coup with the cost of millions workers’ death.
 We want remark we are not comparing your positions with the ones of Deutscher, Cliff, etc. We are thinking about and discussing our differences between revolutionaries.  

We have to say together with Trotsky, that from 1920, the capitalism had entered into the old villages in China and since then it wasn’t anymore a semi feudal nation (“The permanent revolution”). This supposes the development of agrarian proletariat, semi proletarian layers and poor peasantry. “The population in China has 80% of peasants, and 20% of them are the owners of the land. They were landowners at Chinese scale but they weren’t at European scale. The landless peasants were employed as agrarian workers or they rented a plot at a very high cost. As the land owners represented the Authority, it was easy for them to avoid taxes, personal payments and the military service that fell back onto farmers and agricultural workers’ shoulders…when the peasants sold the harvest, the prices magically dropped and when they wanted to buy seeds they suddenly increased. The result: the peasantry was always in debt and with no possibility of getting back of its feet.” (L.M. Chassin, The Conquest of China by Mao, 1952). The civil war didn´t develop on feudal bases but on backward capitalist bases, but capitalist. Sectors of agrarian workers were in the CP and that was the reason an agrarian revolution rapidly took place in the territories conquered by Maos’ Army, sweeping away the capitalist landowners      
 
To define precisely the Chinese question we have to start from the objective conditions of the revolution. At the end of 1940 the withdrawal of the Japanese occupation troops had left the nation into a deep crack.
The industry was in bankruptcy and a massive migration of hundreds of millions poor landless peasants took place, looking for work in the cities where they only found unemployment increasing the enormous industrial reserve army, that is labour force that could not be located in the productive process and the only way of surviving was the political fight before the catastrophic situation that affected the nation.  These ruined landless peasants, became into unemployed workers in the cities. They were the motor of the revolution and the basis of consolidation of Mao. They were the masses which led him further his own interests. It was clearly a proletarian revolution. The nationalization of the land solved the agrarian question and this task cannot be taken by the peasants in general. The proletariat leading the ruined poor peasants solved the problem of the land. And even today, the new bourgeoisie in China in spite of capitalist restoration couldn´t finish historically that gain of the ex- worker state.

Here, the confusion is between Maos’ taking of power and the existence or not of a worker state. If we carefully see the first thing Mao did, it was to set up a popular front government, as it happened in Cuba. A bourgeois provisional government with he bourgeoisie’s ghost (the widow of SunYat Sen, some leaders of the Kuomitang who had grumbled about Chiang Kai Shek) because in the civil war the majority of this was on Chiang’s side. The expropriations would come later not the day Mao triumphed forced by the workers and peasants. Like in Cuba, the workers and the exploited masses, took advantage of the civil war which had destroyed the old regime, had split the bourgeois army-the fundamental base of the State-. In their way to expropriate the bourgeoisie they threw in the garbage dump the Maoist program of “New Democracy” for a non anti-workers “popular” capitalism, etc. They did what Marx had said in 1857: “Supported by the peasants civil war” they had finished expropriating the bourgeoisie towards the Socialist Revolution. We think it is unilateral to affirm the proletariat didn’t play any role in the Chinese revolution, because it didn’t end in 1949, it only started, in its development the expropriation to the bourgeoisie and imperialism was imposed as the proletariat demanded. If the proletariat and semi-proletariat hadn’t existed, the taking of power would have been similar to the one in Mexico when Villa and Zapata entered the city with heir peasants’ army and went back to the farm because they didn’t know what to do. There wasn’t a proletariat, it came up later. In China in 1949 indeed a proletariat existed and it was the one which forced the Chinese PC to go forward and this is one of the historical exceptions explained in the program of the IV International.

The Chinese Worker State involved the whole process from the triumph of Mao’s guerrillas during the civil war up to the moment of complete expropriation of the bourgeoisie. It wasn’t pacific. After defeating the fascist of Chiang in the civil war, with who Mao always made pacts, during the civil war a provisional government with a dual power character was established. The dual power represented the masses in arms including the agrarian workers and the agrarian semi proletariat who expropriated all the landowners allied with the fascist of Chiang. As soon as they entered the city, the workers rebelled against the regime and join the fight, as it happened on may, 1949 when the troops of Chiang were expelled from Shanghai and due to that struggle the provisional government of Mao had to declare the nationalization of the bourgeois agents of Chiang( Mao called this “bureaucratic capitalism”),that means the whole bourgeoisie as all was with Chiang. In 1950 the Yankee troops get off on Korea and the aim was to arrive in Peking and to make Chiang retake the power. The workers in Korea defeated the Yankees troops and at the same moment China was on fire as a rearguard. The Agrarian capitalists were hanged and shot by the masses in arms. Chinese revolution wasn’t “Chinese”, it was Asian revolution, Korean workers’ triumph was a big impulse in the sense that Chinese revolution assumed a socialist character   

Since 1949, the revolutionary poor workers and peasants had expropriated the Chinese bourgeoisies of Chiang. In 1952 the State had expropriated all the banks, the 80% of heavy industry, the 50% of light industry and the railways. In 1953 on the bases of the expropriation of the production means and the foreign trade monopoly, the first five-year plan took place and the planned economy took place setting up clearly defined a Worker State..

The exception of Chinese Revolution doesn’t deny the counterrevolutionary role the Chinese bureaucracy played.  They did everything against Chinese revolution could expand outside the nation. Mao himself ordered the workers not to move forward to expulse the Yankees from Korea, promoting the popular front policy in Asia. One of the terrible consequences for the proletariat and the exploited peasants was the massacre of Indonesia in 1965 after the biggest Maoist party in the world, negotiated to sell out the disarmed masses to the fascist coup. It took decades for the Vietnamese proletariat to succeed and the popular front supported by Peking was responsible for it. In China the bureaucracy of the CP rapidly dominated the masses, smashing them with its bureaucratic control. This was not unavoidable. There was a Chinese section of the Fourth International, but the IV International became centrist and impotent to avoid it.

A distorted Worker State

From our point of view, the distorted worker state definition was on the basis of the political regime character-that is to say the Stalinist Thermidorian bureaucracy- and not the social regime. Both degenerated and distorted States –were workers states because of the social regime. The proletarian dictatorship was established and the bourgeoisie had been expropriated. Russia was a worker state from the beginning because it had a revolutionary leadership, the Bolshevik party. The expropriation on behalf of the Stalinist bureaucracy transformed the state, in the sense of the political regime, into a bureaucratic state, that is, a degenerated State.  
   
In our opinion the Chinese revolution was a socialist worker revolution. The triumph of Chinese revolution, in the postwar period was one of the exceptions predicted by Trotsky as a theoretical hypothesis in the Transitional Program.
In Chine like in the ex- Yugoslavia, because exceptional conditions at the end of the war, the masses made revolutions, expropriated the bourgeoisie and forced the Stalinist leaderships of Mao Tse Tung and Tito to go far away from what they wanted in the rupture with the bourgeoisie. This way, the distorted worker states were born led by counterrevolutionary leaderships from the beginning which emerged from the revolution itself. Different from Russian revolution, the Stalinist bureaucracy came up from a Thermidorian bureaucratic counterrevolution as a result of the worldwide revolution’s delay, because the Russian masses were exhausted and the Bolshevik vanguard had been killed during the civil war.   

China, Cuba, etc are the exceptions raised by Trotsky in the Transitional Program: “Under the influence of extremely exceptional conditions (war, defeats, financial crack revolutionary masses pressure, etc) the petty bourgeois parties, even the Stalinist parties can go far away from they want to go in the way of rupture with the bourgeoisie “ and to establish Workers and peasants governments, “a brief episode towards the real proletariat dictatorship”. This happened in China, where the Stalinist leadership of the CP was taken far away from what it wanted in its rupture with the bourgeoisie, coming up then distorted workers states from the moment of their birth. 

The Chinese working class took the power after two revolutions-he first one in 1925-1927 and the second in 1949- in spite of and against their Stalinist leadership. We agree you are wrong when you say the Chinese proletariat never ruled the proletariat dictatorship; on the contrary, it was the only class capable of taking the power and ruled the proletariat dictatorship through a Stalinist petty bourgeoisie leadership which was forced to go far away from what they wanted, expropriating the bourgeoisie leading the peasants it imposed the planned economy, the foreign trade monopoly and the national property. A transitional regime was imposed until the Stalinist bureaucracy changed into restorationist bureaucracy in the ’80 and the transitional regime from capitalism to socialism was interrupted. The proletariat dictatorship was abolished. This counterrevolution wasn’t pacific. The political revolution process was defeated in 1989 at the cost of millions of deaths.  

We believe we don’t have to take categories as the worker state as something fixed and unchangeable, something schematic. For example the agrarian workers unions of Trujillo were organized and led by the NGOs in the beginning. This doesn’t n match with the idea of the unions are founded “heroically” as in the old days of the fight for the 8 hours or during the ’70 against the military dictatorship. We mean: we are in front of a union or not? We reject its union character? We would say it is part of the NGOs? If we think dialectically we don’t consider the distorted character of these unions to prove they don’t have the character of worker organization. We have to remember comrades that every union now is born distorted, under the influence of the CGTP, chatting about “RSE” (“Social Responsibility of the Company”), that they don’t want to be bosses’ opponents but to share out in a best way, etc. They don’t even speak about classism. However in spite of this we still consider these organizations as unions.         

The old worker state of China like the unions of the workers of the agro- industry of Trujillo, were born in a distorted way. The difference is the advisor of the NGO thought they could do a brilliant career in the bourgeois regime. Chinese bureaucrats were forced to abolish the bourgeois regime in the middle of enormous historical events under the pressure of the same working class and the poor peasants under exceptional conditions.

The need of an International center, yesterday and today

Finally, when you state that:”…what is unquestionable is that based on the concept of deformed worker state the “orthodox Trotskyism” distorted and even “refuted” the theory of the permanent revolution to justify its adaptation to Stalinist and petty-bourgeois nationalism policy…”

To recognize the character of worker state or not was not what led the centrist Fourth International to capitulate before stalinism. In 1963, for example, Mandel and Hansel reunified based on the recognition of Cuba like a worker state. Mandel and Healy denied that character and kept their international Committee. That did not prevent that such IC was servant of Stalinism similarly to the Unified Secretariat of Mandel-Hensel. For example, that IC supported Guillermo Lora when he betrayed in the revolution of 1971 rising up the Stalinist program of supporting General Torres and capitulating before that bourgeois nationalism. Then, Healy broke with Lora and Lambert to prostrate himself before the Arab bourgeoisie like stalinist-castrist of FPLP and FDLP did.

The question on the deformed worker state was a discovery of the Unified Secretariat.  More than that, it was a description of the reality. Mandel and Hansel sometimes were able to describe a fact blowing their noses. From that fact, of course, they did not draw the conclusion of political revolution. They transformed exception- triumphant revolutions led by petty bourgeois or Stalinist leaderships- into a rule, and that led them to the capitulation and adaptation before every emerging counterrevolutionary petty bourgeois or Stalinist leadership. The truth rule was the defeat and treason of the 99% of the revolutionary process of that period in the hands of Stalinism and its counterrevolutionary contention pact.

We believe that the degeneration of the Fourth had little to do with the erroneous theories. According to Trotsky, Bukarin gave to the Third International of Lenin a grotesque “theory” every week but this did not finish in a catastrophe. The  inevitable errors as regards characterization- that were not only of Bujarin but of all- finished to be corrected by a democratic discussion and a praxis in common guaranteed by the international center whose core was Lenin and Trotsky.

If an International center had existed, through discussion and praxis, it would have been possible to arrive at a Marxist theory about what happened in China since 1949 in full processes. And not only that. The Fourth during and at the end of the war ended up adapting and not playing a decisive role in China in 1949 due to the dispersion of its international center, the same happened to the Chinese section. The role that a Chinese section could have played within the democratic centralism of a Fourth International with a revolutionary center only can be imagined. The great opportunity that the Chinese masses gave to Trotskyism could not be better. The Chinese Trotskyism was known by the factory workers and had the lessons of 1925-1927. But it was not enough to have old laurels. Within a real Leninist democratic centralism, the Chinese section could have guided in the new situation, and rose up against Stalinism by organizing the fraction of revolutionary and internationalist workers against Mao. The crime against the Chinese working class was that a revolutionary center did not exist. For 1949, Hansen, Cannon, Mandel, and Pablo forgave each other, ones because of abandoning the international center and the others for their capitulation before the chauvinism in the war. They already started their romance with Tito, then with Mao, years later with Castro saying that those counterrevolutionary bureaucrats were centrist even unconscious revolutionaries. From a pablist-cannonist centrist center (they did not split till 1953), the Chinese section was unable to get a authentically Trotskyist leadership.

Well, comrades, sorry for this long first reflection but we consider necessary to give the foundation of our position on the former workers states question to be able to continue the debate. Anyway, we attach a supplement of the IWO that talks about the situation in East Europe, Russia, and China facing the world crisis and also on the ’89 historical processes. This press will help in the debate.
These are some comments on your letter and we expect your positions on this to further the debate among revolutionaries.
Internationalist  greetings,

Laura Sanchez, Rafa Cruz, Anibal Vera and Roque Sanchez of SCI -FLTI.
There was an error in this gadget