Maria Weiß 14th / 29.10.2011
"Who owns the banks?"
This movement "Occupy the Deutsche Bank" should better call itself a movement to save capitalism and above all the bourgeois (or revisionist) state.
That came out beautifully in the televion show “Maybrit Illner” (14th october 2011), especially in the speech from Sahra Wagenknecht of the so-called Left Party, which has shown convincingly that the Deutsche Bank actually since a long time belongs to "the taxpayer" and that these banks are acting irresponsibly and act in a way that they take up more and more risks and rely on the fact that ultimately the taxpayers will help them and that this whole system means that in the foreseeable future the banks and the taxpayers will go broke and that one should not let it come so far. The state is basically left out, it serves only as an instrument to save the banks, but has no personal interest unless its self-preservation as a parasitic colossus that weighs on society as a whole, but this didn`t come out , at least not from the side of this representative, that this exactly is the interest of the bourgeois state itself. And since this whole system is constantly overheated, at the end she came out with the "compelling" question: "And we don`t want to let it come to such a breakdown, that at the end we`ll all go broke." Why not? Then the whole capitalism is just broken. But that's exactly what puts these forces in fear and terror.
“We don’t want to let it come so far?” But of course, we have to let it come, because otherwise fundamentally changes will not come, because this whole system, causing all these symptoms that are described so beautiful, is bankrupt and goes to break and really since long is ripe for its fall . How else? Wagenknecht babbles something about "overcoming of capitalism." How she wants to overcome it? By saving it, "by the state" so to speak? Certainly not.
"The financial sector must be downsized, so that it is again the servant of the real economy (i.e. the real capitalist exploitation and above all the exploitation of guaranteeing real bourgeois state) ". What sort of concept is this?
There is an enormous mentioning of this so-called "real economy" in the show. The only representative who has addressed the main point of growth, or rather non-growth, was the representative of Standard & Poors. He was immediately cut off by May Britt Illner.
It is true that the financial capital speculates with all States and the population is increasingly taken as hostages, but one must not forget that the state itself also does that, he takes part in that. He uses the population as a reserve.
Sahra Wagenknecht, what does she really want? Whith all the talking of "making profits here," "making profits there," what capitalist banks are usually doing, of course, what is the capitalist principle, by the way, she wants to achieve that the state gets a bigger portion of the earnings from exploitation, that's all she is interrested in. Likewise, the rest of these gentlemen of this species. What really distinguishes the so-called Left Party from Social Democracy?
Concerning the state there is always the question: for whose benefit does it work? Whose servant is it? And if it should be a servant of tamed banks like here, then we really can say thank you very much.
As for example in Putin`s Russia, where the state is one of tame oligarchs taken to curb, apart from the mafia merging with them. Or today in revisionist China, where the capitalists have merged with the bureaucrats.
This all has absolutely nothing in common any more with a rule of the working class, of the working people.
Whe they describe it in the way that jobs and capital assets were destroyed by the financial markets with their slavish adherence to rate of return – no way! Not only financial markets, it is the bourgeoisie as a whole, the state and the bourgeoisie, which have destroyed jobs here, primarily through their anti-growth policies. Quite apart from the fact that capitalism anyway permanently destroys jobs and capital assets, if only because of the very commonly recurring crises and its constant hunger for new markets and cheap labor. All of these claims, such as transaction tax or taxation of corporations or other taxes only serve to bring money into the state’s bag, or better said to reduce its debt (maybe) a little, but that does not create more jobs, this is a fallacy, it leads to more bureaucracy and thus possibly to other debts, because what really creates value does not take place.
All the talking about the containment of the greed for profit is nonsense. Capitalism is based on the profit system, which can not be abolished without abolishing itself.
We must provide clarity about the origin of the current multiple crisis. It
depends, above all, on the ailing state of the societies in Europe and the U.S.,
on the fact that these regions of the world increasingly have chosen to relocate
their production activities to a large extent to other parts of the world in
order to escape from the pressure of the working masses in their own regions.
This is characteristic for both the U.S. and for European countries, at least
most, especially the western and southern European countries. This has led,
in the consequence, to the shifting of the weights and, above all, to the shifting
of the main focus of economic development to other parts of the world. It is
not surprising that, of course, this shift has its consequences, namely the
"arrival" of these parts of the world
in capitalism since long, and even at the higher ranks of the financial bourgeoisie and take part in a corresponding game. So also among the beneficiaries of the global system of capitalism, there is an increased competition at the highest levels. And that these circles treat the masses in an arbitrary manner, and States as well, is nothing new.
It is correct in principle that there is resistance by the masses, from the bottom. This is fine and worthy of support. However, there is something wrong with the thrust, which remains stuck in the whole system which caused this crisis and directs the impact on only one certain part the perpetrators. It leads nowhere and of course there is not by chance currently some applause and support from one part of the ruling class, especially by the exponents of the state apparatus. government currently supports exponents and applauded. Above all, the Social Democracy excels because it again sees a chance for itself, but also a whole host of other forces with sometimes quite opaque character.
On the movement "Occupy Wall Street"
In Frankfurt for example one could see a poster in large letters ”occupy the world". Well, if it would be so simple. But one can not expect from this movement, after all what has happened here over the last few decades, that they develop at once a flawless class consciousness. The same applies also for the movement in USA.
It is also by no means not exclusively so that Wall Street and London are the only centers of this global capitalism, this has changed and now we have quite a number of new centers, at least one of them is located definitely in Asia (especially China), others develop in South America or in Eastern Europe, which means above all Russia. There is a main focus even in Arabia. This has been split, and these new centers smell, of course, their chance to finally present the bill against the traditional Western capital. And you can be sure that in this present movement which, though, has a legitimate site, but is still very one-sided, these forces move around with it and push things in the direction mentioned in their favor. Even Wall Street itself is split, by the way, and someone has recently been found to be right that Obama himself uses this movement for his election campaign.
There is a lot of talking about "générations perdues" or "lost generations". How certain people can afford to forego whole generations? This speaks even plain text about the system and the fact that it is not enough to impose barriers to the banks.
"Simply spare the people" was written on a banner at the Frankfurt
demonstration. Nothing of this sort, the people is needed for drudging, otherwise
you can not make profits. After all there must be a basis.
What now seems to put the bourgeoisie and especially the state and its apologists in trouble, is that the banks have only little cash provision, very small equity as it is called. Most banks have no more than 5 percent maximum so-called cash provision. This is extremely low, considering for what , so to speak, they just need to stand for, in the case that, they can not manage it at all. What is it in the case of inflation? Since this money will be worth nothing,this will be cumulated then, and of course all have an incredible respect for that kind of bankruptcy. For example, representatives as Schäuble and Co. therefore come to such constructions as "leverage" of the current so-called Euro-emergency parachute. The shield consists now of money what they do not have, and if this even will be "leveraged", where will it end? This is completely harebrained and really shows the extreme crudity of the contradiction that exists here, or, better said, has broken up. Therefore, it is more than at the time to worry about it, basically what happens with this whole system in general and how to tackle the fundamental problems.
This is something, of course, revisionists do not like to hear. Revisionists always adher to the existing state and prefer to monopolize it for themselves, including appropriate modifying purposes. That was the case in 19th Century with Lassalle and today again, with the so-called Left Party in this country, for example, (the Social Democracy is since long an integral part of it). They do not like such things like fundamental considerations.. But that is precisely what must be done.
What we need is another state, and indeed everywhere in the world.
The thing with the 99-to-one just does not work
What takes place in the world is the struggle of opposing social classes which have currently been established in almost all countries in the world.
The question is what this movement really wants to push through what the bourgeoisie does not want anyway?
If there were really 99 percent and only one percent of exploiters, then it would be easy to get rid of them. However, the question arises: what is the aim of the 99 percent? And that`s reaaly a great question if this all is really as uniformly as proclamed,. This is actually completely out of the world. Basically, that is clear from the beginning, when it has started, apart from the fact that to get rid of this “one per cent”, one must solve the question of the atomic bomb.
The question is, how far this movement includes or affects the current class division. The question is also about the role of the state, and the question is, or is not really a question: it is simply not the case that if one cuts off the tip somewhere that then immediately disappears the whole tree and the whole structure of the the forest. This is nonsense.
This performance, as now demonstrated for example with Libya in the face of the world, bears the hallmarks of U.S. imperialism, and for example not only refers to this alleged “one per cent”. These are far more forces advocating such a thing from whatever reasons, and that speaks volumes about the social divisions.
Schäuble lets the cat out of the bag
This evening, he announced to lever the so-called Euro-emergency parachute at 1,000 billion € !
How is it possible to provide an insurance policy for sums you do not have, and how to give a warranty to those?
The truth that comes out of this whole thing is this: what is turning out at this present crisis is that the policy of unrestrained piling up of government debt, issuing bills of exchange on the future of coming generations, which is running here by the state and the bourgeoisie for decades - a policy of being on the run from their own internal class enemy, the working class - has ultimately failed and now is headed for its bankrupcy. It's basically a bottomless pit, which opens up, not only in Greece.
The question is: Do the masses have any other choice than to take up the fight fundamentally against that? ? Does the working class, the working people ultimately have a choice? It's just the way that the laws of capitalism fully are prevailing here and the corresponding tasks are posing themselves objectively.
In a way you can say really: Greece is everywhere.
It is only the beginning, the tip, and not even the tip of the iceberg (mountain of debt) is likely reached.
Nation-building in US-style - wow!
The imperialists, especially the USA-imperialists are trying to wriggle their way out of the crisis with military maneuvers, to get cheap raw materials, for example oil. Therefore, the Libya War was instigated, and that's why Gaddafi now was executed. It's odd: this time even the sparrows whistle it from the rooftops (the press) in our country, that the whole is of course fine, so he can not stand trial and, maybe, blow the whistle about certain unpleasant things. This time there is no great applause by Angela Merkel, at least not as in the preceding case (the execution of Osama bin Laden). Only Hillary Clinton - not surprisingly - was to hear with an unappetizing "Wow" after the execution.
It is interesting that it is proclaimed in fact now by the U.S. imperialists,
that this is their strategy worldwide, it seeks to clear away unwanted opponents
in such a way (of course under the guise of so-called defense of human rights!).
We should once think through what that means.
Surely this man (Gaddafi) was a personality having very different sides. One seems to be clear, and this is largely concealed in the press that quite a number of things during this long time (of his government) in this country have evolved, and not to the detriment of the population. For example, by the fact that especially for women the possibility of a scientific study was created and was practiced. The marriage between a man and a plurality of women was forbidden, and more. That this man now, after what has become known, fell victim to lynching supported by NATO (if not organized) has, among other things, probably a reason even in these facts.
"Freedom and democracy" and once again "yes we can" in Obama's way!
The role of dogs of Cameron and Sarkozy, of the british and french capital, should also not to be ignored.
Gaddafi by the the way, intended to introduce in the African countries a currency based on gold.
What did the African Union say about this whole thing?
Many Europeans, by the way, are not really so well, considering this blatant
strategy presented by the U.S. imperialists, it turns out by the fact that this
time a lot seeps through the media.
The Russian (ambitous) imperialists hold back much, there is hardly something to hear of criticism. Medvedev said anything so like that Libya must now find a "democratic way". Otherwise, they wait. China holds itself out largely as in most cases and makes its own strategic preparations for the upcoming conflicts.
In fact, it is urgent to prepare for the masses in Europe, and that is not so easy. In some ways, today confirms again what is already represented in the very early releases of our organization: imperialism does not leave the working class a choice: Either you submit yourself, then you will be ripped to the max-no-more or be burnt in war, if something has been left of you at all, or you're standing up against it. And there is no question that the latter will be essential.
The cozy, softy way, which currently is propagated by revisionist forces here as a solution for the situation in taking over significant parts of the state apparatus and the nationalizations of banks is a dangerous illusion, behind which ultimately stand the imperialists themselves, one should not get into the trap, this is no solution.
In all European countries the failures of the past are shown. The whole policy of flight from the revolution, has proven to be a Boomerang, which now appers in the form of a tremendous, no longer to be ignored debt crisis which seams to be most likely no more solvable for them..
It would be interesting to see who would all sign up if all of Europe would proclaim: we make a cut with zero (debt). That would be really interesting to see which international forces would then move in and what interventions they would take on. Such an act would amount to a revolution, however, it would show very quickly, for example, who in this country really represents what a position and how strong is the link of their own capital with the international one, how much the banks, or the state apparatus itself with the international financial sharks being now ostensibly under attack, are linked and intertwined. One can not separate one from another. To believe that one can "rehabilitate" this state, in this form as it is existing now, is an illusion. This requires a completely different revolutionary state, which means that such one must be fought for once, and that the current must be broken, and that means revolution. Ultimately there is no other way. But one must see that whoever is representing something like that here, this one is risking life and limb. This experience is shown in the history of class struggles, and it has been clear too that from this reason Hartmut Dicke has been swept out of the way because he stood for it in an outstanding way .. The basic principle is that the bourgeoisie is to use such measures again and again. We must not shrink away and have to take up fight.
The European states, the ruling classes do not need to think that there does not be their turn, or that it could not come to them. You can see how the U.S. imperialists are going on. They destroyed a whole country, which in part was one they previously worked together with closely, and executed at the end the leading representatives of this country. But people should not believe that this could not be practiced in other cases too. Precautiously this person is just identified with a specific historical series, so that no one gets the idea that perhaps there would be some hesitancy at this regard on others.
It also raises the question of whether forces currently prefer certain things very specifically.
In this concern it should also be mentioned that the Merkel government has now abolished compulsory military service and has trimmed the armed forces toward a professional troupe for international operations in the interests of imperialist war adventures against other nations – which is a dangerous affair. Thus, the defense capability of our own country will continue to be undermined and delivered basically more or less to U.S. imperialists and other imperialist (or revisionist)superpower maneuvers.
On purposes of the so called Euro bailout decision
Of course all these decisions which have now been prepared for the so-called Euro- rescue summit, are destinated to help the bourgeoisie, especially the European bourgeoisie yet again to make ends meet with its problems for a while. Yet , they cannot solve a single problem of this society. This requires very different, fundamental social changes.
But one cannot bring about a revolution by talking. It develops, or just not (not yet). It depends on the objective development of the contradictions, everything else is idealism.
A crash course at the present time would be in some way disastrous for Europe, because other ultra-reactionary forces in the world would try to benefit. On the other hand, the current situation is not of such a kind you can hold on to her, on the contrary it will increasingly become a torture for large segments of the population, and it will be seen further on what sort of opportunities will develop to break these chains.
Currently, Angela Merkel is hailed as an alleged savior in the crisis in Europe. However, this should be a superficial view. It just takes a short glance behind the surface to find out that quite the opposite is true. Merkel has massively deepened this crisis with her final decision to renounce the nuclear energy in Germany , which will be reflected already in the very near future. There are also representatives of bourgeois voices that see this and try to criticize the decision. This, however, wil not be sufficient at all. The question is whether they are actually still able to make the reverse, because it also relates to the whole intensification of the contradictions of this society and the desire of the ruling class to avoide a revolutionary development of this society. What instead is presented as a "solution" is basically nothing more than permanently sliding back and spend sums they do not have , meanwhile real investment, real development of future-orientated projects are prevented, resp. left to foreign powers.
Surely the idea of real investments in Greece, for example, or elsewhere in Europe, would be much smarter than a continuation of that idiotic buying-up of government bonds, as it is clear from the outset that the value is zero, or in an increased bleeding of the population of countrys . But who does that? Until now there is not much to see. Instead, they are creeping behind alleged international economic potentates - a pretty ridiculous posturing- and begging them please to help them making an end with their European debt crisis.
Certainly a renewed collapse of European states and, consequently, the possibility of these being again pushed off against each other is not desirable. On the other hand, such an empty shell, as it is currently here desperately trying to maintain with all its might, is also not of much worth . It follows that the current situation in Europe is far from being harmless, because the bourgeoisie knows basically no advice, but entangle more an more in in seudo solutions and the social counterpart, the working class, is not up to date. His social and political action is missing. And this situation has to do something with just this sort of workers' aristocratism due to the increasing differentiation in international exploiters and exploited masses, which just had largely helped these traditional capitalist countries to save their capitalist system of exploitation at home. This bill will not work in the long run, and the first signs of this are seen even now. This may be certainly for many people an inconvenient truth , but its one peeling out of the current situation.
Therefore it is an important question of how much more politically minded people being interested in social progress will be able to enforce a change here.
Ultimately, the contradictions that are broken up all over the world in this global capitalist system of exploitation can not be solved except through a revolutionary transformation. This will prevail in the long run , whatever imperialists and revisionists and reactionaries may plan as ugly war crimes in their back rooms. But the more it is necessary that revolutionary minded people around the world with a concern on progress and development and transformation of the existing ailing society of exploitation come to consultation and, if possible, join together.
( Translation of the German original)