As Trotsky wrote, in relation to the Balkan Wars, socialists can never subcontract these historic tasks to the bourgeoisie or its state.
“But it is not at all a matter of indifference by what methods this emancipation is being accomplished. The method of “liberation” that is being followed today means the enslavement of Macedonia to the personal regime in Bulgaria and to Bulgarian militarism; it means, moreover, the strengthening of reaction in Bulgaria itself. That positive, progressive result which history will, in the last analysis, extract from the ghastly events in the Balkans, will suffer no harm from the exposures made by Balkan and European democracy; on the contrary, only a struggle against the usurpation of history's tasks by the present masters of the situation will educate the Balkan peoples to play the role of superseding not only Turkish despotism but also those who, for their own reactionary purposes, are, by their own barbarous methods, now destroying that despotism... 
Our agitation, on the contrary, against the way that history's problems are at present being solved, goes hand in hand with the work of the Balkan Social Democrats. And when we denounce the bloody deeds of the Balkan 'liberation' from above we carry forward the struggle not only against liberal deception of the Russian masses but also against enslavement of the Balkan masses.”
(Trotsky,War Correspondence, The Balkan Wars 1912-13, p 293-4)
 |
| For A Socialist United States of Europe |
Our goal is not their goal, and even when apparent immediate interests coincide, we pursue those interests separately from, and in opposition to them. The EU referendum was another case in point. Socialists had an apparent immediate coincidence of interests with the dominant section of the ruling class, the owners of fictitious capital, and representatives of large-scale socialised capital. But, our actual interests were diametrically opposed. They sought a continuation and strengthening of the EU on its present capitalist basis, whereas socialists sought a strengthening of the solidarity and class organisation of workers across the EU, and its transformation into a Workers' Europe. The present capitalist nature of the EU was the point of departure, in terms of why socialists opposed Brexit, as against why the dominant section of the bourgeoisie opposed it.
The same applies to the plaintiff appeals of social-democrats, including those that call themselves Marxists, or even revolutionaries, who demand that the capitalist state nationalise this or that failing business or industry, or even that it “nationalise the commanding heights of the economy”. Such demands are as Utopian as the programme of the Narodniks, and pose no threat to the bourgeoisie, in the same way. They are not based on any kind of reality, and so, like all such Utopian demands, are also reactionary. They lead workers into a dead-end, and miseducate them. On the one hand, the capitalist state can simply ignore such demands, because those that raise them have no power to force them to do otherwise; just as there is no way to force “democratic imperialism” to act in the interests of workers, when it invades this or that country, and acts to bolster its own military strategic ambitions.
On the other hand, there are times when the capitalist state does see the need for nationalisation. During WWII, large parts of the economy was effectively nationalised; after the war, because large sections of core industries were devastated after decades of under-investment, the capitalist state nationalised them and recapitalised them; in 2008, capitalist states nationalised banks and financial institutions and recapitalised them; during the self-inflicted coronavirus moral panic and lockdown, capitalist states effectively nationalised the variable-capital of businesses, becoming the employer of last resort, and paying the nation's wages. But, none of this was done in workers' interest, and nor could workers or socialists turn it to workers' interest. They could make faint pleas that all of this should be done whilst the capitalist state grants “workers' control”, but, as Lenin says, in relation to the similar demands raised by the Narodniks to the state, why on Earth would a capitalist state do that? It is a class state, a capitalist state, acting in the interests of capital not labour! It is no more going to do that than “democratic imperialism” is going to undertake invasions and military adventures on behalf of worker' interests.
No comments:
Post a Comment