War, Peace, & Imperialism – Problems of our time
Written By: Rose A
As we enter the new decade, many all over the globe feel that we live in an era of increasing uncertainty and political instability. Our bourgeois leaders are struggling to maintain a grip on public support from France to Chile, from Iraq to Haiti. New independent powers are emerging. New forces are rivalling old ones. Contradictions are heightening and a re-emergence of the bloody fighting for the redivision of an already divided world is coming back into high focus. So, what is the backdrop of the current situation?
On one hand it is the conditions created by the so-called “long peace” that emerged out of the lack of conflict between western imperialist powers since the Second World War – a peace which was formed in part due to the power of the Soviet Union, a power that greatly, and rightfully, petrified the ruling class into rallying itself behind the United States against its existential threat.
“The rise of the new nationalism of the 2010s in the imperialist nations typified by Trump, the Brexit movement, Le Pen, Bolsonaro etc. are emerging in contradiction with the status quo of entrenched neoliberalism”
But this unity of imperial nations is still being upheld despite the symbolic removal of the red menace. The conditions that were created to contend with the existence of a strong socialist rival are gone and so attempts at holding together this unified hegemony are falling apart again. Cracks in the phony “bourgeois internationalism” are, and have been for the past 30 years, intensifying.
The bourgeoise is not an ideologically homogeneous class. Like the working class, it too has divisions and schisms despite ultimately having the same class interests. And thus, inter-ruling class conflict only deepens as contradictions in society intensify. The rise of the new nationalism of the 2010s in the imperialist nations typified by Trump, the Brexit movement, Le Pen, Bolsonaro etc. are emerging in contradiction with the status quo of entrenched neoliberalism – an ideology which attempts to justify the latest phase of globalisation which started in the 90s. But how long can this be kept up? How long until the contradiction between new nationalism and neoliberalism turns into open antagonism and conflict?
Another main aspect is the growth of rival capitalist powers who came into prominence after the fall of the USSR. This is principally, but not exclusively, China. The growth of China is not a “socialist counter balance” as some on the left have deceived themselves into believing. However, independent of one’s opinion of contemporary China, the rise of its economy acting semi-independently from US hegemony will only continue to heighten contradictions between the powers, forcing the world out of its neoliberal slumber and has begun to do so already with Trump’s trade war.
The dynamic is one less reminiscent of the USSR – where the ruling class attempted to unify in the face of the socialist project – but instead is one of divisions. Do we rally behind American hegemony based in part of yankee chauvinism and the immense Sinophobic fearmongering? Or do we embrace China? Our ruling class here in Australia is especially conflicted on this issue as they already have strong economic ties to Beijing while simultaneously being dependent on American naval supremacy in the region to secure maritime trade. These are real questions with real implications for the future of the class struggle.
“The rhetoric and politics of parliament and congress in the past decade reflects an old existential threat to the capitalists – themselves”
Climate change is also a major factor in this discussion. The old guard, so heavily reliant on the extraction of fossil fuels, are continuing their battle against reality resulting in ever more class conflict such as the recent riots over the resource in Iran and the continued exploitation of indigenous lands in settler colonial countries such as Australia, Canada etc. This league of backwards reactionaries stands in opposition with their so-called “progressive green capitalist” counterparts who, in reality, only seek to continue the bloody imperial regime through the exploitation of new resources as exemplified by the recent attacks on Bolivia’s progressive forces for the purpose of controlling the South American nations’ massive lithium deposits needed for many new green technologies – aided by the complicity and treacherous actions of their comprador ruling class, so eager to sell off their nation for a quick buck.
We should take this opportunity to keep in mind that these are not static isolated issues facing bourgeois society but are all fundamentally the product of the wider class struggle and contain many interconnected aspects with one another. We should also remember that the divided nature of the imperialist ruling class at present is partisan in one aspect, particularly of politics, but it isn’t the principle driving motion of history in our current epoch – that is between the working class and the capitalists, of the imperialists and the colonies, semi-colonies, and neo-colonies. Imperialist capitalism is a bipartisan issue for the ruling class despite their squabbles on how that order is conducted and who gets the spoils of that plunder and exploitation.
The rhetoric and politics of parliament and congress in the past decade reflects an old existential threat to the capitalists – themselves. The old guard are right to be fearful of a return to an age of inter-imperial disunity as they are more than aware that war and open conflict between rival imperialists is the historic ignition for proletarian revolution.
The inevitable backlash from the democratic forces within the imperialist countries themselves when troops are directly deployed is not something the ruling class wants to deal with (see anti-war movements against Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan etc.). Such is the strength of proletarian internationalism that such mass movements emerge even when the war isn’t being waged within the protesting nations themselves. The massive intensification of internal class struggle that occurs when imperialist war is brought to the doorstep of nations is a critical historic factor in driving revolution and the ruling class has become aware of this. As Mao so aptly pointed out:
“As a result of World War I, the Tsar, the landlords and the capitalists in Russia were wiped out; as a result of World War II, Chiang Kai-shek and the landlords were overthrown in China and the East European countries and a number of countries in Asia were liberated. Should the United States launch a third world war and supposing it lasted eight or ten years, the result would be the elimination of the ruling classes in the United States, Britain and the other accomplice countries and the transformation of most of the world into countries led by Communist Parties. World wars end not in favour of the warmongers but in favour of the Communist Parties and the revolutionary people in all lands. If the warmongers are to make war, then they mustn’t blame us for making revolution or engaging in “subversive activities” as they keep saying all the time. If they desist from war, they can survive a little longer on this earth. But the sooner they make war the sooner they will be wiped from the face of the earth”
Serious ideological attempts to stop fighting between imperialist nations have been made through the establishment of “mediating” non-government organisations like the League of Nations – the first attempt at this bourgeois peace movement failed as it couldn’t contend with the contradiction between fascist capitalism and liberal capitalism – as well as the far more successful United Nations.
Communists do not want war. War brings with it only suffering to the working class who are enlisted in the ranks of the imperialist armies, but it is a reality that we historically have had to contend with and shall have to inevitably in the future, such is the nature of the imperialist stage of capitalism. Lenin said:
“War is the continuation, by forcible means, of the politics pursued by the ruling classes of the belligerent Powers long before the outbreak of war. Peace is a continuation of the very same politics, with a registration of the changes brought about in the relation of forces of the antagonists as a result of military operations. War does not change the direction in which politics developed prior to the war; it only accelerates that development.”
Our job as revolutionaries in the face of this era of political upheaval is to formulate an accurate understanding of the contradictions laid out before us in our present time for the purpose of developing correct strategies as well as continually working with and engaging with the masses.