A Happy New Year to all fellow-members of the Communist University and its sister channels, SADTU Political Education Forum, YCLSA Discussion Forum, and Communist University Africa. The post below is the eighth and last of our "Pieces of Samir Amin". It completes the series begun in 2013. The preliminary post of our first-quarter Communist University course of 2014, which will be on Education, will go out on 8 January, and the first of the ten weekly batches for that course will go out on the 15th of January. For SADTU, the first course will be "Basics", for the YCL it will be the philosophy of Hegel, and for CU-Africa it will be the African Revolutionary Writers. Over the next two weeks, so as to maintain a presence of the Communist University, we will post a version of the "Agitprop" course. This is because the Agitprop course is relevant to the 2014 election, and because it would not otherwise be seen on the CU channel until the third quarter of 2015. For the CU, 2014 is the year of the election, and the year of the branch, with a firm intention to connect these two dedications.
VC _____ Pieces of Samir Amin, 2011, Marxism's Tricontinental Vocation Dedan Kimathi Marx of the East, Marx of the South My interpretation of historical capitalism stresses the polarization of the world (the contrast of center/periphery) produced by the historical form of the accumulation of capital. This perspective questions the visions of the "socialist revolution," and, more broadly, the transition to socialism, that the historical Marxisms have developed. The "revolution"-or the transition-before us is not necessarily the one on which these historical visions were based. Nor are the strategies for surmounting capitalism the same. It has to be recognized that what the most important social and political struggles of the twentieth century tried to challenge was not so much capitalism in itself as the permanent imperialist dimension of actually existing capitalism. The issue is therefore whether this transfer of the center of gravity of the struggles necessarily calls capitalism into question, at least potentially. Marx's thinking associates "scientific" clarity in the analysis of reality with social and political action (the class struggle in its broadest sense) aimed at "changing the world." Confronting the basics-i.e., the discovery of the real source of surplus value produced by the exploitation of social labor by capital-is indispensable to this struggle. If this fundamental and lucid contribution of Marx is abandoned, a double failure is inevitably the result. Any such abandonment of the theory of exploitation (law of value) reduces the analysis of reality to that of appearances only, a way of thinking that is limited by its abject submission to the requirements of commodification, itself engendered by the system. Similarly, such abandonment of the labor value-based critique of the system annihilates the effectiveness of strategies and struggles to change the world, which are thereby conceived within this alienating framework, the "scientific" claims of which have no real basis. Nevertheless, it is not enough just to cling to the lucid analysis formulated by Marx. This is not only because "reality" itself changes, and there are always "new" things to be taken into account in the development of the critique of the real world that started with Marx. But more fundamentally, it is because, as we know, the analysis that Marx put forward in Capital was left incomplete. In the planned sixth volume of this work (which was never written), Marx proposed treating the globalization of capitalism. This now has to be done by others, which is why I have dared to advocate the formulation of the "law of globalized value," restoring the place of the unequal development (through the center/periphery polarization) that is inseparable from the global expansion of historical capitalism. In this formulation, "imperialist rent" is integrated into the whole process of the production and circulation of capital and the distribution of the surplus value. This rent is at the origin of the challenge: it accounts for why the struggles for socialism in the imperialist centers have faded, and it highlights the anti-imperialist dimensions of the struggles in the peripheries against the system of capitalist/imperialist globalization. I shall not return here to discuss what an exegesis of Marx's texts on this question would suggest. Marx, who is nothing less than a giant, with his critical acumen and the incredible subtlety of his thought, must have had at least an intuition that he was coming up against a serious question here. This is suggested by his observations on the disastrous effects of the alignment of the English working class with the chauvinism associated with the colonial exploitation of Ireland. Marx was therefore not surprised that it was in France-less developed than England economically, but more advanced in political consciousness-that the first socialist revolution took place. He, like Engels, also hoped that the "backwardness" of Germany would enable an original form of advance to develop, fusing together both the bourgeois and the socialist revolutions. Lenin went still further. He emphasized the qualitative transformation that was involved in the passage to monopoly capitalism, and he drew the necessary conclusions: that capitalism had ceased to be a necessary progressive stage in history and that it was now "putrefied" (Lenin's own term). In other words, it had become "obsolete" and "senile" (my terms), so that the passing to socialism was on the agenda, which was both necessary and possible. He conceived and implemented, in this framework, a revolution that began in the periphery (Russia, the "weak link"). Then, seeing the failure of his hopes in a European revolution, he conceived of the transfer of the revolution to the East, where he saw that the fusion of the objectives of the anti-imperialist struggle with those of the struggle against capitalism had become possible. But it was Mao who rigorously formulated the complex and contradictory nature of the objectives in the transition to the socialism that were to be pursued in these conditions. "Marxism" (or, more exactly, the historical Marxisms) was confronted by a new challenge-one which did not exist in the most lucid political consciousness of the nineteenth century, but which arose because of the transfer of the initiative to transform the world to the peoples, nations, and states of the periphery. Imperialist rent not "only" benefited the monopolies of the dominant center (in the form of super profits), it was also the basis of the reproduction of society as a whole, in spite of its evident class structure and the exploitation of its workers. This is what Perry Anderson analyzed so clearly as "Western Marxism," which he described as "the product of defeat" (the abandonment of the socialist perspective)-and which is relevant here. This Marxism was then condemned, having renounced "changing the world" and committing itself to "academic" studies, without political impact. The liberal drift of social democracy-and its rallying both to the U.S. ideology of "consensus" and to Atlanticism at the service of the imperialist domination of the world-were the consequences. "Another world" (a very vague phrase to indicate a world committed to the long road toward socialism) is obviously impossible unless it provides a solution to the problems of the peoples in the periphery-only 80 percent of the world population! "Changing the world" therefore means changing the living conditions of this majority. Marxism, which analyzes the reality of the world in order to make the forces acting for change as effective as possible, necessarily acquires a decisive tricontinental (Africa, Asia, Latin America) vocation. From: http://monthlyreview.org/2011/02/01/the-trajectory-of-historical-capitalism- and-marxisms-tricontinental-vocation -- -- You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] . --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "YCLSA Discussion Forum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
<<image001.jpg>>
