The Political Crisis of Imperialist Capitalism
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

 
Other articles
 

Based on its existential crisis, the capitalist imperialism is having a political crisis. This fact exposes itself in two ways.

First, not only in the neo-colonies but also in the capitalist centers as well, bourgeoisie is in a depression of keeping the masses under its political power by means of its major parties and collaborators within the working class.
Secondly, the political stability of the US' domination over the imperialist world hierarchy has been substituted with an intensified imperialist competition.


The Depression of the Traditional Parties in the Capitalist Centers
The political crisis of the bourgeoisie is actually what Lenin puts forward as the first condition for defining the revolutionary situation; "...when it becomes impossible for the dominant classes to maintain their dominance without transforming into a new form; a crisis of the ruling classes"
Bourgeoisie finds itself in a political crisis when the contradictions between the cliques become sharply intensified and the bourgeoisie fails to maintain its dominance as used to be and resorts to new ruling forms.
Bourgeoisie holds the monopoly of armed force in its hands in order to protect its economic, social and thus, the political dominance. However, it cannot preserve its power only through the armed force without having a social basis. Since the capitalist society, which does not have only two major classes, the proletariat and the bourgeoisie being in antagonistic contradiction, but also the petty-bourgeois class that consist of different layers, bourgeoisie provides the social support from and through that intermediate class; the semi-proletarian and the proletarian sections.
All efforts and policies of bourgeoisie for showing its state apparatus, which is composed of military-civilian bureaucracy, in an objective form, as well as establishing different parties with different political lines, linking the mass organizations to itself or presenting the "parliament" as the mean of representation, come out from the necessity to provide the mass support in order to maintain its power.
In the imperialist states, especially in the periods where there is a low level of proletarian mass movement together with a relative stability rather than an economic crisis and a temporary reconciliation instead of wars, bourgeoisie manages to maintain the political mechanism, which allows parties to formally rule through parliaments that are presented as the symbol of "democracy and freedom", and gives effort to create the perception that administration is actually provided by this mechanism.
Thus, wide oppressed and laboring masses are rendered the social basis of the bourgeois power through "bourgeois democracy, although (it means) a great historical advance in comparison with feudalism" (Lenin) and its symbols; the bourgeois parliament and the parliamentarian parties. The petty-bourgeois and the worker aristocracy as the intermediate classes, play the essential role in this mechanism by filling the cadres of these parties.
But in the periods when the mass movements of the exploited classes rise up and endanger the bourgeois power, bourgeoisie resorts for extraordinary methods at the expense of violating the perception that it creates. State of emergency, martial law, state of war, fascism, military coups are the major methods of this situation.
This corresponds to the transition of the bourgeois dictatorship itself where it passes from one form to another and primarily, it is the sign of a political crisis. That is to say, bourgeoisie responds its political crisis by shifting to an open terrorist form together with using civil war methods. With such new forms, it protects its power from the threads of the proletariat and the oppressed classes as well as suppresses possible power struggles or an internal division.
Today, in the central countries of capitalism, the administration model in the form of bourgeois parliamentarism, which has been lasted from 1945 to the 2000's, began to enter into a crisis together with its two major parties. The conservative and social democratic bourgeois parties, which are expressed as "the center right and the center left", have eliminated their difference first in the economic and then in external and internal political spheres. The abolishing of the difference between these parties in the economic sphere as well as in the sense of imperialist expansionism was given by Lenin as an example of the decay of imperialism: "The difference between the democratic-republican and the reactionary-monarchist imperialist bourgeoisie is obliterated precisely because they are both rotting alive." (Lenin, Imperialism and the Split in Socialism ). From here, he was emphasizing the necessity of the proletarian masses to move for a revolutionary rupture.
This phenomenon, which started at the beginning of the last century, had been able to remain at the background for a long time during the decades after the 2nd re-division war, when imperialism had the opportunity to implement its "welfare state" policy. But today it has become permanent by gaining an irreversible character.
In the US, France, Germany, England and other imperialist countries, there is no difference left between the conservative parties and the social democratic parties in terms of their economic and imperialist warfare policies. Plus, regarding also their common sides in terms of implementing the State of Emergency and the Statuary Decrees, it is a fact that they don't have any difference except from some matters like racism, homophobia and hostility against immigrants. In that sense, for example, Corbyn's election to the Labor Party as a result of the disappointment caused by Blair, who was the same as Thatcher, will either remain as casus or - if Corbyn wins a general election- result in a compulsorily veer towards the policies of the British oriented world monopolies.
This fact is important to remember that these parties from both wings used to function for the power of the imperialist bourgeoisie in the sense of binding the masses which have been under the influence of the conservative tradition in one hand and of the historical struggles of the workers movement with the tradition of bourgeois revolutions on the other. But now, this function of the parties is dying out.
The economical opportunities, which used to allow bourgeoisie to give economic-social rights under the name of "the welfare state/social state", was the material basis of the bourgeoisie in getting the consent of the masses, making them the social support of their power for decades by means of its parties and mass organizations. But for almost 30 years, under the conditions of the imperialist globalization, bourgeoisie has got to and has been gradually eliminating these rights. It has necessarily been reducing the worker aristocracy down to a trivial size. In these conditions of the existential crisis of capitalism, bourgeoisie is unable to expand the worker aristocracy. (This fact arises from its own character based on cheap labor and financial exploitation for grabbing share from the world scale profit that results in bankrupts when it falls behind in the competition by failing to maximize its profit through these instruments as well as through military occupations.) Moreover, as in the cases of Berlusconi, Trump, Cameron or Macron, the attempts of the bourgeoisie to hire some bourgeois characters and monopoly leaders directly to the head of the parties/governments or to the ministries do not help to provide a political stability, but rather aggravate the existing impasse.
As a result,the traditional bourgeois parties are losing their social basis and this fact shows that the bourgeois powers are no longer able to rule as they were before; they are in the political crisis.

 

Applying extraordinary Methods
Major parties in the central countries of capitalism, which were able to render the masses the social basis of the bourgeois dictatorships through parliamentarism, are now starting to use emergency methods such as the State of Emergency (the SP administration in France, the MR and NVA coalition in Belgium), the Patriot Decree-Law (the law çıkarıldı by the Bush administration and continued with Obama), or Statutory Decree Laws etc..
Similar emergency methods that the two major parties of bourgeoisie in different countries use under the name of fighting against ISIS or El Kaide are nothing other than thin excuses. The fact is that, under the conditions where the social support declines, bourgeoisie heads for implementing fascist forms through these kind of emergency methods, rather than wasting time by parliamentary means.
As it is mentioned above, the fact that the bourgeoisies of the capitalist centers, together with their major parties, are restricting the parliamentary bourgeois democracy, which used to function as a mean of influencing the masses by being exposed as the symbol of the "democracy for all" discourse and step-by-step applying the administration methods that are specific to the civil war conditions, indicates their political crisis clearly. And the most important aspect of this fact exposes itself in the conditions of governance crisis with the attacks to prevent the movements of workers and the oppressed to be revolutionized.

 

The Rise of the Neo-fascist Movements
Since the bourgeois syndicalism is also in the crisis on the same material basis with the conservative and social democrat parties, bourgeoisie has found the solution in developing neo-fascist movements. More precisely, along with undertaking the emergency fascist implementations as an urgent precaution through its conservative or social democrat governments, it creates the basis for the improvement of the neo-fascist movements.
The Tea Party Movement in the US and the presidency of the racist, sexist, antiimmigrant and fascistoid Trump, the rise of the Pegida movement and AfD in Germany, the strengthening of the National Front in France, the UK Independence Party in Britain, the ongoing impacts of the Freedom Party in Netherlands, the Northern League and the National Social Movement Party in Italy and the Freedom Party in Austria, the improvement of the neo-fascist Jobbik Party together with the fascistoid Fidesz governments for several times in Hungary... These examples shows that bourgeoisie in the conditions of crisis holds the neo-fascist movements and parties in reserve in a way to prevent the development of the revolutionary movement of the worker masses. But it also points out the political crisis of these new conditions.

 

Instability in the Financial-Economic Colonies
In the financial-economic colonies of imperialism, the crisis of the bourgeois political power exposes itself by uprisings, usage of extraordinary means of administration and rising fascism by means of the main "center" parties of the bourgeoisie.
During the 1980's, by the inducement of the US, Latin American countries had shifted from fascism to the reactionary parliamentary regimes which were named as the "low-intensity democracy". Through this way, the mass movements against the fascist juntas were tried to be restrained from turning into sharp revolutionary struggles. However, this attempt failed to prevent the uprisings which had started in the 90's and spread across the continent especially by the 2000's. By means of the petty-bourgeois unionists, parties, progressive movements and the fronts established by the old guerrilla movements, which had decided to conduct peaceful parliamentarian struggle, these uprisings had been absorbed and transformed into the means for establishing -popular or neo-liberal reformist governments. Nevertheless, the political crisis of the bourgeoisies soon erupted again.
Beginning from the end of 2010, there have been the uprisings of workers and the oppressed peoples in the Arab countries which sparked also those in Turkey and Iran. By creating a revolutionary situation, these mass movements rising from the grassroots demanding democracy, freedom and social rights, dragged the states and the bourgeoisies into political crises. The bourgeois ruling forces in these countries failed to put an end to their political crisis although some of their parts headed towards fascism, Muslim Brotherhood like dictatorships or military coups. The civil wars and occupations that are conducted by the imperialists with the reactionary states had deepened the chaos and crisis more than before. Now, also the fascist political Islamist opposition movements in Muslim countries are expanding the chaos, rarifying the political instability even more, and thus, the need for the popular and freedom-demanding revolutions becomes more and more urgent.
In the South European countries, there had been uprisings of the workers and the oppressed against unemployment, poverty and the burden of capitalism's crisis laying on workers. Despite bourgeoisie's tactic of neutralizing the mass struggles through a new type of social democratization for the petty-bourgeois movements together with functioning them in the government, the political instability and the crisis continue in these countries. While bourgeoisie is organizing neo-fascist movements as an alternative for the mass movements to become revolutionarized, the movements of the workers and the oppressed are insisting on exposing leftist and revolutionary characteristics in a large extent.
The Southeast and Far-Asian countries are also passing through a process of the political crisis which manifests itself by the progress of Islamist organizations, power struggles between the bourgeois cliques, the spread of chauvinist aggression as well as the revealance of the decay of the bourgeois rulers... This situation is accompanied by both the ongoing revolution processes coming from the past and the new mass movements.
In the case of Africa as well, the continuous instability exposes itself as the dominant reality which is characterized by ongoing reactionary civil wars, rise of the workers' strikes against neo-liberal capitalist aggression, wars between bourgeois states and the occupations of the imperialists relying on various excuses...
Thereby, concerning also the dimension of these countries, which had turned to be financial-colonies in the imperialist globalization period, we see that the imperialist capitalist system cannot emancipate itself from its political crisis. Regardless of what extent these mass movements (either started before or triggered by the political crisis) became revolutionized or carry a potential for turning into a revolution, it is a fact that ongoing political crisis in these wide links of the capitalist imperialism chain are being transformed into continuous governance crises.

 

Escalating the Reactionary Imperialist Wars
As the material conditions of nation states had been exceeded and the material conditions for the proletarian states to get united freely in an international level became favorable, the imperialist bourgeoisie started to give effort to strengthen its domination by praising the imperialist globalization through spreading the lies presenting imperialist occupations for "democracy and rights", the regional imperialist collaborations on the service of "development and peace".
It is also experienced in practice that the regional imperialist collaborations have been functioned as a stepping-stone for the imperialist states, which have the strongest world monopoly groups, towards their goal of a world scale domination. In that sense, the occupations and wars, which are escalated by the competition between imperialists, have been and keep on intensifying. Specifically in the regions where a dominance vacuum emerged at the beginning of the 90's, the wars between nations and states as well as the imperialist occupations have become increased and widespread up to the present.
This reality indicates not only the intensification level of the competition for the imperialist dominance but also the fact that bourgeoisies are spreading the reactionary and expansionist wars in order to deflect the discontent of the masses away from their own interests through the "nationalist" demagogies and wars. Thus, it becomes the expression of the intensity of bourgeoisie's political crisis.

 

The collapse of the "US Century"
It is another aspect of the intensification of capitalist imperialism's crisis that the "peaceful" order in the hierarchy of the imperialist states, which has actually been maintained by the sword of the dominant imperialist power, has left its place to chaos and wars.
In 1945, the world was divided into two blocs: the capitalist imperialist bloc under the leadership of the US and the socialist bloc under the leadership of the USSR.
This division was not only a sign of the imperialist world order's depression in political sense. Peoples living under the capitalist world states were considering the socialist bloc as a practical alternative for their liberation. However, as the Soviet Union passed towards a revisionist administration and caused a strategical weakening in the world communist and revolutionary movement, the world scale balance and the contradiction of power between the US and the USSR was meaning to a split in favor of the peoples of the world for their struggle against imperialism and local bourgeoisies in terms of the hierarchy of the world states.
Addition to this, some nationalist bourgeois regimes were able to determine policies by taking the advantage of this power balance. Majority of the states from the Non-Aligned Movement, which could be counted as anti-imperialists in a limited sense, or regimes like Saddam Hussein and Hafez al-Assad were those who took benefits from this contradiction.
When the Warsaw Pact, led by the Soviet Union, was liquidated in 1989-90, the US found the opportunity to establish a world system under its leadership, to collect all bourgeois states under its own rule. The thesis that the US would establish its own world empire forever with a greater power than the Roman Empire or the analysis of the "the US Century" had filled the atmosphere along with the prophecy of "the end of history".
As the imperialism under the leadership of the USA was integrating Russia and the revisionist bloc countries into the Western capitalism, there emerged two important consequences. First, the world monopolies ensured their dominance over these regions in financial-economic regard. On the other hand, leading this collective interest of the Western monopolies, the US attempted to re-shape a world political system under its war aggression in order to suppress a possible rivalry of Europe and Japan.
Through imposition, money and wars, the USA manages to pull its rank over the countries which were under the influence of the USSW as well as those positioned as buffer countries in the context of the power balance conditions between the USA and the USSR. The wars that divided Yugoslavia and others in Iraq 1991, Somalia, Afghanistan in 2001, the 2nd Iraq war in 2003, Lebanon, Libya in 2011, the wars in Syria, Yemen; coups 1991 and 2004 in US' backyard Haiti, and the defeated coup attempt against Chavez in 2002... These wars and coups were the means of the US to shape the world imperialist system under its domination and to prevent a possible division of influence and dominance by its rivals. All of these were for running the world under the domination of "Pax Americana". But the law of uneven capitalist development continued to function in a way leading to a change in power relations. Thus, before reaching to a stability, the unipolar imperialist world under the US domination shifted to a process where new imperialist power centers started to occur.
This time, the potential rivals were not the EU and Japan, but the alliance of China, which realized a rapid and long term financial-economic growth, and Russia, which had become a military alternative for the US by regenerating its military industry. In less than a quarter-century, the world dominance of the US had declined and started to collapse. As in the case of the mullah regime in Iran, far from dominating some of the bourgeois regimes which were relatively "autonomous", the US couldn't manage to prevent the ascendancy of the Iranian mullahs even in Iraq which was under its protectorate. In Latin America on the other hand, Chavez, Morales and the Ecuador administrations, together with Cuba, established the Bolivarian Alliance of the Latin America countries (ALBA) as a confrontation rose from the backyard of the US.
The US couldn't manage to reach to a stability in the majority of the regions where it imposed the war or directly occupied. Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Somalia and Syria are the examples of this. First time since the '90s, it has faced with such a determined rival in Syria, the Russian-Iranian alliance, and couldn't attempt for a direct occupation. In Ukraine, where it had organized a coup through improving the civil fascist movement, the US had to admit Russia's annexation and the separation of Southeast Ukraine. In Africa as well, it couldn't achieve a stability with the administrations that it established by occupations.
Starting by the '80s but mainly in the '90s, the US gave its effort to overcome the "Vietnam syndrome", in which it faced with the wave of revolutions and of people's revolutionary movements, through the aggression for establishing "the US Century". However, the monopolistic competition of the imperialist world together with the economic depression and the law of uneven development led to a change in the imperialist power relations and collapsed these such scenarios.
Now, as the greatest imperialist power, the US is meant to intensify the competition against its rivals in order to preserve its dominance. That's why it is escalating the warfare tendency and provoking a re-division war by leaning on its massive military strength.

 

The warfare provocation of the US
This aforementioned fact brings some important consequences: The US domination over its rivals and collaborators is trembling and declining.
Against the US protectionism starting with Trump's slogan "America First", reactions defending imperialist "globalization" have been rising in an extent from China to Germany and France; the competition is getting intensified. Being both, a threat and a mean to preserve its dominance, the US is increasing its military budget, escalating the arm race and mobilizing its massive military force for war.
Since from the last year of Obama through Trump's 54 billion dollar sign, the US military budget has escalated up to 619 billion dollars. This amount shows the will of the US to extend the warfare as a mean to cut the way of its rivals. Only the increase amount of the US military budget this year is almost equal to the sum of the British military budget of 2015 (55.5 billion dollars), at the same time being close to the Russian military budget of the same year ( 66.4 billion dollars).(www.aljazeera.com.tr, 28.02.17).
Placing heavy weapons in the NATO countries on the eastern border of Russia in Obama's last period, and others followed and increased by Trump such as launching missiles from the battleships to hit Syria, intensifying the air bombardments in Yemen couple of fold, using the heaviest conventional bomb in Afghanistan which is almost close to nuclear weapons or provoking warfare against North Korea by sending two aircraft ships carrying nuclear weapons... These are all reflecting the US policy of preserving its imperialist dominance through warfare, but at the same time, they are the direct threats against its rivals China and Russia.
Although the US warfare policy pushed the EU imperialists to "sedateness and reconciliation" in 2003, it is now pushing them much more to "protect their values and interests" whereas at the same time, provoking the Chinese-Russian alliance to stand against in military sense; and thus, laying the path for a new imperialist division war. In this picture, we can see that the US domination is declining whereas, the Chinese-Russian alliance as well as Germany holding the benefits of the EU, are coming to the fore as the focus of power.
The inevitability of the US' war against China and the scenario that a possible "reason" and the place would be the South China Sea, had been repeatedly voiced by Trump's election strategist, S. Bannon, who was also hired to the membership of the National Security Council for a short period. The Chinese military officials were forced to accept this in their foresight, but they did not give up to challenge the US. On the other hand, Trump, who were speaking in favor of reconciliation with Russia, had come to adopt the uncompromising aggression of the US imperialism as a result of the suppression of the US financial oligarchy and Pentagon.
Considering the nuclear "opportunities" that the leading war provocateur, the US, and its rival states and collaborators have, it is clear that today's possible imperialist re-division war would cause an unpredictable catastrophe for the laboring humanity and nature. The decline of the US dominance along with the challenges of other imperialist powers following their own interests gives way for even the financial-economic colony regimes to voice their particular reactionary interest loudly. The governments of Maliki in Iraq, Erdoğan in Turkey and Mondi in India,who have been following their own regional expansionist political lines in some extent, do owe their capability to implement such kind of policies to this depression in the hierarchy of world imperialist states. Those like Duterte, promising to change their ranks, or Iran shuttle between reconciliation and conflict are also encouraged by this depression.
The fore-days of the 1st imperialist re-division war was the period where the world dominance of Britain's world dominance had already been declined, new imperialist power focuses like US and Germany emerged and the process towards the imperialist re-division war had been accelerated Today, we can talk about a similar situation however with different actors with different armament levels as well as with the globalized conditions of the imperialist capitalism that would inevitability cause demolitions in a larger scale.
The war at the beginning of the last century led to an economic-political depression. The monopolization level on the fore-days of the war had accelerated the law of uneven development, declined the world domination of British imperialism, brought the development levels of other imperialist power focuses close and thus, gave birth to the demand for a re-division war. Today, the economic depression prioritized the war provocation and together with the change in the power relations in economic-financial terms, it causes a political depression in the imperialist hierarchy along with increasing the actors' tendency for the warfare provocation.
The 2nd imperialist division war came upon a grave and long economic depression of '29. Just like that period, today's growing danger of war is being escalated upon a long-term economic depression. However, unlike both periods, it rises from the basis of capitalism's existential crisis.
Because of this reason, unlike the cases of Britain and USA in those war periods, it cannot be said that a new era under the dominance of one great imperialist state would follow after the chaos and war.
As a result, capitalist imperialism is in a political crisis both in the centers and financial-economic colonies, and it is a fact that the world is passing through conditions towards a new imperialist division war.
This political crisis is one part of the complete existential crisis of capitalism. For this reason, it cannot be substituted with a long-term political stability, neither through improving neo-fascist movements, nor wars. The continuous political depression and wars can be permanently stopped only by the socialism struggle of the working class and the oppressed which will overthrow the power of the class being the source of the depression.

 

 

Archive

 

2019
March
2018
November September
June March
2017
October
2008
December January
2007
January
2006
January
2005
April
2004
September

 

The Political Crisis of Imperialist Capitalism
fc Share on Twitter

 

Based on its existential crisis, the capitalist imperialism is having a political crisis. This fact exposes itself in two ways.

First, not only in the neo-colonies but also in the capitalist centers as well, bourgeoisie is in a depression of keeping the masses under its political power by means of its major parties and collaborators within the working class.
Secondly, the political stability of the US' domination over the imperialist world hierarchy has been substituted with an intensified imperialist competition.


The Depression of the Traditional Parties in the Capitalist Centers
The political crisis of the bourgeoisie is actually what Lenin puts forward as the first condition for defining the revolutionary situation; "...when it becomes impossible for the dominant classes to maintain their dominance without transforming into a new form; a crisis of the ruling classes"
Bourgeoisie finds itself in a political crisis when the contradictions between the cliques become sharply intensified and the bourgeoisie fails to maintain its dominance as used to be and resorts to new ruling forms.
Bourgeoisie holds the monopoly of armed force in its hands in order to protect its economic, social and thus, the political dominance. However, it cannot preserve its power only through the armed force without having a social basis. Since the capitalist society, which does not have only two major classes, the proletariat and the bourgeoisie being in antagonistic contradiction, but also the petty-bourgeois class that consist of different layers, bourgeoisie provides the social support from and through that intermediate class; the semi-proletarian and the proletarian sections.
All efforts and policies of bourgeoisie for showing its state apparatus, which is composed of military-civilian bureaucracy, in an objective form, as well as establishing different parties with different political lines, linking the mass organizations to itself or presenting the "parliament" as the mean of representation, come out from the necessity to provide the mass support in order to maintain its power.
In the imperialist states, especially in the periods where there is a low level of proletarian mass movement together with a relative stability rather than an economic crisis and a temporary reconciliation instead of wars, bourgeoisie manages to maintain the political mechanism, which allows parties to formally rule through parliaments that are presented as the symbol of "democracy and freedom", and gives effort to create the perception that administration is actually provided by this mechanism.
Thus, wide oppressed and laboring masses are rendered the social basis of the bourgeois power through "bourgeois democracy, although (it means) a great historical advance in comparison with feudalism" (Lenin) and its symbols; the bourgeois parliament and the parliamentarian parties. The petty-bourgeois and the worker aristocracy as the intermediate classes, play the essential role in this mechanism by filling the cadres of these parties.
But in the periods when the mass movements of the exploited classes rise up and endanger the bourgeois power, bourgeoisie resorts for extraordinary methods at the expense of violating the perception that it creates. State of emergency, martial law, state of war, fascism, military coups are the major methods of this situation.
This corresponds to the transition of the bourgeois dictatorship itself where it passes from one form to another and primarily, it is the sign of a political crisis. That is to say, bourgeoisie responds its political crisis by shifting to an open terrorist form together with using civil war methods. With such new forms, it protects its power from the threads of the proletariat and the oppressed classes as well as suppresses possible power struggles or an internal division.
Today, in the central countries of capitalism, the administration model in the form of bourgeois parliamentarism, which has been lasted from 1945 to the 2000's, began to enter into a crisis together with its two major parties. The conservative and social democratic bourgeois parties, which are expressed as "the center right and the center left", have eliminated their difference first in the economic and then in external and internal political spheres. The abolishing of the difference between these parties in the economic sphere as well as in the sense of imperialist expansionism was given by Lenin as an example of the decay of imperialism: "The difference between the democratic-republican and the reactionary-monarchist imperialist bourgeoisie is obliterated precisely because they are both rotting alive." (Lenin, Imperialism and the Split in Socialism ). From here, he was emphasizing the necessity of the proletarian masses to move for a revolutionary rupture.
This phenomenon, which started at the beginning of the last century, had been able to remain at the background for a long time during the decades after the 2nd re-division war, when imperialism had the opportunity to implement its "welfare state" policy. But today it has become permanent by gaining an irreversible character.
In the US, France, Germany, England and other imperialist countries, there is no difference left between the conservative parties and the social democratic parties in terms of their economic and imperialist warfare policies. Plus, regarding also their common sides in terms of implementing the State of Emergency and the Statuary Decrees, it is a fact that they don't have any difference except from some matters like racism, homophobia and hostility against immigrants. In that sense, for example, Corbyn's election to the Labor Party as a result of the disappointment caused by Blair, who was the same as Thatcher, will either remain as casus or - if Corbyn wins a general election- result in a compulsorily veer towards the policies of the British oriented world monopolies.
This fact is important to remember that these parties from both wings used to function for the power of the imperialist bourgeoisie in the sense of binding the masses which have been under the influence of the conservative tradition in one hand and of the historical struggles of the workers movement with the tradition of bourgeois revolutions on the other. But now, this function of the parties is dying out.
The economical opportunities, which used to allow bourgeoisie to give economic-social rights under the name of "the welfare state/social state", was the material basis of the bourgeoisie in getting the consent of the masses, making them the social support of their power for decades by means of its parties and mass organizations. But for almost 30 years, under the conditions of the imperialist globalization, bourgeoisie has got to and has been gradually eliminating these rights. It has necessarily been reducing the worker aristocracy down to a trivial size. In these conditions of the existential crisis of capitalism, bourgeoisie is unable to expand the worker aristocracy. (This fact arises from its own character based on cheap labor and financial exploitation for grabbing share from the world scale profit that results in bankrupts when it falls behind in the competition by failing to maximize its profit through these instruments as well as through military occupations.) Moreover, as in the cases of Berlusconi, Trump, Cameron or Macron, the attempts of the bourgeoisie to hire some bourgeois characters and monopoly leaders directly to the head of the parties/governments or to the ministries do not help to provide a political stability, but rather aggravate the existing impasse.
As a result,the traditional bourgeois parties are losing their social basis and this fact shows that the bourgeois powers are no longer able to rule as they were before; they are in the political crisis.

 

Applying extraordinary Methods
Major parties in the central countries of capitalism, which were able to render the masses the social basis of the bourgeois dictatorships through parliamentarism, are now starting to use emergency methods such as the State of Emergency (the SP administration in France, the MR and NVA coalition in Belgium), the Patriot Decree-Law (the law çıkarıldı by the Bush administration and continued with Obama), or Statutory Decree Laws etc..
Similar emergency methods that the two major parties of bourgeoisie in different countries use under the name of fighting against ISIS or El Kaide are nothing other than thin excuses. The fact is that, under the conditions where the social support declines, bourgeoisie heads for implementing fascist forms through these kind of emergency methods, rather than wasting time by parliamentary means.
As it is mentioned above, the fact that the bourgeoisies of the capitalist centers, together with their major parties, are restricting the parliamentary bourgeois democracy, which used to function as a mean of influencing the masses by being exposed as the symbol of the "democracy for all" discourse and step-by-step applying the administration methods that are specific to the civil war conditions, indicates their political crisis clearly. And the most important aspect of this fact exposes itself in the conditions of governance crisis with the attacks to prevent the movements of workers and the oppressed to be revolutionized.

 

The Rise of the Neo-fascist Movements
Since the bourgeois syndicalism is also in the crisis on the same material basis with the conservative and social democrat parties, bourgeoisie has found the solution in developing neo-fascist movements. More precisely, along with undertaking the emergency fascist implementations as an urgent precaution through its conservative or social democrat governments, it creates the basis for the improvement of the neo-fascist movements.
The Tea Party Movement in the US and the presidency of the racist, sexist, antiimmigrant and fascistoid Trump, the rise of the Pegida movement and AfD in Germany, the strengthening of the National Front in France, the UK Independence Party in Britain, the ongoing impacts of the Freedom Party in Netherlands, the Northern League and the National Social Movement Party in Italy and the Freedom Party in Austria, the improvement of the neo-fascist Jobbik Party together with the fascistoid Fidesz governments for several times in Hungary... These examples shows that bourgeoisie in the conditions of crisis holds the neo-fascist movements and parties in reserve in a way to prevent the development of the revolutionary movement of the worker masses. But it also points out the political crisis of these new conditions.

 

Instability in the Financial-Economic Colonies
In the financial-economic colonies of imperialism, the crisis of the bourgeois political power exposes itself by uprisings, usage of extraordinary means of administration and rising fascism by means of the main "center" parties of the bourgeoisie.
During the 1980's, by the inducement of the US, Latin American countries had shifted from fascism to the reactionary parliamentary regimes which were named as the "low-intensity democracy". Through this way, the mass movements against the fascist juntas were tried to be restrained from turning into sharp revolutionary struggles. However, this attempt failed to prevent the uprisings which had started in the 90's and spread across the continent especially by the 2000's. By means of the petty-bourgeois unionists, parties, progressive movements and the fronts established by the old guerrilla movements, which had decided to conduct peaceful parliamentarian struggle, these uprisings had been absorbed and transformed into the means for establishing -popular or neo-liberal reformist governments. Nevertheless, the political crisis of the bourgeoisies soon erupted again.
Beginning from the end of 2010, there have been the uprisings of workers and the oppressed peoples in the Arab countries which sparked also those in Turkey and Iran. By creating a revolutionary situation, these mass movements rising from the grassroots demanding democracy, freedom and social rights, dragged the states and the bourgeoisies into political crises. The bourgeois ruling forces in these countries failed to put an end to their political crisis although some of their parts headed towards fascism, Muslim Brotherhood like dictatorships or military coups. The civil wars and occupations that are conducted by the imperialists with the reactionary states had deepened the chaos and crisis more than before. Now, also the fascist political Islamist opposition movements in Muslim countries are expanding the chaos, rarifying the political instability even more, and thus, the need for the popular and freedom-demanding revolutions becomes more and more urgent.
In the South European countries, there had been uprisings of the workers and the oppressed against unemployment, poverty and the burden of capitalism's crisis laying on workers. Despite bourgeoisie's tactic of neutralizing the mass struggles through a new type of social democratization for the petty-bourgeois movements together with functioning them in the government, the political instability and the crisis continue in these countries. While bourgeoisie is organizing neo-fascist movements as an alternative for the mass movements to become revolutionarized, the movements of the workers and the oppressed are insisting on exposing leftist and revolutionary characteristics in a large extent.
The Southeast and Far-Asian countries are also passing through a process of the political crisis which manifests itself by the progress of Islamist organizations, power struggles between the bourgeois cliques, the spread of chauvinist aggression as well as the revealance of the decay of the bourgeois rulers... This situation is accompanied by both the ongoing revolution processes coming from the past and the new mass movements.
In the case of Africa as well, the continuous instability exposes itself as the dominant reality which is characterized by ongoing reactionary civil wars, rise of the workers' strikes against neo-liberal capitalist aggression, wars between bourgeois states and the occupations of the imperialists relying on various excuses...
Thereby, concerning also the dimension of these countries, which had turned to be financial-colonies in the imperialist globalization period, we see that the imperialist capitalist system cannot emancipate itself from its political crisis. Regardless of what extent these mass movements (either started before or triggered by the political crisis) became revolutionized or carry a potential for turning into a revolution, it is a fact that ongoing political crisis in these wide links of the capitalist imperialism chain are being transformed into continuous governance crises.

 

Escalating the Reactionary Imperialist Wars
As the material conditions of nation states had been exceeded and the material conditions for the proletarian states to get united freely in an international level became favorable, the imperialist bourgeoisie started to give effort to strengthen its domination by praising the imperialist globalization through spreading the lies presenting imperialist occupations for "democracy and rights", the regional imperialist collaborations on the service of "development and peace".
It is also experienced in practice that the regional imperialist collaborations have been functioned as a stepping-stone for the imperialist states, which have the strongest world monopoly groups, towards their goal of a world scale domination. In that sense, the occupations and wars, which are escalated by the competition between imperialists, have been and keep on intensifying. Specifically in the regions where a dominance vacuum emerged at the beginning of the 90's, the wars between nations and states as well as the imperialist occupations have become increased and widespread up to the present.
This reality indicates not only the intensification level of the competition for the imperialist dominance but also the fact that bourgeoisies are spreading the reactionary and expansionist wars in order to deflect the discontent of the masses away from their own interests through the "nationalist" demagogies and wars. Thus, it becomes the expression of the intensity of bourgeoisie's political crisis.

 

The collapse of the "US Century"
It is another aspect of the intensification of capitalist imperialism's crisis that the "peaceful" order in the hierarchy of the imperialist states, which has actually been maintained by the sword of the dominant imperialist power, has left its place to chaos and wars.
In 1945, the world was divided into two blocs: the capitalist imperialist bloc under the leadership of the US and the socialist bloc under the leadership of the USSR.
This division was not only a sign of the imperialist world order's depression in political sense. Peoples living under the capitalist world states were considering the socialist bloc as a practical alternative for their liberation. However, as the Soviet Union passed towards a revisionist administration and caused a strategical weakening in the world communist and revolutionary movement, the world scale balance and the contradiction of power between the US and the USSR was meaning to a split in favor of the peoples of the world for their struggle against imperialism and local bourgeoisies in terms of the hierarchy of the world states.
Addition to this, some nationalist bourgeois regimes were able to determine policies by taking the advantage of this power balance. Majority of the states from the Non-Aligned Movement, which could be counted as anti-imperialists in a limited sense, or regimes like Saddam Hussein and Hafez al-Assad were those who took benefits from this contradiction.
When the Warsaw Pact, led by the Soviet Union, was liquidated in 1989-90, the US found the opportunity to establish a world system under its leadership, to collect all bourgeois states under its own rule. The thesis that the US would establish its own world empire forever with a greater power than the Roman Empire or the analysis of the "the US Century" had filled the atmosphere along with the prophecy of "the end of history".
As the imperialism under the leadership of the USA was integrating Russia and the revisionist bloc countries into the Western capitalism, there emerged two important consequences. First, the world monopolies ensured their dominance over these regions in financial-economic regard. On the other hand, leading this collective interest of the Western monopolies, the US attempted to re-shape a world political system under its war aggression in order to suppress a possible rivalry of Europe and Japan.
Through imposition, money and wars, the USA manages to pull its rank over the countries which were under the influence of the USSW as well as those positioned as buffer countries in the context of the power balance conditions between the USA and the USSR. The wars that divided Yugoslavia and others in Iraq 1991, Somalia, Afghanistan in 2001, the 2nd Iraq war in 2003, Lebanon, Libya in 2011, the wars in Syria, Yemen; coups 1991 and 2004 in US' backyard Haiti, and the defeated coup attempt against Chavez in 2002... These wars and coups were the means of the US to shape the world imperialist system under its domination and to prevent a possible division of influence and dominance by its rivals. All of these were for running the world under the domination of "Pax Americana". But the law of uneven capitalist development continued to function in a way leading to a change in power relations. Thus, before reaching to a stability, the unipolar imperialist world under the US domination shifted to a process where new imperialist power centers started to occur.
This time, the potential rivals were not the EU and Japan, but the alliance of China, which realized a rapid and long term financial-economic growth, and Russia, which had become a military alternative for the US by regenerating its military industry. In less than a quarter-century, the world dominance of the US had declined and started to collapse. As in the case of the mullah regime in Iran, far from dominating some of the bourgeois regimes which were relatively "autonomous", the US couldn't manage to prevent the ascendancy of the Iranian mullahs even in Iraq which was under its protectorate. In Latin America on the other hand, Chavez, Morales and the Ecuador administrations, together with Cuba, established the Bolivarian Alliance of the Latin America countries (ALBA) as a confrontation rose from the backyard of the US.
The US couldn't manage to reach to a stability in the majority of the regions where it imposed the war or directly occupied. Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Somalia and Syria are the examples of this. First time since the '90s, it has faced with such a determined rival in Syria, the Russian-Iranian alliance, and couldn't attempt for a direct occupation. In Ukraine, where it had organized a coup through improving the civil fascist movement, the US had to admit Russia's annexation and the separation of Southeast Ukraine. In Africa as well, it couldn't achieve a stability with the administrations that it established by occupations.
Starting by the '80s but mainly in the '90s, the US gave its effort to overcome the "Vietnam syndrome", in which it faced with the wave of revolutions and of people's revolutionary movements, through the aggression for establishing "the US Century". However, the monopolistic competition of the imperialist world together with the economic depression and the law of uneven development led to a change in the imperialist power relations and collapsed these such scenarios.
Now, as the greatest imperialist power, the US is meant to intensify the competition against its rivals in order to preserve its dominance. That's why it is escalating the warfare tendency and provoking a re-division war by leaning on its massive military strength.

 

The warfare provocation of the US
This aforementioned fact brings some important consequences: The US domination over its rivals and collaborators is trembling and declining.
Against the US protectionism starting with Trump's slogan "America First", reactions defending imperialist "globalization" have been rising in an extent from China to Germany and France; the competition is getting intensified. Being both, a threat and a mean to preserve its dominance, the US is increasing its military budget, escalating the arm race and mobilizing its massive military force for war.
Since from the last year of Obama through Trump's 54 billion dollar sign, the US military budget has escalated up to 619 billion dollars. This amount shows the will of the US to extend the warfare as a mean to cut the way of its rivals. Only the increase amount of the US military budget this year is almost equal to the sum of the British military budget of 2015 (55.5 billion dollars), at the same time being close to the Russian military budget of the same year ( 66.4 billion dollars).(www.aljazeera.com.tr, 28.02.17).
Placing heavy weapons in the NATO countries on the eastern border of Russia in Obama's last period, and others followed and increased by Trump such as launching missiles from the battleships to hit Syria, intensifying the air bombardments in Yemen couple of fold, using the heaviest conventional bomb in Afghanistan which is almost close to nuclear weapons or provoking warfare against North Korea by sending two aircraft ships carrying nuclear weapons... These are all reflecting the US policy of preserving its imperialist dominance through warfare, but at the same time, they are the direct threats against its rivals China and Russia.
Although the US warfare policy pushed the EU imperialists to "sedateness and reconciliation" in 2003, it is now pushing them much more to "protect their values and interests" whereas at the same time, provoking the Chinese-Russian alliance to stand against in military sense; and thus, laying the path for a new imperialist division war. In this picture, we can see that the US domination is declining whereas, the Chinese-Russian alliance as well as Germany holding the benefits of the EU, are coming to the fore as the focus of power.
The inevitability of the US' war against China and the scenario that a possible "reason" and the place would be the South China Sea, had been repeatedly voiced by Trump's election strategist, S. Bannon, who was also hired to the membership of the National Security Council for a short period. The Chinese military officials were forced to accept this in their foresight, but they did not give up to challenge the US. On the other hand, Trump, who were speaking in favor of reconciliation with Russia, had come to adopt the uncompromising aggression of the US imperialism as a result of the suppression of the US financial oligarchy and Pentagon.
Considering the nuclear "opportunities" that the leading war provocateur, the US, and its rival states and collaborators have, it is clear that today's possible imperialist re-division war would cause an unpredictable catastrophe for the laboring humanity and nature. The decline of the US dominance along with the challenges of other imperialist powers following their own interests gives way for even the financial-economic colony regimes to voice their particular reactionary interest loudly. The governments of Maliki in Iraq, Erdoğan in Turkey and Mondi in India,who have been following their own regional expansionist political lines in some extent, do owe their capability to implement such kind of policies to this depression in the hierarchy of world imperialist states. Those like Duterte, promising to change their ranks, or Iran shuttle between reconciliation and conflict are also encouraged by this depression.
The fore-days of the 1st imperialist re-division war was the period where the world dominance of Britain's world dominance had already been declined, new imperialist power focuses like US and Germany emerged and the process towards the imperialist re-division war had been accelerated Today, we can talk about a similar situation however with different actors with different armament levels as well as with the globalized conditions of the imperialist capitalism that would inevitability cause demolitions in a larger scale.
The war at the beginning of the last century led to an economic-political depression. The monopolization level on the fore-days of the war had accelerated the law of uneven development, declined the world domination of British imperialism, brought the development levels of other imperialist power focuses close and thus, gave birth to the demand for a re-division war. Today, the economic depression prioritized the war provocation and together with the change in the power relations in economic-financial terms, it causes a political depression in the imperialist hierarchy along with increasing the actors' tendency for the warfare provocation.
The 2nd imperialist division war came upon a grave and long economic depression of '29. Just like that period, today's growing danger of war is being escalated upon a long-term economic depression. However, unlike both periods, it rises from the basis of capitalism's existential crisis.
Because of this reason, unlike the cases of Britain and USA in those war periods, it cannot be said that a new era under the dominance of one great imperialist state would follow after the chaos and war.
As a result, capitalist imperialism is in a political crisis both in the centers and financial-economic colonies, and it is a fact that the world is passing through conditions towards a new imperialist division war.
This political crisis is one part of the complete existential crisis of capitalism. For this reason, it cannot be substituted with a long-term political stability, neither through improving neo-fascist movements, nor wars. The continuous political depression and wars can be permanently stopped only by the socialism struggle of the working class and the oppressed which will overthrow the power of the class being the source of the depression.