How do we respond to the recent riots from a working class point of view? As well as the statement put out by the ICC [1], there have been statements from the International Communist Tendency, Solidarity Federation and others, and there has been lively and sometimes heated discussion on various discussion forums, including libcom. Here we will try and take up the main issues rather than look in detail at any particular contribution.

First and foremost, the statements by the three organisations all start by denouncing both the bourgeoisie’s hypocritical campaign to demonise the rioters in the media, which also prepares the ground for the harsh sentences meted out, and the worsening conditions faced by the working class today that underpins the tensions that erupted in rioting. This is absolutely basic regardless of the fact that the riots took place – causing disruption and sometimes danger – in areas where workers and the most disadvantaged live. These are also the areas which suffer most from poverty, unemployment and police repression – the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham being the spark that set the whole thing off.

An effort to understand

“It is not for communists to condemn the riots. They are a sign of capitalism’s crisis and decay. Neither do we romanticise the riotous act as an effective form of struggle against capitalist exploitation” (ICT, https://www.leftcom.org/en/articles/2011-08-09/riots-in-britain-the-fruit-of-forty-years-of-capitalist-crisis [2]). And SolFed “will not condemn or condone those we don't know for taking back some of the wealth they have been denied all their lives” (https://libcom.org/article/anarchists-respond-london-riots-solidarity-federation?page=1 [3]). This does not mean the working class has nothing to say on the question of behaviour. SolFed, finding the riots blamed on anarchism, their political heritage, say clearly “there should be no excuses for the burning of homes, the terrorising of working people. Whoever did such things has no cause for support” and “people should band together to defend themselves when such violence threatens homes and communities”.

The Solfed statement was generally well received among the anarchists, and in general the question of behaviour, of ‘proletarian morality’ (even if not called that), came up in a lot of the online discussions in the libertarian milieu. The dominant mood was of reflection and concern, not one of blindly cheerleading the riots.

Illusions in the looting

However, there remains a widespread uncritical attitude to the issue of looting in particular. Posts such as “we shall critically sympathise the rioters, showing what is good (bourgeoisie rule and property contested) and also what is bad (hurting working class fellows) in the riots” (piter on libcom) see something positive in the looting, and others that tell us that as revolution will not be ‘pure’ we should accept the riots in their entirety, divisive and anti-proletarian behaviour included. Socialism and/or barbarism goes even further and, while recognising that this is not the negation of capitalism, looks at “the insurrectionary aspect … the fact that many of those rioting are getting themselves organised” and then extends the positive to include shopkeepers defending their property with baseball bats “taking action without waiting for the mediation of the police” (https://socialismandorbarbarism.blogspot.com/2011/08/open-letter-to-those-who-condemn_10.html [4]). As if the bourgeoisie, and the British in particular, had not spent hundreds of years honing the art of divide and rule, of setting different groups against each other and using it to their advantage!

A number of people have argued that looting somehow undermines commodity relations – if not subjectively then objectively as one poster on libcom put it. But this view fundamentally misunderstands the nature of the communist revolution and the role of consciousness within it. Under capitalism, commodity relations dominate everything, like a natural force. They can only be overcome by the ‘subjective’ determination of the working class to organise itself, expropriate the ruling class, and redistribute the social product on the basis of need. In massive struggles of the working class that have fallen short of the revolution itself we have seen clear tendencies in this direction. But looting, even when carried out in large groups, does not lead towards such a collective, social awareness: if anything it reinforces the grip of the commodity over the individual. Thus the ICT are correct to argue that “Far from being a liberating form of activity, this sort of ‘expropriation’ is simply a reflection of capitalist ideology”. The nature of the riots was put to the test in practice by several contributors to libcom when they first started. They went to see what was happening, and left because the situation was dangerous and there was no opportunity for any positive intervention. A more successful initiative was the one taken by Solfed members in Deptford, who called a street meeting that attracted about 100 people with the concern to put out any fires - an act of solidarity - but also to discuss the causes of the riots: “Many people spoke of the problems that young people and the whole working class is facing and the need to act collectively to make changes. Out of the discussion came a decision to hold an emergency demonstration the next day against the cuts and to highlight some of the causes behind the riots” (https://libcom.org/article/deptford-hackney-tottenham-respond [5]).

The Deptford meeting was focused on discussing the situation and trying to understand it. It  did not participate in the riot.

We do not look for a ‘pure’ class struggle. Wherever there is proletarian life and struggle this is always contested by the bourgeoisie. For instance in the assemblies in Spain we confronted the Real Democracy Now ideology aimed at reforming the capitalist state; in any strike workers come up against union efforts to keep them within the legal restrictions on pickets, solidarity and extension – but the key thing is that there is a real workers’ struggle being expressed, a struggle that by its very nature can open out to other sectors of the working class and draw them in. In the riots there was no such possibility. On the contrary, the very methods used by the riots tended to create fear and division within the working class, providing an alibi for increased repression and further austerity.

The question of perspective

“We believe that the legitimate anger of the rioters can be far more powerful if it is directed in a collective, democratic way and seeks not to victimise other workers, but to create a world free of the exploitation and inequality inherent to capitalism” (SolFed). True the rioters have much to be angry about, but riots are not the way to do anything about it, quite the reverse. But it is not enough just to address the legitimate anger of rioters – what about the legitimate indignation of the whole working class? Here we agree with the ICT: “unless and until the working class begins to see there is an alternative to capitalism and begins to struggle politically there will be more outbursts from those who have no stake in this society…”. It is the struggle of the working class as a whole that will provide a perspective for all those in society who have no stake in capitalism. Riots express the lack of perspective that results from the absence of a clear proletarian alternative.

Capitalism has repeatedly faced the working class with situations where worsening conditions become increasingly unbearable. At certain moments the exploited have responded by launching a collective revolutionary assault on capitalism, as in Paris in 1871, Russia 1917, or Germany 1919-23. In the 1930s, when the revolutionary wave had already been defeated, there were hunger marches of unemployed workers as well as other struggles and strikes – but all the time the working class was being tied more closely into the bourgeoisie’s ideology and perspective, the insane, murderous perspective of imperialist conflict on a global scale. Today the bourgeoisie cannot provide any perspective for society, they cannot even agree on whether they should emphasise austerity or quantitative easing. Nor, as the ICT point out, has the working class struggle reached the level where it can pose the alternative to capitalism (except for the tiny minority that is convinced of the possibility of communist revolution).

In a post on the ICC forum, a member of the CWO, Jock, makes this comment: “Everyone of us who commented had expected and ICC response that it was "all down to decomposition" but instead we find a materialist analysis which most of us agree with. Ironic therefore that Baboon should then criticise our statement for not mentioning decomposition when we were relieved to find that the ICC had not done so either! After 40 years of capitalist stagnation it is not surprising that social disintegration is taking place…” In fact, the last sentence accords entirely with our analysis of decomposition: it is precisely the long-drawn out nature of the crisis which is at the root of the present tendency towards “social disintegration”. The whole ICC statement on the riots is framed in our materialist analysis of “capitalism’s crisis and decay” in circumstances in which the bourgeoisie cannot impose any perspective on society, however destructive and insane, and where “the race is on for the revival of a really liberating movement of the working class to present an alternative to capitalist barbarism” to use some of the ICT’s words. It is no surprise that the ICT recognise so many aspects of the decomposition of capitalism, even if they do not share our analysis, because that is the reality of the world today. 

Alex, 29/8/11

Quite a significant part of the various sectors of the population in this part of India i.e. West Bengal, seems to be agog with the possibility of change. They are celebrating the decisive electoral defeat of the ruling leftist combine and the landslide victory of the rightist combine. Some are excited simply by the thought and fact that the Stalinist ruling combine has at last been ousted from governmental power. People were so much disgusted with the unlimited arrogance and corruption of almost everyone linked in one way or other with the ruling Stalinist clique. Some people said openly, “we don’t bother about what is going to happen in the coming period. We bother only about ousting the Communist Party of India (Marxist) from governmental power. They are unbearable.” Thus this instant jubilation of this part of the masses of people including the working class and the exploited sectors is quite understandable. These people seem to be relishing a profound sense of relief.

Almost the whole media, print as well as electronic, is leaving no stone unturned in propagating and strengthening the notion of change. They are depicting the CPI (M) as the most notorious villain of the whole episode, the embodiment of everything negative, the root of all evils. On the other hand the victorious rightists combine and particularly its supreme leader is being presented as the symbol of honesty and heroism. They are also never tired of singing paeans of praise for the unlimited power of democracy and particularly that of the purity and maturity of Indian democracy. Quite a significant part of the population seems to be swallowing with relish all such materials circulated by the press in this context. It seems to be working overtime to bring home this point to everyone. The new ruling alliance is  not only enacting scenes of high dramatic populism to show that it is fundamentally different from the previous regime, on every occasion, almost every day, but also seems to be enjoying it wholeheartedly. The bourgeoisie seems to have been quite successful at least temporarily in the task of mystification.

But it has failed to mystify and befool each and everyone. A significant part of the population has not at all been moved by this propaganda of change. A lot of young people who have been eligible to vote for the first time have refused to cast their votes according to some reliable survey reports.

It is urgently necessary to pause for a while to reflect on the real form and content of the change and stop being swept over simply by the dreamy idea of it.

We cannot but point out that whatever the hype about the virtue and power of democracy, this particular election has shown very clearly the dying condition of democracy. Without the direct protection and prop of the bureaucratic military machine it is absolutely unable to stand steadily and function. In its youthful phase of life in the nineteenth century, capitalism had the upper hand and full control of the bureaucratic military machine. But now in its phase of senility it is under the full control and protection of the latter. What a great fall! The centre of gravity of capitalist power is not in the parliament now; it has shifted more and more to the permanent bureaucratic, military and judicial machinery. Various sectors of the bourgeois think tanks are lamenting over this inevitable transformation and degeneration of democracy.

In this context it should be mentioned that democracy, including the purest, oldest and the maturest varieties, is based on three things. These are use of money, muscle and mystification power. In the backward countries like India the use of money and muscle power is predominant. In addition to this, the power of mystification of the working class and toiling masses plays also a very important role. Every political party and leader participating in the electoral battle resorts to random lying and mystification. It is something like a competition in lying. Those who are able to make the people believe the lies as truth are victorious in the electoral game. In the more advanced countries the use of the power of mystification is very much predominant. Nevertheless, in these days accusations of intimidation of the electorate are also being made even in the USA.

Illusion and reality of change

The now ousted leftist combine came to governmental power after a landslide electoral victory way back in 1977 dealing a crushing defeat to the Congress, the rightist ruling party of that time. The leftist combine then claimed to be most determined crusader against the repressive methods and all-out corruption of the then ruling party. They clamored for change and economic development. They pledged to work for the defense of the interest of the working class and the exploited strata of society. They asked their cadres not to be revengeful against those of the previous ruling party who terrorized them and drove them out of their houses and compelled them to flee away. People then, like now, were disgusted with the extreme arrogance, corruption and terrorizing methods of, and the terrorized environment created by, the goons sheltered and used by the Congress party. Then, like now, they were eager for the change of the unbearable, suffocating social atmosphere. They thought and took the election as a means to oust the Congress party and bring the leftist combine to governmental power. Then also there was much hype about the wave of change sweeping over various parts of India. But it did not take much time for the cloud of illusion to be gradually dispersed and the actual reality of the then new leftist regime to be more and more exposed. The protagonists and defenders of that regime gradually began to resort more and more to the same repressive methods and drowned deeper and deeper into the same sea of corruption. They played not only an active but also leading role in the massacre of the masses of peasantry and killing of the working class struggling against the attacks on their living and working conditions in various parts of west Bengal. All such movements have been severely repressed not only by the official police force but also by the unofficial regiment of hired goons. Socio--economic problems, particularly the living and working conditions of the working class and various sectors of the toiling masses of people, began to worsen with each passing day. The problem of unemployment also has worsened.

Today’s victorious parties are very vocal against the all-out corruption and the repressive methods of the crushingly defeated leftist combine. They have claimed themselves to be the vanguard of change. Their most important slogan is “change not revenge” and economic development. They are also pledging to work for the interest of the poor.

But these very parties are the offspring of the Congress party which resorted to repressive methods since the transfer of political power to it by the British in 1947, and particularly in the early seventies. People were afraid of even casting their votes according to will. The members of the Congress party then were the vanguard of the biggest massacre of the sympathizers of the Maoist movement in 1971 in the heart of Calcutta. The state machinery was brazenly used for this massacre by the then Congress chief minister. Lots of leaders, young militants and supporters of the Maoist movement were then killed just after arrest even without the farce of any trial. Many were killed in fake clashes. The houses of lots of poor and landless peasants in various parts of west Bengal who supported the Maoist movement were demolished forcibly by the goons of the then Congress party. Lots of people fled away from their residential places out of fear.

Quite a significant portion of the leaders who were directly involved in those killings and massacre are still leaders of the now victorious rightist combine. But the massacre of the common people struggling for their various demands against a government which has been resorting to more and more repressive methods and all sorts of corruption at all levels has  given a good opportunity to those rightist leaders to wipe out the accumulated blemish and polish their political image to a great extent. This may be repeated in course of time in the case of the severely disgraced and humiliated leftists in the opposition now. After some period of time it is quite likely in the present national and international situation that the new ruling combine will be compelled to resort similar repressive measures with one excuse or other against the inevitable movements of the working class, various sections of the peasantry and the unemployed. It may even surpass all past limits. This is likely to provide the necessary conditions to the disgraced leftists of today to wipe out the thick blemish and polish their political image. In this way the left and the right of capital will help each other and keep capital alive.

The working class and bourgeois democracy

According to the thoughts of Marx and Lenin also, the working class and toiling, exploited masses of people are given the right every four or five or six years to choose by whom they would like to be exploited and repressed in the next five years. So whoever wins it is basically the same for the working class and exploited people. History has proved the validity of this assertion again and again. There can not be any end to the exploitation and repression of the working class by the change of the ruling team or party. The political management of the capitalist socio-economic and political system is only changed through the election. The real dictatorship of the capitalist system remains unchanged and intact. Again according to the concepts of Marx democracy is the best form of bourgeois dictatorship. This dictatorship lies hidden in the relation of production of capital based on exploitation and repression of the working class and toiling masses of people. This relation has nowhere and never been determined by democratic methods. Factories are nowhere run by the democratic method. All aspects of production including prices are not determined democratically.

The bureaucratic military machine, the permanent, most important and strongest pillar of the state, the sole weapon for carrying out exploitation and repression, remains the same. The “parasitic excrescence on the social body” will not only remain intact but it will be much more swollen in the coming period. That means nothing but further intensification of the exploitation of the working class and toiling people in the coming period. This can never be lessened in a single country or part of a country.

There is no fundamental difference between the leftist and rightist political apparatus so far as the defense of the interest of capital is concerned. And for this the leftist political apparatus of capital is indispensable, particularly in this historical phase in the life of global capital when it has been transformed into the biggest obstacle in the way of further progress of humanity and proletarian revolution is so urgently needed. Not only that, the present advanced phase of senility and decadence of the capitalist system will lead humanity gradually towards total destruction if there is absence of world proletarian revolution. This only can destroy capitalism and save humanity. In such a situation the leftist apparatus including each and every Stalinist, Trotskyite or Maoist variety without any exception has been and will be the sole savior of the global capitalist system.

The world bourgeoisie has realized very clearly and profoundly that the leftist political apparatus is indispensable to it in this historical period of unlimited barbarism, where the historic choice is between total destruction of humanity or world proletarian revolution opening the door for the creation of a borderless world communist society free from any sort of exploitation and repression. They can point to the Stalinist and Maoist regimes and the ruling ‘communist parties’ to discredit and attack the perspective of communism. They know very well that if this is grasped by the masses of working class their existence will be fatally endangered. They needed and still need the ‘socialist states’ very urgently only to discredit scientific socialism which for the world working class and toiling people had and still has a great attraction. Their sole aim is to deal a fatal blow to this attraction. In this reactionary task for the defense and prolongation of the life of the totally anachronistic and historically needless capitalist system, the leftist political apparatus is absolutely indispensable. With this end in view they openly abuse the Stalinists, Maoists and Trotskyites in a very calculated way so that the latter can present themselves as the true defenders of the interest of the masses of the population against the attacks of the bourgeois state and thus can derail their struggle for liberation from all sorts of exploitation and repression.

Individual goodwill vs material conditions      

The course of history has not been determined by the goodwill or not of this or that individual, male or female or group or political party at the helm of affairs. It has been determined by the material conditions of the predominant relation of production in a particular historical phase and the conditions of class struggle in that phase. The latter has been the determining factor in the political goodwill or lack of it or its change.

Whatever tall promises are made in the time of election propaganda, whatever goodwill for the masses of people are shown in words, the new government will have to serve the interest of the capitalist system in West Bengal. It may shout aloud that its only aim is to serve the interest of humanity (Manush) as a whole. The victorious rightist combine never tires of asserting that their victory is the victory of mankind (Manush), undifferentiated and classless. But can the interest of capital and that of humanity as a whole and particularly that of the working class and exploited masses of people be the same and defended simultaneously, particularly in this historic phase?

The global capitalist system entered its   phase of senility or decadence since the beginning of the last century. The First World War was the definitive proof of this. Since then it is passing through permanent crisis which was expressed in the outbreak of the great depression of 1929. This led to the breaking out of the Second World War. This was suppressed to some extent after the war in the new international imperialist configuration of the division of the world into two imperialist blocks led by two victorious superpowers, US and USSR. The crisis raised its head again in the end sixties putting an end to the so-called glorious thirty years. Since then the crisis has been intensifying more and more with the passage of time as the relative saturation of the world market gets deepened. In such an international situation the only condition for the existence of capital is more exploitation and repression of the working class and toiling masses. The more any government of any capitalist state will be able to ensure this the brighter will be the possibility of continued existence of the historically needless capitalist system at least in that state. The task of any leftist or rightist government is to ensure this. The task of the new government in west Bengal can never be otherwise. Whatever its good will, real or fake, it will be compelled by the evolution of material conditions of global capital and class struggle to further intensify exploitation and repression of the working class and toiling masses and resort to more fascist methods. Attacks on the living and working conditions of the working class cannot but be further intensified in the coming period. There is little hope for any resolution of the problem of unemployment. This is likely to worsen in the days ahead. There is every possibility that the roles of the political parties and alliances will be interchanged. The right in government will demonstrate their true colors in reality and the left in opposition will also show their original colors. They will leave no stone unturned to present themselves as the true defenders of the working class and toiling people and thus try their best to derail their class struggle from the class terrain and the process of coming to consciousness. There is fundamental unity between the left and right of capital so far as the cause of the defense of basic interest of capital is concerned. There is of course a difference—that of methods.

Task of the working class

The working class should not be swept away by the hype, hysteria and illusion of change. They should not take sides in the dogfight between the rightist and leftist political apparatus of capital for capturing the covetable post of top political management of the affairs of capital. Both are the sworn enemies of the working class.

It should rather focus its whole attention on the intensification of its class struggle against each and every attack of capital on its living and working conditions, developing the self-organization and control of the struggle, its extension to all sectors and its unification. Constant collective struggle against all sorts of mystification by the left and right of capital and for coming to proletarian consciousness is indispensable. This is the only way to resist the attacks and defend its class interest.

Saki 16/7/11        

It has been calculated that between December 2006 and April 2011 the “war on drugs” cost more than 40 thousand deaths (amongst drug dealers, military and civilians). The cost in torture and robbery is incalculable. This is a war waged as much by the politicians and military as the mafia gangs. The bourgeoisie tries to pretend that this is a problem outside of its system, but the truth is that the spread of drugs and crime stems from the same root as any war around capitalist competition to win markets. At the same time it shows the difficulty of the ruling class to act in a coherent, unified manner.  The bourgeoisie’s lack of political control, the growing conflicts within the ruling class itself, brutally and clearly express the advance of capitalism’s decomposition.

 The weight of decomposition has certainly taken on growing dimensions in the least developed countries, where the bourgeoisie is less able to control its differences. Thus we see in countries such as Colombia, Russia or Mexico that the mafia has merged into the structures of government in such a way that each mafia group is associated with some sector of the bourgeoisie and defends its interests in confrontations with other fractions, using state structures as their battlegrounds. This exacerbates the whole struggle of “each against all” and accelerates the rot in the social atmosphere.

This does not mean that the more industrialised countries are immune to the process of decomposition. Although the bourgeoisie in these countries, for the moment, can to a large extent push some aspects of decomposition onto the periphery and act in a relatively more orderly way to damp down its differences, it is not exempt from this dominant tendency. If the specter of drug trafficking has not become a dead weight for them, there are other aspects of the advance of decomposition that effect them, for example terrorism. It is important to understand that the advance of decomposition, even though it dominates the whole capitalist system, does not unfold in a homogeneous way. Nonetheless, given the circumstances affecting the whole world, we can still affirm that the social disintegration we are seeing in countries like Mexico is the horizon towards which the rest of the world is heading.

Without a doubt it is the advance of barbarism that dominates the present world situation. This is deeply connected to the impoverishment that is being accelerated by the crisis.

The advance of capitalism’s decomposition

At the beginning of the 90s we said: “Amongst the most important characteristics of the decomposition of capitalist society, it is necessary to underline the bourgeoisie’s growing difficulty in controlling the evolution of the situation at the political level”.[1]The reason for this lies in the difficulty that the ruling class is having in ensuring its political unity. The diverse fractions into which the bourgeoisie is divided are confronting each other, not only at the level of economic competition, but also (and fundamentally) politically. Faced with the drawn out economic crisis, there are some unifying tendencies, which are mediated by the state; but they only take place around short-term economic aims. At the level of political leadership, the worsening of competition caused by the crisis provokes the widespread dispersal of the bourgeoisie’s forces. On the international scale there is a growing tendency towards the struggle of “each against all”, a generalised lack of discipline at the political level, which prevents the imposition of the order that the old imperialist blocs were able to maintain during the Cold War. The atmosphere of “every man for himself” which defines the international situation is repeated in the activity of the bourgeoisie in each country. It is only in this framework that we can explain the enormous growth in drug trafficking.

Decomposition did not begin on this or that day, but is a series of phenomena that were already present in the previous phases of capitalist development and which have increased during the period of capitalism’s decadence. But it is in the last decades of the 20th century that they were magnified and became dominant. Drug trafficking is a graphic example of this “progress”.

 In the middle of the 19th century, during the phase of the ascendancy of capitalism, the business of drug trafficking had an impact. The trade in opium created political difficulties that led to wars, but in these cases the state was directly involved and the ruling class was not threatened by any resulting instability. The “Opium Wars” directed by the British state are a historical reference point, but were not in themselves a dominant element during that period.

The importance of drugs and the formation of mafia groups with an underground life (with connections of the state, but secret ones) has taken on increasing importance during the decadent phase of capitalism, although at the beginning it did not have the same dimensions it has today. In the first decades of the 20th century the bourgeoisie certainly tried to limit and control through laws and regulation the cultivation, preparation and traffic of certain drugs, but only because it wanted to gain better control of these commodities.

If you think that “drug dealing” is something that the bourgeoisie and its state repudiate, you would be wrong. It is this class that has encouraged the spread of drugs and has made good use of them. Methamphetamine, for example, was developed in Japan in 1919, but it was in the Second World War that its production and use expanded as the Allied and Japanese armies used it to hype up their soldiers and to exacerbate aggressive attitudes.

Until the last quarter of the 20th century the state did not have too many problems controlling drugs. But in the 60s, with the war in Vietnam, some derivatives of cocaine were given to attack-dogs, and then heroin was distributed amongst the troops to placate demoralisation and to make use of the ferocity that it can awaken. With this use Uncle Sam incubated a demand for the drug, and it was the same North American government which encouraged drug production in the countries of the periphery, even supplying its own laboratories.

And although the effect of social degradation began to spread in the US, this still did not worry the bourgeoisie very much. President Nixon did declare the “War on Drugs” in 1971 but he knew that most drug production and sale was still under the direct or indirect control of the US state and of the states that were allied to the bloc under its command.

The states in control of drugs

In the middle of the 20th century in Mexico, the production and distribution of drugs was still not important. Nevertheless it was strictly controlled by part of the state. Not only did the police guard and protect the incipient mafia (as was the case of “Lola La Chata” famous drug dealer in the Federal District during the 40s), but there was a whole confusion between state structures and the mafias. For example, a character like Mazario Ortiz, who stood in as the governor of Coahuila and was a founding member of the PNR and Secretary of Agriculture, made good use of his “investiture” in order to freely distribute opium. The DFS (Direccion Federal de Seguridad, which functioned as a political police) began life headed by military men who controlled drugs as personal businesses.

In the 80s it was the North American State, once again, which wanted to increase the production and consumption of drugs. In the “Irangate” affair (1986) it came to light that the Reagan government, facing limitations on the  budget for aid to the military opposition groups in Nicaragua (known as the “contras”), used resources provided by the sale of arms to Iran, but above all, by CIA funds derived from the sale of drugs. In this tangle, the US government pushed the Colombian mafias to increase production, at the same time assuring material and logistical support from the governments of Panama, Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador, Colombia and Guatemala. The same government, in order to “expand the market”, produced “derivatives” of cocaine that were cheaper and therefore easier to sale, though more destructive.

This is what the big boss did in order to bankroll similar adventures in the rest of Latin America. In Mexico the US was behind the “dirty war”, which was the war of extermination that the state carried out during the 70s and 80s against the guerrillas, led by the army and paramilitary groups, who were given carte blanche to kill, kidnap and torture. Much of this was funded by money from drugs. Projects such as “Operation Condor”, presented as operations against drugs production, were used in order to attack the guerrillas and protect the cultivators. During this period, according to figures obtained by Anabel Hernandaz, it was the same army and Federal Police who, in association with the mafia groups, controlled the operations to do with drugs[2].

As the above demonstrates the production and distribution of drugs has been constantly under the control of states: what has changed though is that there have been a quantitative and qualitative growth in the indiscipline amongst the different bourgeois groups that have been integrated into the state apparatus. In Mexico the period of the Cold War was associated with the monolithic power of the PRI, which from its foundation (1929) had the task of holding together the “revolutionary family” by distributing sinecures and fragments of power in order to ensure harmony between bourgeois fractions. With the ending of the Cold War, the breakdown of the alliances of the various imperialist powers has been replicated within each country (with their specificities). In Mexico’s case this has been generally expressed through open disputes between fractions of the bourgeoisie. In order to try and overcome this situation there was a change of the governing party and the “decentralisation” of the reins of power. This meant that the state governors and municipal presidents consolidated their own regional power bases, and according to their interests, each of them linked up with one of the mafia gangs, leading to the growth of these groups and at the same time feeding the confrontations between them.

Is there a solution to capitalism’s decomposition?

The acceleration of the barbarity that marks drugs trafficking and the “war” associated with it, which brings death and suffering to the many and higher profits to the few has been generated by capitalism. The entire ruling class is undoubtedly involved in this conflict, which does not mean that it suffers the consequences. However it does know that the worst effects fall upon the workers and it is more than willing to use this in order to assure its control over the exploited. Thus it is the exploited masses that are being killed or are abandoning the land due to fear or direct threats. The bourgeois uses this atmosphere to spread fear, to paralyse all discontent or push it towards desperate actions.

The bourgeoisie, cosseted in its own mystified world, believes that the existence of this problem can find a solution through political action and strategies against drugs. An example of this is the “Global Commission on Drugs Policy” which criticises the policies sponsored by the USA since the 70s, and instead proposes as a solution the revision and reform of the classification of drugs, with the aim of legalising the use of some drugs and ensuring better control of their production and distribution. There are other proposals, even put forwards by sections of the non-exploiting classes, such as the peace movement led by Javier Sicilia[3], which although reflecting real discontent and a rejection of the present barbarity, also expresses a dead-end desperation. Javier’s 4th June declaration exemplifies this, talking about the need... “to reach out and touch the head of the political class, those of the criminals and to get them to transform their lives into ones of human beings in our service. They have the possibility of change if they change their hearts”. Thus despite the reality of Javier’s pain and discontent, as that of many of those who participate in his caravan, this approach ends up placing confidence in the bourgeoisie’s ability to carry out compassionate actions and to solve the system’s growing putrefaction

In reality, the only solution open to the bourgeoisie in seeking to limit the further explosion of barbarism is to cohere around one of the mafia groups and thus to marginalise the rest. This is what happened in Colombia where the crimes and outrages were reduced. The bourgeoisie, through the government, backed the dominance of one of the cartels in order to gain a better control of the situation. This did not mean a solution to the barbarity, only that it was pushed into a region which the state did not control and onto other countries. In Mexico’s case, the bourgeoisie will try to find a conciliation of interests, but in the context of the approaching elections (2012), which will produce even greater struggles over economic and political control at the national level, these differences and the struggle of “each against all” will only get worse, there is no possibility that the bourgeoisie will find a solution to the growing decomposition and corrosion of its system. only the revolutionary activity of the working class can put an end to the nightmare we are living in. what engels (1892) said about the choice facing HUMANITY - “socialism or barbarism” - IS truer than ever.

Tatlin 6/11 (First published in Revolución Mundial 123 [11], the ICC’s publication in Mexico).

 

Hurricane Irene slammed a vast region of the US from North Carolina to Maine over the course of the last weekend and into Tuesday, dragging away homes and bridges, cutting off roads, submerging neighborhoods underwater, killing at least 35 people, and leaving at least 5.5 million homes and businesses across the region without power in the worst hurricane in decades (still 1,700,000 as of Wednesday, August 31). In New York City alone, some 100,000 customers were without electricity. Utility companies said it would take days to restore electricity in more accessible areas and weeks in the hardest hit and more remote regions. As of Tuesday, August 30 floods were expected to wreak yet more devastation as some rivers in Vermont, upstate New York, and New Jersey were still expected to crest. While homeowners are left to their own devices as to how to repair damage or relocate altogether as they discover that their insurance does not cover flood damage, they, and the rest of the population, are treated to a shameless display of political exploitation and disregard for human suffering by our exploiters. Whether they are to the right or the left or at the center of the capitalist state’s political apparatus, they are trying to reap political benefits from the devastation. Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said that disaster relief money should be paid for with cuts to other programs. He was immediately rebuked by the White House when Jay Carney took the opportunity to try and win brownie points for the Democratic Party by saying, “I wish that commitment to looking for offsets had been held by the House majority leader and others, say, during the previous administration when they ran up unprecedented bills and never paid for them". The ruling class, be it the right, extreme right wing of the Tea party, or the democrats, are making use of this event to fuel their respective rhetoric in the developing electoral campaign, as each political actor poses either as the champion of a ‘fiscally responsible’ government with a ‘balanced’ approach to budget deficit reduction that includes some ‘revenues’ – the democrats – or one that ‘helps the middle man’ by not including rising taxes – the right. The media, those mouthpieces of the ruling class, help either this side or the other as they frame the aftermath of the hurricane in terms of whether and how much aid the government should be prepared to give. Cantor and Carney may well pose as ‘opponents’ in the debate as each vies for power for their respective parties. The fact of the matter, however, is that the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) contingency fund dipped to about $800 million earlier this year and that the damage by Hurricane Irene is estimated at anywhere between $10 and $20 billion. The Republican-led House has already approved annual funding legislation to replenish FEMA’s contingency fund in which additional dollars for disaster aid were offset by cuts elsewhere. The Democratic-held Senate has yet to act on that measure, but the new emergency, coming at the tail-end of a year full of ‘natural disasters’ in the US and in the midst of a ferocious recession, will likely resolve the apparent hesitation by the Democrats in the Senate by giving them a reason to pass the legislation, notwithstanding their raucous blame-game at the present time. Cantor and Carney may disagree as to who is to blame for the current financial dire straits of US capital, but they cannot disagree that cuts will have to be implemented. Facing an unprecedented economic crisis, accompanied by enormous budget deficits which more and more states are unable to finance and sustain, certainly the ruling class has reasons to worry about how it will manage to provide the least possible relief while maintaining its credibility and boost people's confidence in its state apparatus. By contrast, for a great number of the victims of the hurricane, facing the costs of repairing the damage is a real tragedy which may bring with it total financial bankruptcy, not to mention the human loss. Looking at each side from the perspective of the working class, it becomes obvious that the mud-slinging in which the ruling class is currently engaged is proof of their utter failure to address the population's most urgent needs. In an attempt to shore up the tattered image of a quarreling ruling class, the media campaign turned to gathering kudos for the actions of the several governors, mayors, federal agencies, CEO’s of transit systems involved in the evacuations and rescue efforts. Indeed, the pre and post-hurricane media blitz serves several purposes: 1. By imposing a virtual black out on all other news and conducting a veritable media barrage in the days building up to Hurricane Irene’s landing, the media subtly suggested images of a violent and catastrophic ‘natural event’ against which our rulers could not humanly do enough to protect the population in case the hurricane’s impact would have been even more devastating than what it actually was; 2. By giving extensive coverage to the ‘plans of action’ put forth by the various governors and mayors of the cities and states impacted by the hurricane the media helped strengthen the image of a caring, prepared, and efficient state apparatus, thus suggesting that any grievance directed against it regarding the ensuing human suffering is unreasonable and unfounded, while tying the destiny of the affected population to the presence and intervention of the state. The conclusion that the population should draw from all of this is that another ‘Katrina’ will not be repeated.

Cantor and Carney are not the only politicians who see in a human tragedy the opportunity for political advantage. Mayor Bloomberg of New York City, that other reckless capitalist, sees in Hurricane Irene an opportunity to boost his own public image, which was battered at the time of the snow storm of last winter. On Friday, August 26th Mr. Bloomberg ordered mandatory evacuation of 370,000 people from low-lying areas most prone to flooding and ordered the Metropolitan Transit System shut down as of noon of Saturday, August 27th, until Monday. Metro-North, the LIRR, the PATH train to Jersey City, and AMTRACK were also shut down. This was an unprecedented action by a mayor of the city. The three metropolitan airports were also shut down. Measures of this kind have been studied ever since the notorious failure by FEMA and all other federal agencies to prepare for and provide relief in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina put the question to the credibility of the capitalist state in facing up with emergency situations. Therefore, Mr. Bloomberg did nothing ‘extraordinary’. What is indeed extraordinary, are the fame and glory he claims for himself and his ability to ‘save the lives of New Yorkers’, an easy claim to make, given the fact that Hurricane Irene left New York City comparatively unscathed! Had the hurricane hit the city with the same or similar violence as it did the rest of the region, the problems that the latter is experiencing – i.e. power shortages, homelessness, loss of lives and belongings, dirty water – would necessarily be tenfold. Why? Because capitalism has no ability to update the rotting infrastructures of its decaying cities to face up to the demands put on them by a changing climatic situation, ultimately the cause of the innumerable ‘natural disasters’ of the recent times, themselves caused by capitalism. Furthermore, the way in which capitalist production is organized requires the reckless and chaotic concentration of human labor in the megalopolis of the planet. The urban ‘planning’ of cities like New Orleans and Haiti, or the very urbanization of an archipelago like Japan, are a direct result of capitalism’s need to concentrate the population wherever it is the most profitable for its own needs, with no consideration for risk factors to the population it exploits. The catastrophes that ensued in those areas are the total responsibility of capitalism. This kind of urban ‘planning’ makes preparing for emergency situations and rescue operations extremely difficult and inefficient. The need for profit further aggravates the situation by significantly curtailing any serious attempt at evacuations. It also demands that, when evacuations do occur, workers are ordered back to work well ahead of the stabilization of the situation. This is what both Governor Christie of New Jersey and mayor Bloomberg did. In New York City, workers were expected back to work last Monday, even though the transportation system was not back to full operation. In New Jersey, Governor Christie ordered all state employees back to work in a similar fashion. Mr. Christie too, like Mr. Bloomberg, exploited the situation to his own political advantage as his popularity wanes in the face of the draconian austerity measures he has recently imposed on the workers in his state. In a display of total hypocrisy and political calculation he for once edited his right-wing Republican rhetoric of ‘small government’ and started to call on the administration and FEMA for total involvement as he declared the state of emergency for New Jersey!

As it has been the case for every emergency situation in recent memory – from Hurricane Katrina in 2005, to the infamous BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010, to the tornado that struck Joplin, Missouri a few months ago, just to mention a few events and just in the US – it will be left to the victims themselves and their neighbors, relatives, and friends to pick up the slack and piece together the tattered remnants of their existence. It has become evident that in the face of what they like to call ‘natural disasters’ all our exploiters have to offer us is ineptitude and the inability to either prepare before an emergency or organize effective rescue and repair after it, effectively turning every ‘natural disaster’ into a human catastrophe. Rather than being just an accidental occurrence, their political maneuvering, lack of adequate planning , and disregard for human suffering are symptomatic of a system that has reached its historic limits, with all this implies in terms of the urgency to finally overcome it.

Internationalism, US

 

The movement of the Indignados: A report of the demonstrations in Madrid at the end of July

The movement of the ‘Indignados’ in Spain provides us with some rich lessons. It shows a gradual rise in combativity of the exploited faced with the relentless deterioration of their living conditions and a deepening reflection about how to struggle, how to respond collectively to the economic crisis and the attacks of Capital. The movement has moreover seen expressions across Europe, notably in Greece, but also further afield, in countries like Israel and in Chile.

And the recent events at the end of July have confirmed this deep social discontent and the maturation of working class consciousness. Indeed, while the international media have largely ignored the events that hit Madrid at the heart of the summer, preferring to shine their spotlight on the removal of the remaining camps of protesters and proclaiming the death of the movement, the militants of the ICC who were present in the square have found instead that the tens of thousands of ‘Indignados’ who occupied the streets were motivated by a genuine desire to continue the struggle, knowing that the crisis would only create furher havoc and that the struggle would of necessity resume. But it was above all the quality of discussions about the real nature of bourgeois democracy, the trap of reformism, sabotage of the movement by "Real Democracy Ya" (DRY), the importance of the assembly debates... that have truly excited our comrades. They immediately reported their intervention to all the militants of the ICC around the world to inform them of what they had witnessed and experienced. We are publishing this text below as it is, almost in its entirety, which explains its very direct and sometimes telegram-like style.

On the rallies in Madrid in July

Friday, July 22nd: The first columns of marching workers arrived from the working class towns on the outskirts of Madrid. According to many accounts, the arrival of these marchers resulted in massive assemblies and people being very happy together; they hugged, sang and discussed animatedly.

Saturday 23rd: Plaza Puerta del Sol and the surrounding streets were occupied. Maybe 10,000 or more, far more than was reported by the press and TV who spoke only of "hundreds of the Indignados". We were there and we distributed our supplement[1]. It was very well received. Small groups gathered around us. What was striking was the desire of people to talk and how they expressed themselves spontaneously against capitalism and in favour of the assemblies as the most valuable tool. The general assembly began after 10 o clock at night and was devoted entirely to the accounts from the marches. There were some very moving moments as the speakers were very excited and almost all spoke of revolution, of denouncing the system, of being radical (in the sense "going to the roots of the problem" as one of them said) .

Sunday 24th: In the morning in Retiro Park, the assemblies were devoted to specific themes: international coordination, national coordination, political action, using the web ... In the international coordination assembly there were individuals from Italy, Greece, Tunisia, France and also some young Spanish expatriates. A ‘European Day of Indignados’ was proposed and there were also two interventions talking about a World Day, with the axis being on "the fight against the cuts in social spending that is taking place everywhere today." One of us intervened to insist on the fact that more and more people are “in the same boat”. Someone else took up an initiative which arose in Valencia for an "international day of debate on the 15M" in which collectives would be invited not only from Spain but from other countries too [2]. This initiative was given explicit support by the moderator of the assembly.

That said, in the general assembly that followed, there was some manipulation. The focus was solely on the reports from each of the "themed" assemblies, preventing any unscheduled interventions. In addition, the reports from the speakers were too long. The report from the International Coordinating Committee was relegated to last place when many participants had already left. The spokesperson - who we hadn’t seen in the committee - didn’t say anything about the proposed day and we weren’t able to intervene to rectify this.

In the afternoon there was a massive demonstration (100,000 people). There was a lively atmosphere; we succeeded in distributing our press and there were many discussions. At a given point, the police erected a roadblock in the Paseo de La Castellana. Instead of chosing confrontation, the demonstrators divided themselves onto several adjacent streets and then regrouped, encircling the police. The police plan was made to look ridiculous as they found themselves surrounded on all sides with no possibility of reacting [3].

In the evening there was an assembly dedicated to discussing "state and economy." A Catalan who seemed to clearly defend the positions of ATTAC[4], made a very long speech of 30 minutes, in which he said we needed a "cooperative system", that the state was "disappearing" under the weight of the "markets" and also that nations were being "crushed". He suggested that the state and the nation were "revolutionary alternatives to capitalism today, that defending the state and the nation is revolutionary today." A number of interventions, including ours, vigorously opposed these views.

Monday 25th: There was a forum discussing several topics: ecology, feminism, politics, cooperatives . We had arranged a table for selling the press and decided to participate in one of these forums. We chose the one on For or against a new constitution.

A woman gave a long presentation. She spoke about a development of "representative" democracy towards a "participatory" democracy that the assemblies were spearheading. There should be assemblies for everything: to select the candidates of the political parties, to elect the union leaders, to approve the municipal budgets ... It would be, in her words, "a new order, an order of assemblies". All this, she presented as a new contribution to "political science" (sic) ...

The assembly wasn’t impressed by this "discovery". One young person said frankly that the problem was capitalism and that it was impossible to "reform" it or "democratise" it. Another spoke of revolution and wanted to return to the teachings of Lenin to form a revolutionary party. This provoked the anger of an anarchist who, while defending the need to destroy the state and establish the power of the assemblies (or, he added, Soviets) said that Lenin wanted to form a party without workers, with only intellectuals. Another speaker said that we need a revolutionary party which does not participate in the parliamentary or electoral game, but "only accepts the law of the assemblies."

Other interventions denounced the proposed new constitution. "We were wrong in 1978. Why fall into the same error today?". A youth from Ciudad Real spoke about "dual power": the power of the assemblies and the power of "so-called democracy" and he added that we should have "a strategy to achieve the triumph of the former." One girl expressed her thoughts thus: "They want to combine assemblies and constitution, but this is impossible, the assemblies have nothing to do with the constitution, they stand in total opposition to it". Some interventions were made in defense of a new constitution, but a guy who at first read a long text on a "draft new constitution provided by a group from Granada" came back in a second intervention to say that he was only speaking on behalf of the group, but that he preferred "the power of the assemblies". Interventions on the impossibility of reforming capitalism were loudly applauded as was the need to talk not about democracy in general but about the state. One of our comrades responded by saying that the state was the organ of the ruling class, that it was its repressive and bureaucratic apparatus with its troops, its police, its courts and its prisons, and all hidden by the democratic facade: "We, the exploited, have nothing but the assemblies to unify us, for enable us to think collectively and to make decisions together; the power of the assemblies - even if it is a long struggle – is not a utopia if this fight is part of a world-wide process." Several people came to congratulate us for this intervention.

Sensing that the wind was turning, the Catalan from the previous day changed his tune: he was in favour of "all the power to the assemblies" and for a "world government" and that "in this context, we would have enough force to establish new constitutions"(sic). A "marxist" speech, this? Maybe, but in the "Groucho tendency"[5]!

In the afternoon we went to Móstoles - an industrial town on the outskirts of Madrid - to visit the coordination of the assemblies of the South, the one that called the demonstration on June 19th. This was a very combative collective that had participated in 15 M with a class approach. A youth who was a very active participant expressed his joy about the 15M movement and discussed with us the analysis he had made of it: the denunciation of democracy, the shenanigans of DRY on which he made some very specific points, the revolutionary perspective, the awakening of the proletariat, the trap of immediatism, the need to develop consciousness ... The only point on which he disagreed with us was the analysis of Spain in 1936 which he saw as a self-management revolution. He was very happy to welcome us and we decided we would send our press to this location; he was also going to propose to the collective that it should participate in the meeting in Valencia in October.

Some thoughts

These three days were very intense, showing a movement of great depth.

It seems that there is still a large amount of discontent within the movement but there are other important aspects too: a desire to discuss and clarify, a sense of togetherness, a continual search for links ...

From the beginning, DRY and its satellites have done their best to keep the movement inside the straitjacket of a series of "specific demands"- the famous catalogue of democratic demands. There was always muted resistance in a large section and open opposition from a large minority.

However, two months have passed and "the confrontation between classes" has not yet come about[6]. Is this is a weakness? Is it a sign that the movement is running out of steam? If we review the reasons why class movements have ended in recent decades, we see that one of the causes is the physical defeat but the most common cause was the ideological defeat. Led away from its class terrain, the class has found itself locked in a combat with no way forward, which eventually led to deep demoralisation. But the exhaustion of the movement in France in autumn 2010 was not exactly a result of any of these factors. It was mainly due to the fact that the government would not give way despite the massive protest and, faced with that, it was difficult for the core of the assemblies to confront the unions. What we find in Spain, is a characteristic that’s even more "original" and certainly still a bit disorienting for some politicised minorities but also for the bourgeoisie itself: the movement avoids a direct confrontation and devotes itself to reflection and to developing links and solidarity ... We could say that the movement prefers to prepare for future confrontations by "building up its forces."

On the one hand, a degree of consciousness is emerging of the huge stakes on the immediate horizon[7] But there is also a degree of consciousness of the class’s own weaknesses, an awareness of  its lack of confidence in itself, the need to rediscover its class identity, in short, a recognition of the lack of maturity in being able to react to the ongoing situation of brutal attacks and deteriorating living standards.

In this context, this attempt to "build up its forces" also shows a certain foresight. This is probably a necessary and inevitable phase in a period in which the perspective of widespread class confrontations is looming. The movement of the 15M renewed and developed a whole range of features that were present in embyonic form in the movement in 2006 against the CPE: assemblies, the emergence of a new generation, giving specific attention to ethical and subjective factors, wanting to establish new links, starting a conscious battle ...

Reflecting on the days in Madrid, a series of observations are striking:

- people spoke quite freely about "revolution", because they saw "the system" as the problem;

- "all power to the assemblies" emerged from the ranks of a small minority and became more widespread and popular ([8]).

- The push for the "international expansion" of the assemblies was quite remarkable, as is indicated by growing support for a proposal for a "world day of assemblies."

It's true that this was all taking place in the midst of great confusion. All sorts of things were added to the cocktail of "revolution": self-management, cooperatives, nationalistion of the banks ... On internationalisation, we had a conversation with a young Valencian: he reproached us for our scathing denunciations of DRY and pointed to the proposal from DRY for a "European day of struggle that could become worldwide" as evidence against this. At the same time, he added: "I do have a problem with the agenda for that day. If the goal is democracy, why is it that no country has a true democracy? "

The proletariat suffers from the weight of the dominant ideology with DRY and other bourgeois forces([9]) present in the assemblies supported by the politicians and the media. At the same time the communist minorities are small in size and influence. In this context how can we not expect a debate taking place in the midst of enormous confusion with a proliferation of the most diverse theories and the most ridiculous proposals? Consciousness has to forge a way through this chaotic and dizzying situation.

The proletarian collectives

In the assemblies, we saw that DRY - the tentacle of the state in our midst - was confronted with muted resistance and by an increasingly active minority[10]. We should differentiate its two parts: the first one, much larger than anyone would imagine, passively resisted DRY’s proposals, let it go ahead, not daring to remove it from its leading roles, but expressed a variety of objections to its proposals.

By contrast, a minority element did oppose the democratic, citizenship and reformist politics, opposing it with support for class politics and for adopting a revolutionary perpsective of the struggle against capitalism, and for the power of the assemblies.

This minority generally organised itself inside "collectives" that became widespread and devoted lot of work to reflecting on things, most notably, to our knowledge, those in Valencia, Alicante and Madrid, even if, for now, these collectives are dispersed and scattered without having succeeded in breaking away from a concern with local actions.

ICC 1/8/11

For some weeks now, among the posters for L’Oréal, Décathlon, Dior etc there’s a new one from UNICEF: “Hunger Emergency: two million children threatened by the food crisis in the Horn of Africa”. They display graphic pictures of anguished mothers holding undernourished children. But the careful work of the publicity experts is all in a good cause. We the consumers are enjoined to put our hands in our pocket, while at the same time letting us know that the democratic state has set up structures which will allow good citizens like ourselves to come to the aid of the underprivileged.

We reject this way of seeing things because it is an insidious way of making us think of ourselves as “privileged”, as people who are spared the worst kind of misery and should not therefore complain too much about the minor austerity measures being introduced by the governments of the central countries. 

 What is happening in the Horn of Africa?

It is true that the situation in Somalia, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Eritrea and Kenya is particularly dramatic and disgusting. An unprecedented drought (the UN is talking about the worst drought for 60 years) has hit the Horn of Africa with merciless force – and this is a region which has been a theatre of war for over two decades. In an interview published in Figaro.fr, Andrée Montpetit, quality controller for the NGO Care in Ethiopia, puts it like this: “I am hearing things that I have never heard before. A villager from Dambi, in the Morena region, explained to me on Friday that even camels are dying of thirst, whereas in the great drought of 1991 the camels survived. In Borena, you have to walk six hours there and back to reach a source of water. This has never been seen before. There is no water, no grass. The cows are dying like flies”. The UN has estimated that more than 12 million people are in a desperate situation. In Somalia, the situation is unbearable. Since 2006 it has been the scene of conflict between the Ethiopian army and the al-Shabab militias which control up to 80% of the country and have imposed a very harsh version of Sharia law. More than 9 million inhabitants are living in a daily hell, deprived of food, wracked by disease and heat, with no water to wash themselves. As for humanitarian aid, the NGO’s themselves are denouncing the lack of any real provision. Even worse, when aid does arrive, it is often blocked or stolen by the Islamist rebels fighting the government, or by the Somali army for the same military reasons. “The most recent example, last Friday (12 August), was the looting of two trucks of food aid by Somali soldiers, just before it was due to be distributed to starving families in a neighbourhood of the capital. The fusillade that followed left five dead” (Courrier International no 1085, 18-24 August 2011). You hardly dare imagine what happened to these families in Mogadishu, or to the thousands of other families who have fled the capital, and have been parked in refugee camps under a burning sun, with no more food and water than needed to survive from one day to the next. “Mahieddine Khelladi, executive director of the NGO Islamic Aid, prefers to talk about ‘the serious risk’ of supplies being stolen. ‘In a hospital that I visited, one which had been sent medicine, the pharmacy was empty’, he said” (‘Somalie: l’aide humanitaire détournee?’ 20 Minutes, 22 August 2011). And the intervention of the great powers is not going to make anything better, far from it. “Since the collapse of the government in 1990, the USA has been in military occupation of part of the terrain. This was pushed through by the ‘Restore Hope' operation in 1992. This was also the time when France's Bernard Kouchner arrived in Somalia carrying sacks of rice on his shoulder, discretely followed by some French army contingents!” , as we wrote in February 2010, in ‘Yemen, Somalia, Iran, the drive to war accelerates [21]’. Acting solely in defence of their capitalist interests in this important geostrategic zone[1], the great powers have done nothing to help the impoverished inhabitants of the region. In fact, the exacerbation of imperialist tensions in the region makes the whole situation worse. Among other things it is pushing the armed groups to recruit more and more young people. “According to a recent report by Amnesty International, al-Shabab, which has lost a lot of fighters since the beginning of the year, has been reduced tor recruiting more and more children” (Courrier International, ibid).

The faces of so many children in the cradle of humanity are cracked with heat, tormented by flies, bleeding and emaciated; or else they are marked with the scars of war, eyes empty yet full of hatred, a machine gun in their hands. Faces sculpted by decades of capitalist barbarism. Hundreds of thousands of years of evolution are being put into question by the survival of this utterly cynical system. We should be lucid about this: what is happening in Africa and in all countries ravaged by war and poverty is the future that capitalism is shaping for all of us. No government, no armed force or NGO can hold back the destructive dynamic dictated by the laws of profit and the interests of imperialism. In the central countries, galloping inflation and austerity packages announce where things are going. Only the overthrow of capitalism, the work of a majority seeking for authentic solidarity, can free humanity from the talons of his dying system.

Maxime 27/8/11