Cheers,
Hugh
__________________________
In the course of his latest informative compilation on the economic meltdown in Asia -- a creative job despite the use of ready-made sources! -- Kim Scipes, who we all owe a debt of gratitude for his labours, makes the following comment:
>[Kim note: What wasn't talked about in the above article was the IMF and
>World Bank's roles in both pushing each country to adopt an export-oriented
>industrialization strategy as a way to "develop," and their efforts to
>promote these efforts to international lenders. In other words, while this
>might have been a good strategy for a limited number of countries, by
>extending it thoughout the entire region, there is now an OVERPRODUCTION of
>goods in comparison to the absorptive capacity of the so-called developed
>nations. Massive amounts of loans only hastened the development of this
>overcapacity. And it is this overproduction that has led to intensified
>efforts to compete to sell their goods, which initially touched off the
>crisis.
>
>[In other words, I now believe that efforts to solve the FINANCIAL crises
>are really acting on SECONDARY factors rather than the cause of the
>problems. The problem is overcapacity. And until that is addressed, the
>likelihood of the situation repeating certainly exists. But the
>IMF/Clinton Adminstration is trying to keep this from happening by forcing
>changes on the financial systems, and changing them to benefit US
>corporations rather than helping the countries solve their problems. But
>this is all being done through a supposedly "neutral" institution....]
I think this emphasis on overproduction is very valuable. But as it stands it's too narrow, as it defines the problem as one of overproduction of goods, of too much manufacturing capacity, whereas the real underlying problem is one of overproduction, to be sure, but overproduction of *capital* -- in other words, too much capital to be reinvested at the accustomed rate of profit.
The only answer to this is the destruction of capital, or the rendering worthless of great parts of it -- devalorization. What we are seeing at the moment is a huge game of musical chairs as immense blocks of capital lunge around and manoeuvre to be near a "chair" when the music stops.
There are few chairs in the semi-colonies or minor partners of imperialism. I was in Brazil when the first news of this crisis was breaking, and within minutes Volkswagen was threatening to lay off ten thousand workers -- half its Sao Paulo workforce!
The slow-motion development of the crisis (slower for some than others, and in apparent reverse in a few places like the US) is a function of two things, as I see it.
First, the fear of the imperialist governments and their various instruments such as the IMF that a deep social crisis today would provoke very unpleasant political consequences for them worldwide, including demands for the expropriation of capitalist property on the grounds of complete mismanagement, brutal exploitation and generalized misery.
Second, an increased ability to coordinate tactical international manoeuvring thanks to digitization, combined with a high awareness of the stakes involved for *all* parties if one should fail.
This second factor will go by the board as soon as the real heat starts of course, as each imperialist state tries to save its own skin.
At the same time, interestingly enough, the analyses of the "globalization" theorists (strong version) will also go by the board along with the "technology determines politics" approach.
I'd like to finish off with two points following from this view of the current crisis as a crisis of overproduction.
1) Since debt is the principal lever used by the imperilists (oops, I meant imperialists!) to coerce weaker countries, a head-on attack on this mechanism by the workers of semi-colonies and their unions and political organizations would be an excellent tool for revealing the flimisiness of the political foundations of imperialism. *Can't pay! Won't pay" should be the main slogan in relation to foreign debt. Some Latin American workers are already using it "No al pago!".
2) The political scene is now totally different from what it was last time round, given the disappearance of the Stalinist bureaucracies in 1989-1991. The international stability that the workers' states provided for the world capitalist system is a fading memory. The social stability that the national CPs provided is no more (as for instance France abundantly testifies). The shock absorber has gone. Every jolt is felt for what it is. This will lead to increasing mobilizations of the kind we have seen in Korea, France and currently Australia (to mention only the most obvious and most labour-oriented). Our task will be the twin one of getting to the roots of what's happening and doing what we can to make sure the interests of the working class (which also coincide with the interests of humanity) prevail over the destructive interests of capital.
Cheers,
Hugh