U.S. Hegemony and the Crisis of the Revolutionary Movement

For many years, the international revolutionary movement has been in profound crisis. This crisis is not fundamentally the product of objective circumstances, much less of personal conflicts or organizational methods. If there is a crisis, it’s because the Marxist movement has not correctly set out its tasks in light of the realities of the international situation.

After the fall of the USSR, the international position of the United States became hegemonic. Globalization, the European Union, free trade and privatization all evolved under the aegis of the U.S., to the detriment of workers and under the ideological cover of liberalism. So what was necessary was to fight against U.S. imperialism and the influence of liberalism. If the revolutionary left is weak, it’s because it didn’t even recognize this task.

The ICL has not been spared post-Soviet political disorientation. Our organization was shaken by successive internal crises, and its interventions in the class struggle were sterile and sectarian. What sets us apart today is that we have sought to understand the origins of our crisis and to apply the lessons we have learned in practice.

Today, the world situation is evolving by leaps and bounds. Trump has shed the mask of liberalism and is pursuing an aggressive and openly reactionary policy to counter the relative decline of the United States. It’s up to revolutionaries to provide clear answers to the great problems of our time.

Marxism versus Dogmatism

All too often, Marxist thought is replaced by abstract formulas totally disconnected from historical development and from the dynamics of the class struggle. This is the case particularly when it comes to major world conflicts.

A series of arbitrary facts are selected and used to determine whether we have before us an “imperialist state,” a “non-imperialist state” or a “workers state.” Once a label has been selected, no further thought is necessary; one can come up with a quick mathematical formula: imperialist state + non-imperialist state = defeatism. And this passes for Marxism!

Many claim to be Leninists while forgetting the political considerations behind Lenin’s analysis. When he insisted on the interimperialist character of the First World War, it was not out of dogmatism but to advance the political unity of the proletariat. In his time, the world was divided between a handful of colonial empires that oppressed the majority of peoples and nations. Unity of the oppressed was impossible as long as workers in imperialist countries were fighting alongside their own bourgeoisie to defend its right to oppress other nations.

Now, as then, the unity of the working class against the bourgeoisie must be the primary consideration guiding a Marxist analysis of the world. Indeed, it is this very consideration that will enable the international revolutionary vanguard to put an end to its own divisions. Truth is always concrete, so let’s set aside empty formulas and abstractions and set the tasks of the proletariat in the framework of the historical development of imperialism.

Imperialism Since 1945

From the rubble of the Second World War, the United States forged a new world order. The old colonial powers soon ceased to play a truly independent role on the international stage and became second-rate partners in a capitalist world dominated by the U.S. giant.

The destruction of the USSR in 1991 fundamentally changed the balance of international forces, but it did not change the alliance between the imperialist powers. The EU was founded with the agreement and assistance of the United States to promote the eastern expansion of finance capital. Japan, Australia and the U.S. similarly worked together in Asia to exploit the continent.

Today, the world is still ruled by the American empire and its postwar institutions. Neocolonial countries are plundered by debt owed in U.S. dollars and guaranteed by the U.S. military. The balance of international power has certainly changed. But the world has not been redivided. There are no new imperialist powers. We are still in a world shaped by the postwar era and the collapse of the USSR.

Every day Trump shows that the United States is not going to give up its dominant position without waging a merciless struggle against its rivals and the world’s oppressed. To think that U.S. hegemony has already been broken, without a war, without a crisis, reflects a liberal-pacifist view of history. “Peaceful” economic development constantly alters the international balance of forces, but an imperialist order is born and dies through iron and blood.

The Ukraine War

The war in Ukraine is the result of American overextension. Since 1991, NATO has been constantly expanding, not Russia.

This in no way means that Russia is waging a just war in Ukraine. Russia seeks to dominate Ukraine, and the resulting national oppression can only poison relations between Russian and Ukrainian workers. It’s true that Ukraine’s defeat will be a defeat for the United States. But this defeat doesn’t directly involve the U.S. military. The United States is already showing that it is ready to abandon Ukraine, reach an agreement with the Russians and concentrate its resources against China—predictable and reactionary developments.

It is totally legitimate for Ukrainians to defend their independence. But it is not legitimate to fight to bring pro-Russian regions back under Kyiv’s control. National unity around this chauvinist goal, and the alliance with Western imperialism, give a reactionary character to the Ukrainian war effort. Moreover, this strategy undermines Ukrainian national defense.

Internationalist unity requires:

• A rejection of Western imperialism
• A mutual guarantee of the right to self-determination
• Opposition to the Russian and Ukrainian bourgeoisies
• Fraternization and revolutionary defeatism

China

Many consider China to be an imperialist power. But China does not oppress any nation outside its borders! Its investments abroad are entirely dependent on institutions set up by the United States. Be it in Ukraine, Palestine or the various African conflicts, China plays a conservative role. The political instability on the international scene is not due to Chinese expansionism but to U.S. imperialism, which is seeking to maintain its domination by suffocating China.

Some revolutionary parties believe that capitalism was never abolished in China, while others believe there has been a gradual restoration of capitalism, without a counterrevolution. Let’s put aside the categories for a moment and look at the facts:

• In 1949, a peasant insurrection liberated China from imperialist oppression and drove out the Chinese bourgeoisie, which fled to Taiwan.
• The Communist Party of China (CPC) led the revolution based on a bureaucratic Stalinist program.
• After the fall of the USSR, the CPC embarked on a policy of economic liberalization while keeping the state and political structure intact.

• — Did workers need to defend the gains of the 1949 Chinese Revolution? Yes!
• — Should they have supported the CPC’s policies? No!
• — Is there anything to defend in China today? Yes!

Chinese workers have every interest in fighting the United States, which seeks to subordinate China and destroy its economy. They also have a vested interest in defending the Chinese state forged in the revolution which has led to economic development never seen in history. But they must also oppose the CPC, which conciliates the capitalists and undermines the gains of the revolution.

The example of the USSR shows the disaster a capitalist counterrevolution entails. We cannot afford for such a catastrophe to be repeated!

Palestinian Liberation

Israel’s genocidal war is a war of national oppression. The Palestinian national liberation struggle is a just struggle. To reject this is a gross capitulation to imperialism and to Zionism.

That said, Palestinian liberation cannot be won with a bourgeois-nationalist strategy. The tactics and policies of Hamas are counterproductive to Palestinian national liberation.

What is needed is a program that unites national liberation and proletarian internationalism—in other words, the program of permanent revolution.

• U.S. imperialism is the main reactionary force in the region.
• There can be no Palestinian national liberation without the destruction of the Zionist state.
• The oppression of Israeli workers is heightened by the oppression of the Palestinians.
• Proletarian unity can only be forged with mutual respect for national rights.
• Bourgeois nationalism is an obstacle to the struggle against imperialism.

Analysis and Program

Analytical debates reflect class relations. The main error of contemporary Marxist analyses reflects the main political error: a conciliation of U.S. imperialism in its liberal form. Equally problematic are those who attribute a progressive character to the actions of Russia, the CPC or nationalism.

Against these two poles, what’s necessary is an independent proletarian path. This alternative must be forged in struggle against the current leaders of the workers movement, who everywhere are leading workers to defeat and defending the interests of “their” national bourgeoisie.