Attack against the United States
We cannot commentate on events such as the New York and Washington ones with an instant mail like this. More reflecting time is needed beyond all information, assumptions and most of all speculations on the "new Pearl Harbor" of Islamic label, for now. However, from what we said in the past and therefore not improvised, we must organize our work so that we are not wasting our energy by running after the media but targeting all available information.
This work started twenty years ago, on the foundations laid first by the Communist Left and later by its continuation, the International Communist Party. Three were the main pillars:
1) the ongoing development of the social productive force as a changing motor beyond classes and governments;
2) the course of the world capitalism as an experimental verification of the decreasing increment tax law within each country and in the world.
3) the historic course of the bourgeois class domination in the global Capital era (real subjection of labour to Capital) starting from the rough local attempts of society control (fascisms, New Deal and Stalinisms) up to the newly drafted world one (globalisation).
What is mostly fascinating is that within the dynamics of capitalism not only did we witness the closure of the liberal- reformist cycle, the classic syndicalism and the bourgeois revolutionary one (national issue and farming issue, too, being the latter viewed within the article Man and the sun labour, which will be enclosed in our n. 5 review), but also the closure of the broader historic cycle about the successions of imperialisms, from the marine republics to Spain, the Netherlands, England and the United States as last representatives of the capitalistic cycle.
After the last world war, the local Vietnam and Korea wars were fought according to the logics of blocks by using others’ cannon fodder. With the end of the competitive co-existence, not only did the U.S. economic and "cultural" supremacy take over but also the unlikelihood of threatening war to such a giant country. The relationships of strength but, mostly, the interest of all other countries in the American economy, which is a awful attractor of others’ goods.
In the Int CP’s texts immediately after war, a possible third world war or a whole of substitute local battles was mentioned. It was already being pointed out that there was a tendency of the strongest capitalism to master the world:
"Let’s see what kind of war America’s possible next one will be with immense military credits and orders plus strategic rules to be given to far away countries. It could end up to be the most noble of all wars however it would not refrain the Marxists from their anti-middle class and anti-government war everywhere and from criticising this war as the most crushing exploit of aggression in the whole of history. It is not just a hypothetical war as it is already taking place stemming from the European intervention during 1917 and 1942 and being, after all, the final concentration of a huge military and destroying force in a supreme centre of supremacy and defence of the present class regime. This process could develop even without a war, in the strict sense of the word, between the United States and the Soviet Union if the subservience of the latter were to be assured by the pressure of the preponderant economic forces instead of its military means. The arrogance of the above mentioned historic European aggressors’ cannon shooting over a province or a town is nothing compared to how insolently the public is arguing – surely about all secret plans – whether the safety of New York and San Francisco will be dealt with along the Rhine or on Elba, on the Alps or on the Pyrenees. The vital space of the US conquerors goes around the world". (International Communist Party, 1949)
According to this introduction, we noticed that the classic local wars do no longer exist. Indeed, the interventions of the joined forces occur in the shape of international police forces, for example against Iran (rough failed attempt), against Iraq (intermediate attempt left hanging) and in the Balkans (up to date, partly successful).
The tendency of operative police forces is more precisely coming together with globalisation (or better still imperialism). It is also causing several reactions against the power that is seen in reality or imaginary as the cause of their ill by entire populations. The next propaganda will try to give a name to who manually accomplished the multi-attack; still this latest is nothing but a pulsing of the material being of things. No matter what ideological or religious excuse, being an open war against the United States virtually impossible on behalf of anyone, what is world-shaking today will be the substituting shape in the next years to come.
We hope that, like the Gulf War, what is happening nowadays attracts our attention to certain facts by sharpening our collective intelligence. The Balkanisation …of the Balkans, led to the formation of some state entities that have brutally solved or are about to solve old "national affairs" left on hold for centuries, in a bourgeois way. Slovenia, Croatia and Macedonia are formally independent. Bosnia, whose ethnic situation is more complex, is under international defence however it is aiming at a federative form or a share-out amongst the neighbouring countries. The situation in Albania is slowing evolving into a "Great Albania", openly backed by the arms from the West. Serbia may still be letting Montenegro slip.
Even if within a revolutionary perspective the singular States are better seen than the ethnic-state pulverizations, a world crisis is taking place under the huge pressure by the global capitalism and is causing the various ethnic groups to be rivals. The desegregation of the ex-Soviet Union, for example, has transformed Central Asia into a powder keg that triggers the Islamic activity, which was once fed by the U.S. against Russia.
It is typical how the situation is now against the U.S., which will be the ones to solve it. The explosive potential of the world, especially if the present crisis should last or cronicise than it already is, show itself at the moment superficially in ultra-integrated movements such as the no global one or seemengly out of control movements such as some forms of terrorism. But those superficial phenomena are symptoms of a much deeper disease
In this perspective, the search for those who recruited, trained and organized the small but skilled army sufficient enough to trigger the multiple massacres on the American ground (in the next few days, TVs off, the term "hijackers" will sound unsuitable) is no longer relevant. The privatised terrorism of the Saudi billionaire, that of the Japanese Red Army or of some "Satan-state" off the American list, finds help amongst the desperate and irate without being involved in person.
After this state of war that cannot even be called "improper" because of its requisites, the United States will feel free to act thoroughly by widening the "sensitive" areas, as they say in the army, and they will reach any "trouble" spot which can compromise the ever more urgent "new world order". And they will not do this by themselves because, first of all, they have purposely avoided listing the attack as terrorist and immediately deemed it as an "act of war". This way, they can call out for the automatic intervention of all other powers in the army response.
It is not Pearl Harbor
The image of a "Pearl Harbor", especially shown by the media, to which the U.S. can answer by an Israeli-like world retaliation, is fully inadequate. These are the reasons why: 1) in 1941 they were about to dominate the world, therefore they were active even at letting their old and useless battleships drown in order to safeguard their new aircraft carriers that would help them wipe Japan out; today they are already dominating the world, hence their passive defence attitude before a system that’s rejecting them. They are compelled to intervene in order to survive. 2) the Israeli solution is denied to them since Israeli is a small economically isolated and fake state that can only retaliate locally with the protection of the Americans while the United States must plan a world relationship network that allows them the import and export vital trade of goods and capitals.
Facts, experts, even literature and cinema, have already shown how extremely vulnerable any State can be before the international terrorism. Official organizations and military informing groups like Jane’s believe that the diffusion of nuclear techniques and the traffic of fissile material, especially after the disintegration of the USSR, make it easy for anyone to build rudimental atomic bombs with a minimum of resources.
Such a planetary power as the United States must then launch a likewise global policy of action at source. However this is unlikely to happen while the concept of national sovereignty is still even slightly abide by. This is why the most interviewed American observers (the usual Luttwak without mincing matters) were reciting all together the following refrain: the world must solid with the United States against terrorism, still we cannot fight against it if some juridical, economic and political obstacles are always in the way.
No matter how much the national bourgeoisies can be willing, the 11th of September 2001 marks the beginning of the true globalisation. Or else, it marks the beginning of disintegration of the system hinged on the United States, if the deterioration of all international relations should turn out worse than it appear to be. In both cases it would mean an extraordinary impulse of all elements of revolution.
The complete article will be published on n.6 of the review.