strategy and tactics

 In Ireland we do share an electorate platform with the S.P. However, every country has different strengths and weaknesses. In Ireland the partnership agreement has effectively gagged the trade union movement, which has almost entirely wiped clear any memory of organised struggle from the rank and file, where as in Britain this is much stronger. I think the strategy we employ have to consider the real material forces, which have emerged over the last 30 years, as its this understanding that exposes the real material agent of social forces in society at large.

 For instance it is not uprising that women have been at the forefront of struggle in Ireland, as the shifts in production to a service based economy has accelerated women in the work place. This has intern highlighted women as key social force in agitating against austerity as they have the most to lose. Another important factor is how capitalism has shifted from industrial capital to financial capital so often we hear that Marx was primarily concerned with industrial workers. Yet although this is a complete misunderstanding of Marx’s class analysis it still has a lot of purchase.  

The point being that wage labour has no control over their conditions increasingly   capitalism under neo liberalism has drawn this pool into an ever higher proportion. So regardless of people working in banks, industry or in services their condition is bound to market forces revealing higher levels of alienated labour with little or no means to alleviate these forces.  This means that out of necessity we have to appeal to the widest layers of society exhausting all political and economic reforms at are disposal to highlights the inadequacies of bourgeois rule.

 One of the most important characteristics of the neo liberalism today is that capitalism hasn’t the funds or recourses to buy off large sections of working calss, as it did in late 60s. This is important when considering cuts in health, education and housing not only does this expose reformist parties for their inadequacies at maintaining a fairer type of capitalism. It also highlights a clear ideological argument which is, if you want a health system, if you want better housing and education the state will not be able to provide for these, as these demands curtails capitalisms ability to accumulate.  Therefore  reformist demands, such as these will have to be fought for, which means going against the logic of the system.

 I can definitely empathise with your argument about the media yet the media are limited to the strengths and weakness of struggle. The greater the struggle on the streets the further they isolate them self’s form being biased and as you said correctly supporting the 1 percent. Philosophically the bourgeois logic stems from the notion that the idea precedes the act. the reason why I mention this is that often the media present the world, as individual actors all competing against one another in an atomised existence .this in times of boom conceals the true social relations operating to maintain the system. These social relations are forged into class antagonism which emerges from the money form.

Yet although the media presents this false world dominated by these atomistic features, in periods of struggle consciousness is untied against the material forces of exploitation. It’s this combined and often contradictory consciousness that shapes the point of struggle against austerity.  The reason why it’s combined is that by self interest it forces consciousness to generalise against the cuts, but its contradictory character can undermine the leaps being made by engaging in struggle with backward ideas stemming form reactionary views being disseminated by the media.

The reason why it shapes the point of struggle against austerity is based on the strengths of the revolutionary party to intervene in these arguments and push the movement forward. Unfortunately our rulers look for weaknesses in the movement and try to break through those lines of resistance. Fortunately our rulers globally are on the retreat yet with the huge consignment of recourses at their disposal they can always turn this around. This is why we have to be very concrete about our demands and know are strengths and limitations we to go on the defensive and when to retreat.

 In my opinion ironically the ideological malaise of post modernity which prioritised political rights over economic rights have given us a chance to unite the political economic sphere. Issues like, LGBT, Race equality and Women’s Rights have become popularised in society, as a default strand of struggle against Neo liberalism. Yet, as the economic crisis grows in stature these two seemingly separate categories according to bourgeois experts are being forced together. However, in order to seize upon this opportunity we must purge the more conservative layers of the left to take advantage of this situation.     

 However the strength of revolutionary party can intervene in these forces, which questions and eliminates the more reactionary ideas of the movement and push it, as a generalised force against the cuts and more importantly beyond the logic of capitalism. Yet this means appealing to widest layers of society even with those who seam to have a reactionary consciousness. There is no such thing as pure consciousness we are all tarnished by media bias, but in directly challenging the system we collectively challenge racist and sexist ideas within society.

Gramsci was right when he used the term the organic intellectual capitalism by it very nature pushes people into interdependency yet it relies on a pyramid scheme to redistribute profit. When we question the nature of the system through struggle we highlight the limitations of our rulers. More to the point the oxygen that sustains capitalism is our own inaction and apathy collectively we are the agents of change once we realise our power the bias of the media will seam irrelevant and perversely mediocre.    

Stagnation in the eurozone and the necessity for resistance

In Ireland the crippling monolith of austerity has drawn a clear line of intention, which has paralysed society into an ever expanding logic that makes the inevitable, sound radical.  Over the last four year their has been 71 percent drop of fixed capital assets. This has been compounded by a an investment strike, as capitialist hoarded their money until wages have been pushed down sufficiently enough to guarantee a higher rate of return. subsequently this was the main reason for the credit crunch.      

The ECB/IMF bail out has accelerated cuts in Ireland to such an extent that:  mental health users are forced to pay for medication cuts in special needs, schools and hospitals being closed. Attacks in welfare, lone parents and back to education allowance, scraping public housing, slashing wages, driving up the retirement age and attacking pensions has become an all to familiar feature of the current climate This astoundingly has been coupled with privatising public amenities from buses to the waste, imposing stealth taxes ranging from water to house charges, while simultaneously fuelling emigration and job losses. You would be forgiven for dismissing politics and switching the T.V on to silent mode, as you watch the x factor on a Saturday night.

Underneath the veneer of politicians claiming to act in the nation’s interest and to the so called impartial experts, we see a consent theme emerge exposed in the maligned bias of the media. This strand of thought emerges in the Austrian school in the 1930s, which was later developed by the Chicago school by notable academic celebrities, such as Milton Friedman. To understand this economic strategy we need to go back to the economic crisis of the 1970s. Keynesian policies generated constant growth, from the 1950 until the late 1960s. In fact this period of capitalist production went through the longest boom the world had ever known even earning the title the golden age of capitalism.

          

 The global economy since the 1970s and the era of Neo liberalism

Keynesianism, as an economic theory relied on a number of assumptions to drive it forward principle the state would intervene in the economy to sustain growth by initiating full employment by way of state industries. This drew in a large expanse of public work schemes ranging from buses to car manufacturing and military production. When a combination of stagnate economic growth and inflation began to sore the Keynesian solution seamed to out of touch with the modern world and radical plans were drawn up to overhaul the global economy.  This came in guise of the marginalist so called because they were considered so outrageously pro market that they were marginalised by policy circles.

With the rising flames of resistance spear headed by the unfolding events in May France 68 the world seamed to edging further and further towards revolution. This coupled by seemingly inability of the Keynesian solution to provide economic growth opened a space for the marginalists to exploit. There whole argument relied on the assumption that labour power was the reason for the crisis, as workers ability to cause strikes and other disruptions completely curtailed capitals ability from accumulating profitability. They radically altered this pattern by imposing a number of economic instruments that benefited the movement of Capital and restricted labour powers ability to curtail market expansion.  

 These were:

• To deregulate the labour market getting rid of workers rights and increased productivity
• Removing capital controls so that surplus profit being generated in one country wasn’t duty bound to that state.  
• To accelerate unemployment purposely creating the economic conditions for the economy to stagnate ensuring that competitiveness overhauled the economy by driving down wages and devaluing commodities
• Another one of these measures was to accelerate the accumulation by disposition, which essentially uses instruments like privatisation to transfer wealth from taxation from public services like, housing, health and education for the interests of private accumulation.

These measures where designed for three purposes

1. One was to reconfigure the technical, legal and institutional arms of the state for the benefit of private             accumulation. This completely undermined the basis for the welfare state, which was so intrinsic to the legitimacy for western capitalism during the long boom.

2. The second reason was to depress the productive forces of the economy, like industrial hubs which, had long been considered a barrier by way of organised labour to dramatically alter capitals ability to accumulate. This decision to alter the productive base of the economy from industrial to financial capital essentially turned the real economy into a secondary function for the new service based economy.

3. The last and most important of the reasons was the assumption that by increasing and accelerating the rate of exploitation on workers it was assumed that profitability would be restored. This is when the ratio or difference between the mass extracted profits from workers in relation to mass of capital invested i.e. wages, machinery technology, buildings and energy

An important note to this is that since the 1960s there was a tendency for the rate of profit to fall.  Essentially, as capital accumulation increases the rate of productivity in the labour supply begins to diminish, as technological innovation replaces labour power because it’s more productive.  Yet as the labour power diminishes from the circulation of capital M-C-M or money -commodity-money it loses the value of workers input by way of labour time, which devalues the commodity being created this is called the organic composition of capital. So, as technology replaces labour the investment for technological innovation increase, while the value of the commodities diminishes. So you’re selling a commodity for less than the value of the machinery invested

This inherent contradiction within capitalism to occur was altered, as Keynesian intervention slowed down the rate of competition, which meant that the organic composition of capital was undermined. The static relationship between the east and west during the cold war prioritised state intervention and military production accelerating the arms race dramatically reduced the competitive forces of the market thus undermining the organic composition of capital.  Yet as Japanese and European imports started to flood the American market the U.S pulled its capital from the inertia of state facilitated industries into the private sector.

However by doing this it accelerated the organic composition of capital, which meant that by the late 60s the economy started to flat line. The inflation, which was induced by state involvement in the economy started to increase rapidly, while technological innovation replaced labour causing unemployment and stagnation. As I have mentioned earlier this created a wave of reforms primarily at increasing exploitation onto labour market so that profitability would be resorted.

Internationally every significant international institution augmented this regime, as a policy prerequisite, as it discipline states to dismantle the infrastructure of the welfare system and use it for private accumulation.   These ideas were institutionalised in core trading blocs that made up the global economy, which ushered in the era know as the Washington consensus. The EU is of particular importance to this whereby consistent policies aimed at bring EU integration into one federal system sought to reinforce market forces as the main imputes to discipline states.

Ireland integration into Europe and the effects of foreign direct investment in Ireland

This is seen in the Lisbon treaty with the Leval, Ruphert and Viking rulings all of which prohibit any infringement of the market which includes Trade Unions workers rights and strike action. This was reinforced by the growth and stability pact, which ensures government spending on public amenities, stays bellow 3 percent. 

Ireland was not immune to this in fact in Europe, leading Irish capitalist including Michal Smurfit and peter Sutherland spear headed the most influential lobby group in Europe the roundtable for industrialist. This sought to remove any barriers or distortions of the market by integrating Europe into a neo liberal regime. There main ideologue Fredrick Hayek the intellectual architect of neo liberalism advocating a inter states system Werner Bonefeld explains this rational

“the establishment of a supper national political framework was endorsed, as a means that would encourage competitiveness… support the de-politicisation of economic relations and do away with restrictions on the movement of capital, labour and commodities. furthermore super nationalism would narrow the scope for the regulation of economic life, discourage the solidarity of the working class through its national fragmentation and render possible the creation of a common rules of law a monetary system and a common control of communications

This utopia was crystallised by Thatcher and Ragan the Irish élites followed Thatcher’s strategy purposely perusing policies that would further depress and restructure the Irish economy to suit market forces. These aspirations saw wave after wave of right wing reforms, which brought massive reduction in living standards fuelling immigration and unemployment. Yet the Irish ruling class devalued the punt so that it would have a competitive edge over it European rivals. 

 Probably one of the most significant strategic manoeuvres taken by the Irish elites was to set our corporate tax, as the lowest in Europe. American foreign policy saw this reconfiguration of the Irish economy, as a way of combating the European Union as an effective competing trading bloc. This restructuring was combined with  setting the corporate tax at 10.5 percent, as supposed to 37.5 percent (average European tax rate) it facilitated 26.5 percent of total U.S European investment.

More starkly this is shown by Ireland’s population in comparison to Europe, which accounts for 0.8 percent yet 8.4 percent of U.S investment went to Ireland. This ensured that not only was Ireland a geo-strategic platform into influencing the new emerging economies in the soviet block, but also guaranteeing 500 million consumers for American commodities. This gave Ireland a degree of independence form Europe yet it firmly placed our allegiance to U.S market forces. Although, there were real signs economic prosperity particularly in the IT and pharmaceutical industries The restructuring of the Irish economy along Neo-liberal lines emphatically increased inequality form the period of 1994 to 2008

Celtic tiger increasing inequality and inflicting heavy losses in the trade unions 

Kieran Allen senior lecturer in U.C.D writes: Ireland had the lowest level of spending on social protection in the EU fifteen. Means testing rather than universal social insurance was more prevalent, with 29 percent of Total expenditure on benefits being means tested as against an EU average of 10 percent. Ireland also had one of the lowest levels of spending on pensions, at only3.7 percent of G.D.P.A’s against, at the other extreme,14.7 percent in Italy. in the private sector, pension coverage is abysmal with only 38 percent of employees being covered for pensions

Graph of social insurance spending in Ireland contrast to the euro 15

           

               1991 1994 1997 2000 2002

EU15    26.1   28.0  27.8   27.2  27.9

Ireland 19.6, 19.7  16.6   14.3  16.0

Wage share of the total economy and indicates that the share distributed to wages declined faster in Ireland than in the original European Union fifteen

1991-2000 68.7 EU15 62.3 Ireland

2001-2007 67.3 EU15 54.0 Ireland

The time when the Celtic tiger was most prosperous Ireland was rated third worst economy in the OECD for public funding after South Korea and Turkey. More starkly these figures show conclusively that Irish capitalism enjoyed huge benefit from the state while, perusing austere policies onto the working class. The Irish capitalist class utilised the external necessity of foreign direct investment to further encroach and marginalise the composition of the working class in the pursuit of maximising profits.  

The union bureaucracy agreed on a historical capitulation wedding Neo liberal development to the unions in the public partnership agreement. This subsequently removed the shop stewards from organising meeting and influencing collective decisions in work places as had been the case in the seventies and eighties generating one of the highest rates of strikes in Europe. The partnership agreement restructured grass-roots activists and replaced it with union bureaucrats that were gagged by the employers union I.B.E.C.  Yet the catastrophic effects of the partnership agreement were most seen in the private sector  

in 2005 it was estimated that union density in the overall private sector was 20 percent and only 11 percent in the multinationals. It remained however, at over 85 percent in the public sector.

This is backed up by the figures

1994, which is Conventionally taken as the start of the Celtic Tiger, and 2004 total employment grew from 1,221,000 to 1,836,000 But the Figures for union membership showed a much slower growth.

Year Membership Employment Density

1975 449,520 60%

1985 485,050 61%

1995 504450 53%

2004 534,300 36%

2007 551,700 32%

The restructuring of the Irish economy based on U.S market forces saw a dramatic decline of union membership.  Most American companies prohibited trade unions in their work force this is shown most starkly when a study taken from the university of limerick.  42 incoming multi nationals arriving onto Greenfield sites from 1987 to 1991 found that just 16 agreed to recognise unions. This gave the green light to the Irish capitalists to use these favourable conditions to push through their own agenda on the domestic market   

In a later period The Industrial Relations News magazine contacted 45  I. D.A supported companies who had announced more than 100 jobs between 2001 and 2004. Just 1 of the 17 new multinational companies setting up in Ireland recognised union rights, while existing companies, that were  expanding jobs, were also keeping unions out. In some instances, they operated what was known as a double breasted policy’ where they continued to deal with unions in long established plants, but refused to concede union recognition in more recent plants.

The union composition regardless of how left bureaucrat’s seam they are always confined to limits of the system.  Unless the rank and file are politicised the composition of the union structure  are always limited  to mediation with employers, as apposed to driving mass action from the shop floor forward.  Yet this was made significantly worse with the partnership agreement, as it completely undermined any, if all the networks of grass roots trade union activist particularly in the private sector.  

The aggressive nature of the pro market regime in Ireland literally wiped clear any memory for self organisation in the union rank and file. The drastic reduction of workers rights where hidden under the guise of incremental wage increase and the availability of cheap credit to over come any short falls in the future.   However, with the onset of dot com crisis in the 2001 the driving power of the Irish economy was effectually muted. 

The global financial boom and its relationship with Ireland  

The slow down in American investment and increased competition form Eastern Europe ironically offering lower corporate tax than Ireland forced the Irish élites to seek new avenues for generating growth. Globally, the restructuring of economies to suit financial capital was heralded, as the only solution to the organic composition of capital. This emerged  by offering cheap credit to workers who’s wages where declining ,as a result of increase in productivity and the formation of dead labour arising from lack of value  in the productive forces of global economy. As such, a network of financial zones was created to capture value from new emerging export driven economies in the developing world.

These were based in London, New York, Singapore, Tokyo and Hong Kong this forced the productive base of western economies to depress and deflate their industrial capacity in order to discipline and deregulate the labour market. The use of cheap credit was meant to solve the diminishing portion of wages in comparison to the generally lost of income share to capital. 


The new adaptations of the service based economy captured value in these financial zones, which was used act as a counter weight to the declining  use of the productive organs of the economy. However, these financial zones used to complement the obstruction of labour is actually facilitating the entire destruction of the productive base of the economy. subsequently by disciplining wage labour through financial instruments the proportion of variable capital is being superseded by these financial hubs.

Yet more importantly these financial zones don't generate surplus profit their main aim is to redistribute value into lucrative financial ventures, like derivative markets and hedge funds which accelerated the proliferation of credit. It was this abundant supply of credit that fuelled into the now infamous sub prime mortgage lending fiasco. It was believed that this supply of credit overcame  both the effective demand  and the organic composition of capital and the subsequent boom-bust economy, which had be en synonymous with capitalism since its inception.  

However, since the formation of these financial instruments and the adaptations of Neo liberalism  their have been a number of banking crisis starting with the housing and loans crisis in the 87 in New York then to Black Friday in London in 1993 the Asian crisis of the 1997 and the dot.com bubble in 2001. Faced with diminishing direct foreign investment form America and eastern European competition the Irish elites looked to generate growth by market speculation. Two industries arose out of this namely banking and property 

Professor Honohon head Central Irish Bank or C.I.B states that the six main banks in Ireland went from a combined asset value of 85 billion in 1999 to just under 600 billion in 2008. Yet the figure given by professor Honohon shows the irrational logic of financial speculation, as the 600 billion combined assets of the six biggest banks was four times the size of the population. Doctor of economics, Brian O’Boyle states that “essentially we borrowed 8 million form European workers to lend to population of 2 million workers”

Within the space of 9 years the banking system had grown out of proportion with the size of the population. More starkly this feed hysteria of credit into the property bubble, which tripped land and housing prices. Essentially the more credit in the banking industry the further it accelerated the price of housing, forcing people into exorbitant mortgages. A quarterly bulletin taken from C.I.B. notes that the level of personal debt  within a 8 year period rose by 208 billion an increase of 213 percent since 2002. This combined with light touch regulation and the insatiable addiction to greed drove the boom to its conclusion.

However this financial boom from the 2002 to 2008 accelerated the export lead economy of Germany, as it used its trade surplus to invest loans in the periphery states to buy their exports. This was aided by the wage repression; use to gain access to competitiveness over the more productive periphery states in the eurozone. This unwittingly meant that Germany had a comparative advantage over the periphery states like Spain, Ireland, Greece, and Portugal.

Yet this destabilised the periphery states by using wage repression Germany over came the competitiveness of the periphery states although this lead to accelerating their export lead economy. The loans incurred by the periphery states to fuel German exports completely undermined the competitive advantage of the periphery states. Subsequently these contradictions between core and periphery debtors and creditors have generated massive trade imbalances, which simply mean that the loans incurred by the periphery states have no means or ability to pay them back.

Austerity and the contraction in the Eurozone 

Yet the remedy to this solution has been to drive the rate of exploitation, to increase the competitiveness of the periphery states and drastically reducing living standard in order for new avenues of growth to be generated through an export lead economy. Morgan Kelly explains that in order to get out of the crisis Ireland would have to dramatically decrease living standards. 

This would include slashing 150,000 public sector jobs, reduction in both public schools and hospitals by 50 percent and 60 to70 percent wage reductions. The country, which has incurred the most visible attacks in this regard, is Greece.  In May 2010 a document exposing the realities of austerity was laid bare, 25 percent of the population live bellow the poverty line, 16.5 percent are currently unemployed. Youth unemployment was at 30 percent which was 10 percent above the European average. 

It has the fifth highest income inequality in Europe; the top 20 percent get paid six times higher than the bottom 20 percent. They have estimated that in order to run a house hold from food and other necessities to keep a family going it is 66 percent higher in Germany. Yet the salaries remain some of the lowest in Europe, a teacher will start out at 907 Euros a month compared to Britain which is 1307 pounds a month.

This is combined with the Greek government increasing Vat by 23 percent, which will cost 12 Euros a week. Subsequently this is will also included new financial measure, which will include reducing the minimum wage and increasing the pension age by 14 years. These measures will see a reduction of 40 percent in public sector salaries and a 20 percent reduction in living standards. in 2010 some 400,000 people have not been able to access a doctor yet these measures will undoubtedly cause more unemployed forcing a higher burden on the state to provide social  benefits, which  only last for six months.

Yet the picture is far more bleak in Hungary, Romania and Latvia some of the worst hit by the crisis in 2008.  In Hungary they have increased the retirement age by 3 years, increases in vat by 5 percent and unemployment was at 11 percent. Latvia is far worse, 33 percent of public schools and hospitals have been closed, with 25 percent wage reductions in the public sector, while the private sector has faired worse with a 30 percent reduction in wages, while the unemployment is at 23 percent. In Romania there is a 25 percent reduction in public sector pay, 15 percent reduction in benefits and 15 percent reduction in pension the average salary is now on 218 a month. In Spain 25 percent of the population are unemployed the highest in Europe this has been made worse by imposing a flexible wage labour system, which prohibits workers rights and reduces wages.  

80 percent of the youth employment is disciplined by this regime. This has been accompanied by 5 percent reduction in wages increasing vat, slashing the pension and reducing disability benefits. Although these figures are taken in May 2010 it shows the extent to which austerity has crippled the euro zone and these figures are likely to grow, as austerity is championed as the only solution out of crisis. Professor of economics Costas Lapavitsas  at SOAS explains this rational  They are probably hoping that this would lead to a new equilibrium at a lower level of income across Europe, and perhaps after several years there might be renewed conditions for general growth, somehow. But it is very unlikely that it would—it is more likely that that the eurozone would collapse before that.

However there are a number of difficulties with the solutions proposed by our élites namely that increasing the rate of exploitation and subsequently prolonging austerity is seriously undermining the effective demand side of economic growth. Simply put the greater the intensity of austerity the less likelihood that growth can be stimulated by falling wages and spiralling unemployment. This has been compounded in recent months with spread of contagion in eurozone by the ongoing debt crisis. Subsequently measures were taken to contain the risk of contagion by using German, French and Dutch bonds issued to sure up the spiralling deficits in the Eurozone. These measures have unwittingly begun to destabilise the core European economies, as stress testing on the European banks shows the continued fear of insolvency. 

Costas Lapavitsas professor of economics as SOAS explains this downward spiral. The pressures making for collapse are evident—even as we speak the European bond market is seizing up because financial investors are moving into German bonds, selling other bonds due to the fear of insolvency. Consequently, they are pushing up interest rates and disrupting state borrowing as well as the normal functioning of financial institutions If this process is intensified, the euro will be finished in weeks.

This is reinforced by the Financial Times stating that Financial Times:  As fears over the integrity of the eurozone have deepened, European banks have found it expensive, difficult or in some cases impossible to raise funding in the bond markets. So far they have covered barely two-thirds of the amount of outstanding funding that falls due in 2011. For most banks, the bond markets have been closed for months.⁴

This is putting huge pressure on the euro, as Germany has used the European Union as a domestic market, which reflects the contradiction between Germanies surpluses and the peripheries imbalances. However, what is good for Germany is actually destabilising the euro zone, as for all the reasons I have explained in the above. the new amendments used to integrate Europe into a federal state has little to do with a common cultural set of values and more in reinforcing a neo liberal regime . This is explained by a Financial Times commentator Wolfgang  Munchau Contrary to what is being reported, Ms Merkel is not proposing a fiscal union. She is proposing an austerity club, a stability pact on steroids. The goal is to enforce life-long austerity, with balanced budget rules enshrined in every national constitution”.

The conditions have been made worse by the European Financial Stability Facility, which has been largely ineffectual due to basis that it only accounted for less 100 billion.  this was leveraged to give the combined sum 440 billion this has now been tripled to account for Italy’s increasingly likely hood of a default. I suspect this reflects the concern of the BRIC nations including South Africa to pull out from leveraging the euro and stabilise the increasing levels of debt.  However under threat of a European union brake up their have been massive financial and legal measures to further integrate Europe into a federal system Alex Calinecos professor of European studies at U.L.U explains this 

If implemented, it .will institutionalise the dominance of the Frankfurt Group. The idea that judges should vet national budgets is an extension of the neoliberal imperative to take control of economic policy away from elected politicians and transfer it to “experts” (making central banks independent was an earlier stage of the same process).

The Frankfort group will actively promote a system that dissolves democratic controls and in their stead use democratic governments, as a technical machine to implement the austerity. The new changes governing the eurozone have had a dramatic effect in recent months get rid of elected heads of state and imposing technocratic rulers to balance the books, as was the case in both Italy and in Greece. These new policy prerequisites set a dangerous precedent undermining core democratic practices in the hart of Europe.

                                       


A crisis for democracy and legitimacy

This new anti democratic dimension to the European Union has opened up a debate particularly on the revolutionary left. One commentator Slavoj Žižek wrote in Aljazeera that capitalism was moving towards East Asian values with little or no democratic control to mediate or placate the inherent class based politics preferring repression and coercion, as its main instrument to rule. Although this doesn't really reflect such a transition what it shows, is that very corner post of capitalism namely democratic values is beginning to become a barrier to capital accumulation. Yet the architect of neo liberalism Fredrick Hyack stated that, 

we have no intention of making a fetish of democracy. It may well be that our generation talks and thinks too much of democracy and too little of the values it serves. Democracy is essentially a means, a utilitarian device for safeguarding internal peace and individual freedom. As such it is by no means infallible.’ 


this shows conclusively that even democracy is susceptible to attack. It can be argued this has been overarching project for some years, which explains the arrival of the third way. Yet under the conditions of the crisis this has been dramatically accelerated to remove every human barrier form infringing on market expansion. This also coincided with Jin Liqun head of the chine's sovereign wealth fund when he stated if you look at the troubles which happened in European countries, this is purely because of the accumulated troubles of the worn out welfare society. I think the labour laws are outdated. The labour laws induce sloth, indolence, rather than hardworking. The incentive system is totally out of whack.  

Although, Žižek might have reflected upon on this type of East Asian capitalism I think it reflects a much deep concern that capitalism is reaching the limits of what’s humanly possible. Capitalism necessity to accumulate under a limitless system is causing serious damage to world around us and to the labour supply that feeds it. This has been exacerbated by the emergence of the B.R.I.C. nations in the global economy, as seriously undermining the US model for capitalist development.

                         

Conclusion

This leads me to my final point, strategy and tactics unlike our ruler’s alternative, struggle has organically fused people from different levels of consciousness to fight against austerity. Strategy and tactics emerge from concrete material manifestations within the dialectical relationship with means and modes of production and the political manifestations of these phenomena. As such In Ireland we are faced with a dilemma on the one hand we have a diminish trade union and a bureaucracy reluctant to show any signs of resistance. This is party to do with labour party been in government, but more importantly that capitalism doesn't have the resources to buy workers allegiances, as they did in the 68.

The necessitates that we must seek a strategy, which is directly in line with deepening political consciousness by way of social and political movements which acts, as a catalyst that bypass the inertia of the trade union bureaucracy  and take the movement into the work place. This has in part been the wider project of people before profit and the ULA.  By mobilising demonstrations on a local level we are trying to prize open weaknesses and contradictions at the national level which can then be generalised as mass movement. The strength of this method has to rely on the widest possible level of participation, which means exhausting all political and economic reform at our disposal. 

It is only by doing this that we expose the limitations of political reforms, while simultaneously creating movements that push through the cracks left by the limitations of the system. yet we can see from current trends around the globe that strikes, street protests and occupations are the only means to paralysis the social forces of the state , but this has to be prolonged. The other issue is the occupy movement in America this has produced a wealth of struggle expanding and deepening the movement byway of out reach programmes. Yet in Ireland this is deeply sectarian trying to impose the same conditions as indignant movement is like trying to fit a square into a triangle, as the material and political condition are completely different .

What’s important here is to understand that the idea does not process the act rather it is material manifestations that strategy should reflect upon. More importantly tactics should be flexible and fluid enough to allow for alterations in consciousness and deepening levels of struggle so that the point of resistance can be changed in numerous avenues. Yet this has to be based intrinsically in the communities and the organised layers of the working class it is only through their own liberation that struggle can be actualised.  No one can predict the day of revolution, yet by building up networks on a local level ranging form issues, as wide as housing to the protection of the environment that we are actively changing the world of atomisation into collective action.

 This can however produce uneven characteristics of consciousness yet the tendency to launch national campaigns can alter this and bring the more politically radical layers in our society to the fore.  More importantly the devastation of the cuts and the subsequent inaction of the trade union officials and the domesticity of resistance preceding the crisis have widened the defeatism in the general population. 

We must recognise that the material consequences of the crisis both political and economically have shown the ineptitude of the ruling class to propose any alternatives this can only exacerbate these tensions in the future. Yet at the start of this year there has been a marked improvement in resistance currently there are five occupations. this if augmented to general anger against the house hold charge and septic tank issue can explode into a mass generalisation that can breed new live into the workers struggle.

However,  this has to be maintained by mass mobilisation from the local level, to the workplaces and on the street consequently this was not only a feature in Tunisia and Egypt but also in Greece which forced the then prime minster into calling a referendum until he was subsequently ordered out by the EU Lenin once stated that decades can occur and nothing can happen but in days decades can happen in the same way that resistance occurring around the world has a direct result on lifting levels of consciousness into struggle. The state has done everything in its power to isolate this, but as increasing levels of struggle spreads to Britain the Irish ruling class with have difficulty in hiding these mass mobilisations, like on the 30 of November. 


Domestically the house hold charge workers occupations and the up and coming E.U. referendum can present the greatest role for deepening struggle in Ireland.However, as in the case of France in 68 something as arbitrary as same sex dorms can inspire the impossible. It’s these hidden footnotes undefined by any material relationship that sparked mass one of the biggest general strikes in the history of the world.  Yet with an organised revolutionary party and networks in local communities work places and student movements we can build mass movement form the bottom up that can not only challenge the Irish ruling class, but also global capitalism.

http://youtu.be/2SLE7ElyTHA

http://youtu.be/2SLE7ElyTHA

a defence to a previous article

 Thank you for commenting on this blog and I do apologise for the late response to your argument.  I also would hope we can develop a healthy debate in the course of the future. However, I have to add that this post was not intended as prosaic bias towards American people rather a critique of American power politics over the last thirty years. These configurations within the global economy have produced internal contradictions which have undermined key geo strategic interest, which is vital for the U.S to sustain its comparative advantage it has enjoyed over the last thirty years. Also I have to apologise both for the article, as it lacks clarity and for the non positivist approach yet in the case of the later I don’t think I could have augmented the logic of imperialism with capital accumulation.

however in the defence of my position I want to start by highlighting two contrasting statments by leading us foreign policy advisers both of whom lead the war the plans for a project for a new american century.    

.

Francis Fukuyama, 

It is my view that in a longer historical perspective, al-Qaida will be seen as a mere blip or diversion. Bin Laden got lucky that day and pulled off a devastating, made-for-media attack. The United States then overreacted, invading Iraq and making anti-Americanism a self-fulfilling prophecy … Since 2001 the most important world-historical story has been the rise of China. This is a development whose impact will almost certainly be felt in 50 years’ time. Whether anyone will remember Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida at that remove is a different matter

Zbigniew Brzezinksi

 Europe is alienated, Russia and China are more assertive, Asia is organising itself, Latin America is becoming ‘populist and anti‑American’, and the Middle East is inflamed by religious passions and anti-imperial nationalisms. That isn’t the end of it. Iran is dominant in the Persian Gulf, Pakistan is volatile and has nuclear weapons, there is a global political awakening, and the tertiary‑educated youth of the Third World are now ‘the equivalent of the militant proletariat of the 19th and 20th centuries’.

Intelligence specialist George Friedman wrote:

The conquest of Iraq will not be a minor event in history: it will represent the introduction of a new imperial power to the Middle East. The United States will move from being an outside power influencing events through coalitions to a regional power that is able to operate effectively on its own. Most significant, countries like Saudi Arabia and Syria will be living in a new and quite unpleasant world.4

This is contrary to US strategy in the document ‘Iraq: Goals, Objectives and Strategy’, prepared by US officials in August 2002. According to this document the aim of war was not only to topple Saddam Hussein, but also to build a stable pro-US regime that preserved the Ba’ath-dominated bureaucracy, while Washington turned its attention to Iraq’s neighbours, Syria and Iran.  

Yes, you are correct in your assumption that China did win the 3 billion oil contract with Iraq even Russia was prioritised over Europe. This would seam to completely contravene every aspect of my argument.  Yet to understand this bizarre turn of event we have to look at the abject failure of the Iraq war in regards to American strategic objectives. This comes in the form of the now infamous neo cons doctrine “project for a new American century” this out lines the dangers of china economic power and its strategic ties to the Middle East.

However, before I will analyse the manifestations of this document in relation to American foreign policy. We need to look at the key strategic failures in Iraq by the coalition forces that were so cataclysmic that by  default, Iran has become a major geo-strategic power in the region. it is quite obvious that the invasion that the strategy for the Iraq war was not only aimed at disciplining chine’s economic expansion it was also to used silence Iran and Syria.

The entrenchment of U.S. expansionism in Afghanistan, Somalia and Iraq brought a wave of resistance that undermined U.S strategic ambitions. Latin America grew bolder with revolutions both in Venezuela and in Bolivia directly challenging US regional power something, which hasn’t occurred since 1820s with European intervention. China began to assert it self into the affairs of Africa and in Asia. in the middle east Iran has become a regional power only matched by Israel and Hezbollah affectivly pushed Israel' excursion out of Lebanon in 2006. these are contrary to American foreign policy objectives, which has largely almost exclusively subdued any resistance to both its global economic expansion and its global military encroachment.

Yet, how did this occur in such a short space of time, how was it that American foreign policy expansion was largely untarnished for the last thirty years. It is clear that the adventurism into Iraq has complete undermined all these historical certainties. yet to understand this their needs to be an explanation of the Iraq’s Baathest state, which subdued and assimilated so many wide ranging movements from the secularist left  to radical Islam into the infrastructure of the Baathest regime. The policy of coercion and consent was a absolute necessity under the reign of Saddam Hussain, as it alienate militants form large sections of society and then surgically removed them with brutally suppression,

This is in particular importance to Iraq communist party, which had long been the biggest threat to Iraq bourgeois interest, Saddam and to every colonial power that ever had the misfortune of tacking an interest in Iraq’s affairs .the reason why I focus on this political convergence is that Iraq from the 1940 to the 70s was largely secularist. In deed the greatest threat to US interests in the Middle East in this period was indeed the secularist movements ranging form populist left nationalism to communism.

However, with the defeat of Nassarism in the Yom Kippur war with Israel marked an end to both popular left nationalist sentiments and the state building apparatus of nationalisation, which was effectively known as state capitalism. undoubtedly this was corrupt even violently suppressing left wing militants both in the work place and in academic circles, yet it did distribute wealth form the core to periphery.  this also coincided with the failures of the more militant left in the beginning of the second civil war in Lebanon 1978.

The communist parties in the Middle East retracted into stagnation and eventual defeat. This is best show in Iraq where key militant workers, student and the poor became disenfranchised with the left alternative to US strategic ambitions for the region. Saddam Hussain used the stagnation of the left by co opting the communist party into the rank and file of the Baathest party. This meant that the left in Iraq was held tightly bound to the interests of Saddam, which negated the communist party of Iraq from having any leverage in wider society to enact change.

 Devoid of a political alternative, the Dawha party filled the void: this promised an alternative that replaced the dogma of the western traditional thought of left and right and replaced it with radical Islam. Although this didn't in any way alter the contradictions within capitalism. it none the less used this to radically alter the discourse of western based philosophy in the Middle East with one, which was apparently more generic to Muslim faith. No where in the middle east is this shown more distinctly than the rise and influence of radical Islamic into previously categorised secular states. this is seen Lebanon with the creation of Hezbollah, Iraq with CSIRI more importantly it was key component in the Iranian revolution.

The extent of the co-option of the Iraq communist party is show quite dramatically in 1977 during the Kabbalah uprising when communist forces moved with Saddam to smash Dawha movement. The intention was to silence this radical formation yet all it did was to further escalate the speed and penetration of the movement into large section of Iraq society. Although this movements was brutally suppressed during the Iran and Iraq war it replaced the traditional left, as the main means to organise and mobilise the disenfranchised into action.

This was a  familiar trend, which was occurring all over the middle east during the 70s and 80s which is fundamental to understand the power vacuum that enveloped  Iraq once the infrastructure and security forces of the Baathest regime were dismantled. However, more importantly history shows that the Shia clerics during the British lead occupation of the 1920s organised the greatest resistance to the British invasion only months after the occupation began. Contrary to the maligned bias of religious fanaticism presented in the media during the Iraq war there was deep seated sense of national identity, which was carved out during the British occupation.

This was a key factor in the resistance of Iraq during the war, which the US did not recognize or was impervious to the historical warnings of the past.  However, a key feature, which the US forces rather fortunately stumbled upon is that there is a hierarchy in the Shia faith, which is not be confused with the dogmatic structures of Catholic Church.  In Shia faith any Malja (senior cleric) can choice independently the direction of their teachings. This can and often is, contradictory to other senior clerics so it’s not bound by one hierarchy over lord, like the pope in Rome.

 However, there are procedures, as such the rise of al Sadr popularity was contradicted by the hierarchical structure of the Shia faith. although Al-Sadr inheriting a large congregation form his father after his execution he lacked the seniority of an Ayatollah and had to bow to the pressures of Shia faith. this placed  Ali al-Sistani  who is one of the most important clerics in the Muslim world to have grater influence of Shia resistance particular undermining any hope of national based resistance for the whole of Shia faith. this coincided with the conservative nature of his politics even stating quit emphatically that clerics shouldn’t get involved in politics and even complained to the provisional council about the speed of the elections.this would be a familiar pattern in the war a contradiction that put Al Sadr and al Sistani a logger heads in key moments in the war.

This is an important development mainly due to radical composition of the Dawha party in the 70s. However years of repression and defeat had tuned the Dawha party and the militant wing SCIRI into mimicking the policies of the occupation force. Yet although character of the Middle East has transformed the radical composition of politics from secularist left to radical Islam these radical reconfigurations are also susceptible to conservatism. The greatest contradiction of radical Islam is that it proposes to inoculate the civilisation of the west without reconfiguring the nature of capitalism drive for exploitation. So it appears, as a radical brake with convention in its structures and democratic practices yet these structures are all prone to the market expansion.

This largely leaves it teachings as purely aspirational almost, like an apologist or liberal assertions on the ideals of western thought yet this conceals the true relations of capitalist accumulation. This manifestation of conservatism and consolidation with American foreign policy objectives by the Dawha party is largely due to market expansionism.  However, the material dislocation of Iraq society with its rising unemployment .crime and poverty found a new avenue to voice these concerns within the discourse of radical Islam dialectically through Muqtada al-Sadr and Madih army that was created in the aftermath of the invasion.

 In early as April 2004 a mass uprising against the occupation exploded through out Iraq district after district reported heavy losses.  The US backed coalition acted decisively to liquidate the threat of Al –Sadr. However, the important build up to this was in Fallujah where four American mercenaries where killed. The coalition demanded the city hand over those responsible when they refused thousands of troops waded into the city. The Shia and Sunni resistance was so immense that it forced the occupation to retreat. Yet more importantly the political back lash to this bound both Sunni and Shia militant together in a unity of resistance. Thousands of demonstrations broke out all over Iraq attacking troops with rocks and guns.

  

The very thing the Coalition thought was unthinkable was happening before their eyes.  Most starkly for the US coalition was when 200,000 demonstrated in Bagdad where both Shia and Sunnis prayed together similar uprising where occurring in   Baqubah, Ramadi, Sadr City, Samarra, Tel Mar and Mosul.  This was reaffirmed by A poll conducted for the Coalition Provisional Authority in May, 81 percent of Iraqis thought that the occupying forces should leave.  This was combined with the Madih army occupying a number of provisional government offices in the Sothern provinces. In Fallujah where the resistance began demonstrators confronted the 2^nd battalion of the Iraq army shots where fired and several solders where injured. Yet more profoundly thousands of Iraq soldiers began to leave their posts and refused to take orders.

The US coalition brokered a deal that gave greater concessions to the Shia resistance in return of stability. This retreat was a constant theme over the next coming months the very organisations they wanted to isolate, where now the very people they were employing to maintain their interest. Yes of coarse, you can say this in the end with restrain any notion of self management and bind them to the U.S coalition, but at the time it drove on a popular wave of resistance which touched off every corner of the Middle East and is argued developed the strategies in the recent Arab awakening.

Again U.S policy advisers announced the imminent capture of al Sadr yet he was able not only evade capture but take the holy city of Najaff, but with a price. the contradiction between Al-Sistani and Al-sadr's Madih army came to the surface. Ayatollah al-Sistani pleaded and used his ranked to demobilise  Al-Sadr Madih army. Yet the humiliating defeat for the US by not only capturing Al Sadr, but actually intensified the resistance shows once again that the U.S backed coalition were actually acelerting the level and depth of the nation wide insurrection.

The coalition then turned to Sadr city to nail the final blow to the Al-Sadr Madih army, where thousands of American troops swarmed into the city. After numerous battles and fierce resistance the US forces were being threatened with retreat. Their only option was to call in a massive air strike although Sadr claimed he would demobilise his troops, to spare the city. yet after a couple of months the U.S. coalition forces lost it battle to control the city when the head of the US backed council was assassinated. This effectively cut off all ties to U.S coalition with the wider population, which allowed Al-Sadr to outflank the US backed forces by retaking the city. this was a massive defeat for the coalition.

On the 22 July 2004 Robert Fisk reports from the independent:

  

‘For mile after mile south of Baghdad, the story was the same: empty police stations, abandoned Iraqi army and police checkpoints and a litter of burnt out American fuel tankers and rocket-smashed police vehicles down the main highway to HiIlah and Najaf.

After these defeats and rising tide of resistance the U.S backed coalition brought in a new strategy one which would ultimately under mine every strategic objective it had before the war. This was based on the intention to undermine Al-Sadr by co opting  moderates, like Ayatollah Ali Sistani into the U.S chain of command .although this did have some initial success it was believed that Ali Sistani would conform to U.S objectives much like Saddam Hussian before the fist gulf war.

This has similarities with the British Malayan experience in deal with a crisis their in 1950, where by a combination of coercion and co option. The British were able to derail the armed mobilisation of the Marxist guerrillas, while promoting leaders that where keen to maintain the strategic objectives of the occupation. The first major victory for the US to drive a wedge between the populist unity of Sunni and Shia was in Tel Afr, which had become a major smuggling nodal point for the resistance. The U.S demanded that all resistance groups be disarmed the Sunnis side of the council sided with the Americans coalition, while the Shia sided with the resistance.

after a heavy bombing campaign 250,000 to 350,000 people were driven from their homes.  instead of dividing the ethnic minorities into sectarian riviaries it actually bound these sectarian tensions together as one unity resistance force. this is in stark contradiction of the US reliance on top down structure of the councils to impose its authority onto its respective communities yet although this worrying development was beginning to reverberate across key policy advisers, as we can see from quote of Michael Schwartz bellow it gave embattled U.S. coalition the confidence to move onto its next object:

While it is clear that many Shia Turkmen support the guerrillas, the US army insists, and some independent observers agree, that many if not all the insurgents are Sunni Arabs. If this is true, it would constitute an unprecedented alliance between ethnicities within Iraq, one that presages a more resourceful and unified 

However, the US spurred on by this success it then moved decisively to quell the resistance by a full assault on Fallujah. The U.S attacked the city with 15,000 troops yet as a back drop to this thousands of fighters took to the streets across Iraq driving out police and the National Guard. The US was in a circular war when one city was recaptured another would be retaken. However the all out city wide insurrections, were beginning to inflict huge losses on the resistance. They began to change tactics favour guerrilla like raids, as opposed to mass insurrection as it would be punitively assaulted by air strikes. This laid down another strategy of the U.S backed coalition called aid and recognition or resistance and destruction. The Fallujah assault  borrowed tactics form Israeli in relation to its occupation of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. City wide buildings were bulldozed tuning thousands of people to refugee camps.

However, even though the victory of the assault had some successes at driving out the resistance the policy advices from the Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies was damning in its appraisal of US military strategy. In a document entitled ‘Playing the Course’ the think-tank declared:

The bad news is that the US military victory in Fallujah probably only affected 10 to 20 percent of the full time Sunni insurgents in Iraq, and many seem to have escaped. Other Sunni insurgents attacked throughout Iraq during the fighting, and had considerable success in starting an uprising in Mosul. The decision to attack Fallujah was opposed by Iraq’s Sunni president, its leading group of Sunni clerics, and a number of other Iraqi politicians. Sunni Arab media coverage was almost universally hostile both inside and outside Iraq, and these negative images were compounded by TV coverage that appeared to show a US Marine killing a defenceless, wounded prisoner and then a devastated and deserted city.80

However, the limitations of the resistance movement meant that although there was partial unity in sectarian camps the elections brought these partial glimpses of unity to and end. This meant that a bloody civil war was enacted through out Iraq, which brought Shia and Sunnis into conflict with one another. Although the serge in 2007 claimed victory and end to resistance movement the aims of the U.S objectives in Iraq where utterly disfigured. The relationship between   Ali al-Sistani,  Muqtada al- Sadr’s had the capacity to undermine Mehdi army yet by consistently appealing to ali Al-Sistani it forged closed links with Iran.

This is completely contrary to the U.S objectives before the war, yet more importantly the ties between the China and Iran meant that when the Iraqi oil law was passed. The Shia lead government favoured China and  Russia over the U.S and Europe. More importantly the disfigured footnotes of the project for a new American century were completely in ruin. As I have stated earlier the further entrenchment of the US in the Iraq and Afghanistan meant the Chavez could rise in Venezuela, China had more of an influence in Asia and Africa and Iran had more strength in the Middle East, as a regional power.

In the document the rise of new American century,  which is now credited ,as the main theoretical apparatus of the neo cone doctrine china, Iran, Iraq  and North Korea were heavily prioritised as main geo strategic threats to the U.S. in the document it opens with 

Conversely, East Asia appears to be entering a period with increased potential for instability and competition.  In the Gulf, American power and presence has achieved relative external security for U.S. allies, but the longer-term prospects are murkier. Generally, American strategy for the coming decades should seek to consolidate the great victories won in the 20^th century

It followes:

The fourth element in American force posture – and certainly the one which holds the key to any longer-term hopes to extend the current Pax Americana – is the mission to transform U.S. military forces to meet new geopolitical and technological challenges. 

The Chinese military, in particular, seeks to exploit the revolution in military affairs to offset American advantages in naval and air power, for example.  If the United States is to retain the technological and tactical advantages it now enjoys in large-scale conventional conflicts, the effort at transformation must be considered as pressing a mission as preparing for today’s potential theater wars or constabulary missions – indeed, it must receive a significant, separate allocation of forces and budgetary resources over the next two decades

The prospect is that East Asia will become an increasingly important region, marked by the rise of Chinese power, while U.S. forces may decline in number. Conventional wisdom has it that the 37,000-man U.S. garrison in South Korea is merely there to protect against the possibility of an invasion from the North.  This remains the garrison’s central mission, but these are now the only U.S. forces based permanently on the Asian continent.  They will still have a vital role to play in U.S. security strategy in the event of Korean unification and with the rise of Chinese military power

the best way to secure peace and stability in Asia was to deter potential Chinese adventurism through a strong American military presence and system of alliances.

Professor of European affair Alex calinecos writes: This is not where the Bush administration’s strategists had planned to be ten years after 9/11. Seizing Iraq was intended to tighten the grip of the US on the Middle East and thereby discipline its rivals, all heavily dependent on the region’s energy reserves.

Although originally a 65 page document I have tried to highlight the apparent threat to that America faces in relation to China, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Pakistani. However, what makes this document so important are the extremely influential people associated with the project. These include Paul Wolfowitz, Francis Fukuyama and Fred Kagan. In fact every one who was involved in this project either held major position in élite colleges or where apart of highly influential administrative institutions, all of which could impose particular strategic polices onto the U.S government.

  

Yet although these signatories had their influence from the head of the World Bank to west point it would be ridicules to base the entirety of American foreign policy on this one single document. However, in the above article I show conclusively that pressures being exerted on American capitalism both from China and Russia  to a lesser extent India and brazil are repapering  in geostrategic rivalries, as a Marxist I see a totality of contradiction that emerge from class antagonism that eventually bust into geo strategic wars. This can be clarified by China owing 1.6 trillion dollars of American debt and also holding large section of European debt.

In a recent interview on al-jazeera Jin Liqun:  the treasury of sovereign wealth fund for china claims that key to understanding the European crisis is outdated labour laws and a worn out welfare state. This was days before Christine Lagard head of the IMF went to see China to ask for capital injection into Europe. The reason why this is of particular importance is that china’s influence both in economic terms and geo strategic power has grown since the Iraq war. To such an extent that American  companies were largely dismissed in the hole sale of Iraqi oil. The further the U.S relied on the more passive elements of the Shia population during the Iraq war the greater the influence of Iran was in Iraq’s affairs. This is the main reason for the oil contracts going to china, as apposed to the U.S.

However the Iraq oil law did provide at least theoretically an important footnote of American intervention particularly reinforcing neo liberalism enterprise in Iraq. This essentially uses the monopolistic state infrastructure and coverts it into private appropriation of capitalist accumulation. Saddam was able to maintain his power base because he distributed the wealth from oil industry into social programmes: Housing, Education and Health, which made it one of the most progressive social models in the Middle East this reconfiguration of the Iraq state to appropriate the state institutions, like oil and gas into hands of private investors.

The intention of the U.S was to reconfigure the Baathest regime for the appropriation of neo liberal reconstruction using all the states apparatus to turn it into a Mecca of capitalist production. Although this might have been the intention, China’s rise, as a global power both influencing large sections of Africa, Asia and south America shows how catastrophic this blatant adventurism was by bush under the guise of the neo conservative doctrine. The continual engagement in this multifaceted theatre of war under the leadership of Obama highlights a continuation of the previous governments polices, which can only serve to undermine the base of the US strategic interests, as it gives opportunities for expansionism to other rival power blocks to compete with the US globally.   

However, to take your last point I agree war came well before capitalism, yet imperialism under capitalism is completely different under Rome and their appropriation of slave’s society. The whole point, as I have outlines on numinous occasions is to look at the world today capitalism and war goes hand in hand because of the internal contradictions within capitalism. These reappears into inter-state rivalries we can see this in relation to china and Taiwan and to a less extent Russia and Georgia.  

Yet what’s most stark is that China is beginning to influence other developing states using Keynesianism, as apposed to the austerity Neo liberal regime. This means its directly confronting the Neo liberalism assumptions on crisis. A number of years as ago this would not have been possible so the point that you raised at the end of your comment is partially correct yet as I try to uncover in the for mentioned article that capital accumulation creates interstate rivalries, which manifests them self’s in war like Iraq and Afghanistan.