The
global economic crisis and alternatives
Introduction
The
multiple crises that are affecting the globe, including climate
change, are manifestations of the systemic crisis of global
capitalism, whose demise is irreversible. Its agony may last longer
but its end is inevitable. As the Brazilian theologian and
philosopher, Leonardo Boff, argued, the current crisis of capitalism
is not temporary, but “terminal”.
Capitalism
can survive only by destroying more human lives and nature. Already
tens of millions of men and women are out of work, even in
“developed” countries. In Spain, Greece, Portugal, France, the
average jobless rate is in double digits. The young people are the
main victims of the high level of unemployment in most western
countries. Things will only worsen as governments and central banks
attempt to “calm” markets by taking more austerity measures by
reducing public spending in response to the crisis of sovereign debt
and under the threat of speculators and credit rating agencies.
Imperialist
wars of aggression will intensify as western powers scramble for the
control of natural resources as way of solving the crisis of global
capitalism. The imperialist aggression led by NATO against Libya is a
case in point.
The
festering crisis may lead to two opposing outcomes. One is the advent
of authoritarian, terrorist regimes, even fascism, as the growing
influence of right-wing racist, xenophobic political parties in
Europe shows. In the United States and Europe, the reference to
“terrorism” has become an excuse to violate basic human rights by
imposing measures against all those who contest the dominant system.
The
second outcome may be the defeat of capitalism and the advent of a
more humane and sustainable economic and social system. This is the
outcome peoples around the world are yearning for. With the collapse
of market fundamentalism, people and institutions everywhere are
freeing their mind from the shackles of the neoliberal ideology. Even
in the leading capitalist centres, the pillars of the neoliberal
ideology are being challenged by some of its erstwhile most zealous
proponents and others.
Therefore,
the time is right to deepen the crisis of legitimacy of the
capitalist system and promote alternative policies. In this regard,
peoples’ movements and progressive political organizations should
form strong coalitions against capitalism and imperialism with the
view to build sustainable development systems, based on social
justice, equity, democracy, respect for peoples’ economic, social
and cultural rights, and protection of the environment.
The
roots of the systemic crisis of capitalism
The
systemic crisis results from the exhaustion of capitalism as a model
of production and accumulation of wealth, compounded by imperialist
wars of aggression and strong and widespread resistance from
countries and peoples’ organizations from around the world.
The
sources of the economic and financial crises
It
is a fact that the capitalist system has been experiencing a crisis
of profitability in leading capitalist centres, which explains the
rise of the financial sector. As a result, profits are derived more
from speculative activities than from production. This led to the
financialization of the economy, with the growth of the derivatives
market, which accounts for 78% of the liquidity circulating in the
world and it is more than 9 times the size of the world gross
domestic product (GDP)! This translated into a growing gap between
the real economy and financial flows. It is estimated that over 90%
of the daily flows on foreign exchange markets are not linked to the
production and exchange of goods and services.
Therefore,
the subprime debacle in 2008 was only a symptom of a profound crisis
of profitability in the United States and in other western countries.
The subprime market is an outgrowth of the exponential growth of the
derivatives market, fuelled by lax monetary policies and deregulation
in the United States and Europe. These policies are linked to the
blind faith in the power of markets to “self-regulate” (Dembélé,
2009; UNCTAD, 2009) and the myth of the “invisible hand” which
claims that markets work for the good of all while pursuing their
self-interests. Accordingly, State intervention was seen as an
obstacle to the “efficient functioning” of markets.
That
was especially the case in Africa, where the IMF and the World Bank
accused the State to be the main obstacle to development and launched
fierce attacks against State intervention with the aim of
discrediting State-led development experience and the public sector
(Dembélé, 2009; Mkandawire, 2001).
Intensification
of imperialist wars and the militarization
As
stated above, the long agony of capitalism will bring more misery and
oppression to ordinary citizens and especially to people from the
South. For the survival of capitalism, the imperialist powers will
intensify wars of aggression against countries and organizations
fighting capitalist plunder and domination. Capitalism and wars are
inherently linked. This is why the other factor behind the crisis of
global capitalism has been the intensification of imperialist wars
for the control of resources and markets. For US imperialism and its
NATO allies, endless wars are part of its strategy to solve the deep
structural and intractable crisis they are going through. The
aggression and occupation of Iraq, the imperialist aggression against
Libya, threats against other countries are an illustration of that
strategy.
In
Sub-Saharan Africa, US imperialism is seeking a military base for the
headquarters of “Africa Command” (AFRICOM). The aim is to
militarize the region in its drive for the control of the continent’s
resources. In fact, one of the main objectives of AFRICOM is to keep
safe the investments of US multinationals in oil fields in the Gulf
of Guinea and monitor the routes through which African oil is
delivered to the United States.
But
wars of aggression and military occupation are exhausting US
imperialism. It is estimated that since September 2001, the United
States has spent more than 1.3 trillion dollars in Iraq and
Afghanistan. How much did it spend in covert actions against other
sovereign countries or in support of dictatorial and even
authoritarian pro-US regimes? As a result, the United States is
saddled with a huge debt and confronted with staggering trade and
budget deficits. These problems are undermining its ability to pursue
its aggressions and occupation of foreign countries. It has to resort
more and more to NATO and its subservient allies, as seen in Iraq,
Afghanistan and most recently in Libya.
Resistance
from countries and peoples’ movements
Stiff
and widespread resistance against foreign domination and imperialist
wars, against neoliberal policies, and against capitalist
globalization has exacerbated the crisis of global capitalism. In the
South, several countries and nations are reclaiming their
independence and sovereignty as well as the control over their
resources by reversing privatization imposed in the past by the IMF
and the World Bank. This is particularly the case in Latin America
where US imperialism has been losing ground over the last decade or
so. The “free trade” agreement it intended to impose to the
region was challenged and rejected by leading countries in Latin
America in favour of an alternative model, the Bolivarian Alternative
of the Americas.
In
Africa, resistance to another “free trade” agreement, the
Economic partnership agreements (EPAs) by African countries has
derailed the strategy of the European Union.
Meanwhile
peoples’ resistance and struggles against the
capitalist/imperialist system has been intensified in several parts
of the world, even in the imperialist centres. The birth of the World
Social Forum (WSF) in 2001 was a culmination of the struggles against
corporate-led globalization by social movements around the world.
This contributed to discrediting neoliberal policies and
institutions, like the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO. The struggles
against “free trade” agreements, the illegitimate debt of the
South, widening inequalities in the world and the man-made climate
change, all these have contributed to discrediting market
fundamentalism and putting into question the legitimacy of the
capitalist system.
Moving
beyond capitalism
As
examined above, capitalism has exhausted its usefulness and become a
parasitic system. The call for system change is growing, even in the
capitalist centres. The “Occupy Wall Street” movement and the
rise of the “indignants” in Europe are an illustration that large
sections of western societies are rejecting capitalism and looking
for an alternative model.
In
the South, the current crisis has strengthened the challenge to the
so-called “mainstream” economic policies. Peoples’
organizations are determined to explore alternative development
models respecting peoples’ sovereignty over their resources,
protecting their economic, social and cultural rights, and promoting
social justice, democracy and environmental sustainability.
Deepening
the crisis of legitimacy of the capitalist system
The
first step in that direction is to deepen and exacerbate the crisis
of legitimacy of the capitalist system by discrediting its ideology
and myths. One of those myths is that markets should be left to their
own devices because they have “self-correcting” mechanisms and
that market failures are less costly than State failures. But the
devastations brought about by the financial crisis have resulted in
trillions of dollars of losses that western governments had to
mobilize with taxpayers’ money to clean up the mess spread by
speculators to the entire globe (Dembélé, 2009).
As
Paul Krugman said in his article “a few economists challenged the
assumption of rational behaviour, questioned the belief that
financial markets can be trusted and pointed to the long history of
financial crises that had devastating economic consequences. But they
were swimming against the tide, unable to make much headway against a
pervasive and, in retrospect, foolish complacency”.
Now,
with the collapse of market fundamentalism, even some of its most
fervent ideologues are now in disarray. Some of its most sacred myths
are discredited. Things that were unthinkable just a few years ago
have taken place in countries where no one would have expected.
Nationalizations of banks and financial institutions in the United
States, rescue plans for industrial companies, a strong State
intervention and even attacks against “unbridled capitalism”, all
this has been observed in Europe and even in the United States! The
ghosts of Keynes and even Marx have come back to haunt western
leaders and neoliberal ideologues!
The
collapse of market fundamentalism is a major blow to the
International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank, with the reversal
of some of the core policies they had advocated for decades in Africa
and in other “poor” countries under the failed and discredited
structural adjustment programs (SAPs). The IMF and the World Bank
have actively supported expansionary fiscal policies in the United
States, Europe and Asia. They have supported nationalization of
private banks and other financial institutions. All these policies
were deemed heresy by these institutions during the heyday of
structural adjustment programs.
Time
for a paradigm shift
The
demise of market fundamentalism, the deep crisis of legitimacy of
global capitalism and the bankruptcy of the IMF and World Bank
policies have opened opportunities for people and policymakers to
free their minds and dare to think outside the box (Tandon, 2009).
This means daring to challenge the tenets of capitalist/paradigm and
deconstruct its discourse.
The
President of the World Bank in his Georgetown speech pointedly
observed: “Even before the crisis there was a questioning of
prevailing paradigms and a sense that development economics needed
rethinking. The crisis has only made that more compelling”. He went
on to stress “Beyond these challenges to old assumptions, a more
complex set of changes is taking place. As economic tectonic plates
have shifted, paradigms must shift too”.
Challenges
within the capitalist centres
Numerous
voices within the imperialist centres themselves are challenging the
dominant system and calling for a paradigm shift. Popular movements,
trade unions, progressive political forces are challenging the
official discourse justifying the imposition of austerity measures.
They are fiercely opposing the neoliberal remedies the ruling classes
are attempting to impose on the working classes. In Greece, Spain,
France, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, among others, resistance is
widespread. People are challenging both the official explanation for
the crisis and the so-called solutions proposed, because they mean
more sacrifices for them in order to save the system.
The
millions of “indignants” in Spain, France, Greece, United
Kingdom; Ireland, Belgium and now in the United State, are clearly
rejecting the “solutions” aimed at saving the current system.
They are calling for system change, for another system in which there
will be a more equitable distribution of wealth, the prospect for a
better life for all citizens. The movement “Occupy Wall Street”
has given a new momentum to opposition to the official explanation of
the crisis and the solutions proposed. The worldwide demonstrations
against capitalism and imperialism on October 15 mark a turning in
the global resistance against the attempts to save capitalism on the
back of people.
For
the millions of demonstrators and “indignants”, the system has
lost its legitimacy since it is against the interests of 99% of the
world population. In the United States, the demonstrators claim that
the wealthiest 1% owns more than a third of the nation’s wealth.
Indeed,
the gap between rich and poor has never been as wide as it is today.
In 2007, the wealthiest 20% of the world controlled 83% of the world
wealth. According to the latest ‘World Wealth report’, the wealth
of the 10.9 million richest in world grew by 9.7 % in 2010 and now
reaches 42.7 trillion dollars. This now surpasses the 2007 pre-crisis
peak.
The
wealth of Europe’s richest totalled 10.2 trillion dollars, after
growing at 7.2 % in 2010, while the wealth of North America’s
richest hit 11.6 trillion dollars in 2010, up 9.1 %.
The
super rich posted slightly stronger-than-average gains in their
numbers and wealth. They accounted for 36.1 % of the richest’s
global wealth.
The
crisis of global capitalism and its loss of legitimacy are so deep
and pervasive that a number of thinkers and economists see it as a
“crisis of civilization”, forged by capitalism over more than 500
years (Baier, 2010; Cohen-Séat, 2011; Tosel, 2011)
.
Challenges
from the South
The
challenges within capitalist centres reinforce the numerous
challenges to mainstream economic thinking and policies coming from
all parts of the Global South, where it is not only social movements
but also States that are calling for a rethinking of development, in
Latin America, Asia and Africa. During the World Social Forum in
Dakar, in February 2011, intellectuals from the South held a Forum on
the theme “The South thinks and acts by itself” under the
leadership of Professor Samir Amin. The Forum insisted on the
necessity for Southern countries to reclaim their sovereign right to
design their development policies and delink from the global system.
Reclaiming
sovereignty over development policies
Reclaiming
sovereignty over development is to reclaim the right to development
as proclaimed by the United Nations in the mid-1980s. Therefore,
policy makers and peoples’ organizations from the South must
strengthen their resolve to explore more freely and confidently
alternative development policies. It is already happening in Latin
America where governments have challenged the US-led “Free Trade
Agreement of the Americas” to propose their own vision of regional
integration. The Bolivarian Alternative, known as ALBA, is reshaping
the development agenda in that region. Solidarity, complementarity
and cooperation are replacing the discredited concepts of
“comparative advantage” and “free trade”.
In
Africa, the multiple crises that hit African countries, the high
costs of IMF and World Bank-imposed policies and the lessons learned
from the international financial crisis have prompted some African
leaders and institutions to challenge the dominant paradigm and try
to explore an alternative path to development.
Therefore,
policy makers and leaders are slowly waking up and questioning
policies imposed on African countries by “development partners”
and international institutions. The resistance opposed to the
Economic partnership agreements (EPAs) was a sign that something new
was taking place in Africa. There is a growing awareness on the
necessity to strengthen regional integration and even to build new
institutions at the continental level. This new awareness prompted
African leaders and policymakers to explore the possibility to create
regional currencies backed by African countries’ own resources.
At
the continental level, decision has been made to establish an African
Monetary Fund (AMF) in Cameroun; an African Central Bank (ACB) in
Nigeria and an African Investment Bank (AIB) in Libya. These
institutions would strengthen sovereignty over monetary and financial
policies and weaken foreign domination over Africa’s development
policies.
Last
November, a meeting of African institutions in Tunisia has come up
with what they call “Africa’s vision for development” (AfDB et
al., 2010). This is another sign that things are moving in the right
direction, in terms of thinking.
These
positive developments vindicate African social movements and
progressive research institutions, which have been calling on African
leaders and institutions to break with failed and discredited
IMF/World Bank policies and explore alternative policies (Amin, 2009;
Dembele, 2009; Tandon, 2008; 2009; Abbas and Niyiragira, 2009).
African
social movements and thinkers have also been calling for reviving the
spirit of some basic documents that had proposed an independent path
to development for the continent but had been put aside under the
pressure of the IFIs in the 1980s. The Lagos Plan of Action, the
African Alternative Framework to Structural Adjustment, the Arusha
Charter for Popular Participation in Development are all key
documents that were framed by African thinkers and policy makers in
the 1980s and 1990s, with a clear vision for an autonomous path to
Africa’s development.
Rethinking
the concept of development
Reclaiming
their right to design their development policies requires challenging
the neoliberal conception of development, assimilated to economic
growth resulting from market expansion. Hence, the promotion of the
export-led growth model, with its attendant corollaries, such as
trade liberalization, free flows of capital, minimal State
intervention and competitiveness.
Development,
in its original and deeper meaning, is not only economic growth but
also and above all structural changes in economic, social, cultural
and political areas, all aimed at improving the lives of the majority
of the people. In that sense, policies of employment, education,
health, housing, income redistribution and poverty eradication are
integrated into a coherent framework characterized by a vigorous
fight against inequalities, social discrimination and exclusion, with
the State at the centre of these policies.
Restoring
the State’s role in the development process
Indeed,
another major illustration of the crisis of legitimacy of the
neoliberal system is the recognition that the State is a central
player in solving the crises brought about by unfettered markets and
speculators. This shows that the State is and will remain a key actor
in the development process, in developing as well as in developed
countries. When market fundamentalism was in its ascendancy in the
1980s, there were massive attacks against the State and public
service. African States were demonized as major obstacles to
development and came under vicious attacks as “predatory”,
“wasteful”, “rent-seeking”, and “corrupt”! (Mkandawire,
2001).
All
these epithets were intended to discredit the State as agent of
economic and social development and the experience of State-led
development that took place in the post-independence period up to the
late 1970s in Africa. Despite the remarkable achievements of that
period, the IMF and World Bank used every possible negative example
to blame the State for Africa’s crises and ills. They told African
leaders that the State was the main, if not the unique, cause of the
economic and social crisis in Africa.
One
of the key lessons of the international financial crisis is the
return of the State to the centre of development policies. The State
is an indispensable and indisputable agent of development and part of
the solutions to the current global crises. Therefore, the collapse
of the dogma of the “invisible hand” and “self-correcting
markets” should free African and other Southern countries to
restore the role of the State without which there is no development.
This is why, African and international institutions are now calling
for the restoration of a strong and effective State, they call
developmental State (ECA, 2011; UNCTAD, 2007)
Rethinking
the role of the State means that it should be in the forefront of the
fight against social inequalities, the protection of vulnerable
groups and for the provision of essential social services, like
public education, health, public housing, etc. This means adopting
new policies of income redistribution in favour of poor and
marginalized households through monetary and progressive taxation
policies. It also means protecting small-scale producers, especially
in the agricultural sector, against powerful and heavily subsidized
agricultural exporters from developed countries.
The
social State should reverse all privatization policies and take back
under public ownership all strategic sectors, like the mining sector,
natural resources, like water and energy, among others. In fact, one
of the roles of the State should be to protect peoples’ inalienable
economic, social and cultural rights. Therefore, the shift in
paradigm calls for protecting global commons at the national level
against privatization, under any pretext.
This
is why the UN General Assembly decision to make access to water a
basic human right, is a major development in the protection of these
global commons and the fundamental rights of citizens, especially the
most vulnerable ones, to have free access to basic services.
Role
of regional integration and South-South cooperation
In
Africa, some of the above policies can only be possible through
collective action within regional integration. In fact, given the
weakness of many countries in the South, the ability to successfully
challenge dominant policies would come mainly if they are able to
speak with one voice. The examples in Latin America show that
regional integration was the key to challenging US imperialism in
what used to be called its “backyard”! The Bolivarian Alternative
for Latin America and the Caribbean (ALBA) and the South Bank project
contributed to strengthening solidarity among Latin American
countries, which reinforced sovereignty over their development
policies.
In
Africa, the struggle against the Economic Partnership Agreements
(EPAs) is also a good example of how regional integration can be an
effective instrument of collective resistance.
Integration
could lay the foundations for credible and viable industrial policies
because it could provide the policy space to support autonomous
policies. Accordingly, integration could help to increasingly
transform raw materials locally and boost the domestic demand-led
strategy, which would create more favourable conditions for adding
value, providing jobs for the local workers and retaining locally
more of the wealth created.
Transforming
raw materials locally should be part of a coherent strategy of
industrialization. In addition, this strategy will be viable only
within the context of regional integration, which would provide the
economies of scale indispensable for a successful industrialization
policy.
The
viability of a development strategy based on local transformation
calls also for radical changes in monetary and fiscal policies. New
policies should support more effective domestic resource mobilization
in order to reduce dependency on foreign “aid” and give more
policy space to States to support job-creating sectors and
environment-friendly investments. Fiscal policies should encourage
the use of production systems that preserve the environment and
provide sustainable livelihoods.
A
new development model should give support to the use and protection
of endogenous knowledge and technologies in order to boost research
in this area and attenuate the use of Western-imported technologies.
Along
with regional integration, South-South cooperation and solidarity has
become an important instrument in the resistance to imperialist
domination. Closer South-South relations should be part of the
strategy to challenge the dominant paradigm. For instance, in recent
years, solidarity among countries of the South has derailed Western
countries’ schemes, notably at the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Major Southern countries have become key players in the international
arena, as illustrated by the rise of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia,
India, China and South Africa), even if Russia cannot be considered
as a Southern country.
The
BRICS account for one third of the world gross domestic product. The
economic and financial crisis is accelerating the power of the BRICS
and other Southern countries. Projections claim that the combined GDP
of the BRICS and other Southern countries would account for 60% of
the world GDP by 2030. South-South foreign direct investments (FDIs)
accounted for 14% of all FDIs in 2008 while South-South trade
accounted for 16.4% of the 14 trillion dollars of world trade in
2007. South-South trade rose from $600 billion in 1995 to $3.14
trillion in 2008 and $2.63 trillion in 2009. An increasing part of
South-South trade is in manufactured goods. In 2008, $1.85 trillion
was in manufactured goods and one trillion in capital machinery. In
development finance, more than two-thirds of loans made by other
Southern countries are on a concessional basis.
In
its 2010 report on the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), UNCTAD has
indicated that emerging southern economies are now the major export
markets for LDCs, absorbing more than half of their exports. Since
1996, more than half of LDCs’ imports come from the South. In
2007-2008, it was 62% of their imports. Between 1990/1991 and
2007/2008, 66% of the growth expansion in LDCs’ external trade was
due to Southern countries. South-South relations provide greater
opportunities for geographical diversification of trade, investments,
financial flows and technology transfer (UNCTAD, 2010).
Africa
has been building closer ties with many of the leading Southern
countries. For instance, in 2008, trade between Africa and China was
estimated at $107 billion, with a positive balance for Africa. Africa
is also strengthening its cooperation with India, Brazil, Iran,
Venezuela and Gulf countries. South-South cooperation provides Africa
with loans, direct investments and technology transfer at less
onerous conditions.
Several
forums of cooperation have been established in recent years between
Africa some of these regions or countries. They are, among others,
Africa/China Forum; Africa/India; Africa/Brazil; Africa/Latin
America, Africa/South Korea, etc.
On
the other hand, Turkey is developing its relations with Africa at a
great speed. In just a few years, it has become one of Africa’s
leading partners. This year, the 4th United Nations Conference on the
Least Developed Countries (UN-LDC IV) was held in there, as the
country sees itself as a bridge between the South and the North.
If
these relations open the way to a new type of cooperation, respectful
of the sovereignty of each country, this would help African countries
strengthen the policy space they need to weaken the influence of
“traditional partners” and have more freedom to design and
implement their own policies.
Paying
up the climate debt owed by the North
In
light of the ecological devastation wrought by centuries of plunder
of the South’s natural resources, the climate debt owed by the
North has become at the centre of the struggles by social movements
and progressive political forces from the South. Like the other major
crises ravaging the world, the crisis of climate change arises
principally from policies and practices of the advanced industrial
countries over a long period of time, and the related systems of
production and consumption by which the needs of the vast majority of
people are sacrificed for the comfort of a few elite. The peoples of
Africa and other developing countries bear little responsibility for
the climate change and other crises, yet they are suffering its worst
effects, and lack the means for countering them.
Therefore,
developed countries must provide financial resources to address their
climate debts. Climate finance must be a central component of the
struggle for climate justice. Climate finance is understood as
financial reparations to developing countries and affected peoples
pursuant to the differential responsibility of developed countries
for global warming. It should be public, obligatory, free of
conditions, and additional to other North-South financial flows. It
should not produce new financial or ecological debt.
Global
and national channels of climate finance should be democratic and
accountable. Their governance should be fully transparent and involve
democratic representation, in particular of those peoples most
severely affected by the climate crisis. For these reasons and
because of their historic responsibility in promoting an economic
paradigm that is contrary to the ethics of climate justice, the World
Bank and international financial institutions (IFIs), including the
IMF, should be excluded from involvement in climate finance.
Climate
finance justice also includes halting the outflow of finance and
resources from developing countries. This includes in particular the
servicing of illegitimate debts, unjust profit remittances, royalties
and other forms of financial drainage that are themselves very often
a result of projects and policies that have contributed to the
accumulation of ecological and climate debt.
Rethinking
politics and democracy
It
is widely acknowledged in both the West and South that politics and
democracy have lost their meaning as a result of the power of
financial institutions and the WTO promoted by neoliberal
globalization. The weakening of the State and public institutions has
left a vacuum exploited by powerful private groups to influence
public policies at the expense of people and communities.
In
other words, the neoliberal paradigm has relegated politics to the
meaningless role and deprived public and democratic institutions of
their role. This can be seen in the turnout of elections in the West
and in the way economic and financial decisions are made. This is
even more obvious in developing countries where elections have little
meaning since major decisions are made by international financial
institutions and/or by outside powers. National institutions,
including the National Assembly, have little say in the design of
public policies and their implementation.
Therefore,
in promoting a new development paradigm, it is imperative to restore
the role of democratic institutions. However, rethinking politics
should not only be limited to rehabilitating public institutions. The
role and importance of social movements and peoples’ organizations
should be acknowledged in the design and implementation of public
policies. The State and other public institutions are no longer the
sole depositories of legitimacy, the sole representatives of the
people. The rises of social movements and peoples’ organizations in
the struggles against global capitalism in various areas and their
capacity to propose new ideas and alternative solutions have made
them indispensable players at both national and international levels.
As a result, rethinking politics should mean building an inclusive
and participatory democracy in lieu of representative democracy.
Fighting
imperialism
The
challenge to global capitalism is inseparable from the struggle
against imperialism. Indeed, the ever-worsening crisis of the world
capitalist system, with more oppression, more wars of aggression
against the people, is giving rise to more widespread mass uprisings
and armed revolutions throughout the world.
In
North Africa, peoples’ resistance against oppression from
dictatorial and corrupt regimes and foreign domination (particularly
US) set off popular uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt that toppled two
pro-western dictators. This is why the uprisings in these two
countries have taken an anti-imperialist tone. The fact that
democratic and progressive movements have succeeded in toppling
dictators backed by the United States in a region of great importance
to the US strategy of world domination is further evidence of its
relative but irreversible decline.
This
is why the popular uprisings and the worsening crisis of the world
capitalist system are weakening the imperialist powers and sharpening
contradictions among them, thus giving rise to more widespread mass
uprisings and armed struggles throughout the world against both local
puppets and their outside protectors.
This
is why anti-imperialist struggles are taking place in Africa, Asia,
Latin America and the Caribbean. There is rising opposition to wars
and occupation, to foreign military bases in the Middle East, in
Africa, in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Social
movements, progressive political forces should build strong and broad
alliances with States fighting imperialism and its wars of
aggression. Imperialism, especially US imperialism, is the main
source of terror and crimes around the world. Its rhetoric about
“human rights”, “democracy” aims to hide the true nature of
its criminal and despotic policies.
Peoples’
organizations must take advantage of the systemic crisis of global
capitalism and the weakening of imperialism to strengthen
anti-imperialist and democratic mass movements in their countries and
build the broadest possible united front and alliances against
imperialist powers and their local puppets in the South.
In
this regard, we commend the great contribution made by the Korean
people in the struggle against US imperialism, which is trying to
perpetuate division of the Korean people and its domination over the
Korean peninsula.
Conclusion
This
paper has argued that the current crisis affecting world economies
and societies is a crisis of global capitalism. It signals the
irreversible demise of that system, which has exhausted its
usefulness as a system of production and exchange. Its model of
accumulation has become unsustainable. Like social systems that
preceded it, it has run its course and become a parasitic system. It
can only survive by generating more wars, more inequality, more
misery and more ecological and social disasters.
New
paradigms are slowly but inevitably emerging. Beneath the deep crisis
of global capitalism, new paradigms, systems are developing and
strengthening. As a result, in North and South, challenges to
capitalism are growing, with calls for a paradigm shift, for
sustainable alternative development models.
Daring
to think differently and challenge the concepts of global capitalism
is the first step toward a real shift in paradigm. Social movements
should be in the forefront of the struggle to discredit global
capitalism and promote new and bold thinking outside the box.
The
struggle against capitalism should go hand in hand with the struggle
against imperialism, which is one of the main obstacles to countries’
independence and sovereignty.
A
shift in paradigm requires rehabilitating politics and reconstructing
its meaning to democracy. This implies restoring the role of public
institutions in the design of public policies and more importantly,
promoting participatory democracy that recognizes the role of social
movements in the debate on development.
The
above policies should create the conditions for what Samir Amin calls
“the long transition to socialism”. Indeed, socialism and other
progressive development models should be on top of the alternatives
to the discredited and oppressive capitalist model. Socialism should
provide the conditions for a true emancipation of humankind from
exploitation, oppression, domination and discrimination.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abbas,
Hakim and Niyiragira, Yves (editors), Aid to Africa: Redeemer or
Coloniser? Pambazuka Press, 2009
AfDB,
AU, ECA, NEPAD, The Tunis Consensus: Targeting Effective Development.
From Aid Effectiveness to Development Effectiveness: Realising
Africa’s Own Vision for Development, Tunis, 4-5 November 2010
Amin,
Samir, Ending the crisis of capitalism or ending capitalism?
Pambazuka Press, 2010
Baier,
Walter, “‘Transformation’: Antonio Gramsci and Karol Polanyi”
in Europe: The Crisis Goes On, Transform! European Journal for
Alternative Thinking and Political Dialogue July 2010, pp.43-50
Cohen-Séat,
Patrice “At the Heart of the ‘Crisis of Civilization’: ‘The
Issue of ‘Living Well’ in Transform!, European Journal for
Alternative Thinking and Political Dialogue, August 2011, Challenges
& Disasters, pp.56-62
Dembélé,
Demba Moussa, “The International Financial Crisis: Lessons and
Response from Africa” in Pambazuka News, March 19, 2009
ECA,
Africa Economic Report 2011: The Role of the State in Economic
Transformation. Addis Ababa (Ethiopia)
Mkandawire,
Thandika (2001), “Thinking about developmental states in Africa”,
in Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 25, No. 3 (May), Special
Issue on African Economic Development in a Comparative Perspective,
pp. 289-313
Tandon,
Yash, Daring to Think Differently, South Centre and Pambazuka Press,
2009
Tosel,
André, “The Conflict between Conflicts in the Crisis of Globalised
Capitalist Civilization” in Transform! European Journal for
Alternative Thinking and Political Dialogue, Challenges &
Disasters, August 2011, 64-73
UNCTAD,
Economic Development in Africa: South–South Cooperation: Africa and
the New Forms of Development Partnerships. New York & Geneva:
United Nations, 2010
The
Least Developed Countries Report 2010. New York & Geneva: United
Nations
The
Global Economic Crisis: Systemic Failures and Multilateral Remedies.
Report by the UNCTAD Secretariat Task Force on Systemic Issues and
Economic Cooperation. New York & Geneva, 2009
Economic
Development in Africa: Reclaiming Policy Space: Domestic Resource
Mobilization and Developmental States. New York & Geneva: United
Nations, 2007
UN
LDC IV, Harnessing the Positive Contribution of South-South
Cooperation for Least Developed Countries’ Development. Background
Paper, New Delhi (India), 18-19 February 2011
World
Bank, Accelerated Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Agenda for
Action, Washington, DC, 1981.
Bureaucrats
in Business: The Economics and Politics of Government Ownership,
(1995) and Adjustment in Africa: Reform, Results and the Road Ahead,
(1994)
ABBREVIATIONS
& ACRONYMS
AfDB:
AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK,
ACB:
AFRICAN CENTRAL BANK
AFRICOM:
AFRICA COMMAND
ALBA:
ALTERNATIVE BOLIVARIENNE DES AMERIQUES
AIB:
AFRICAN INVESTMENT BANK
AMF:
AFRICAN MONETARY FUND
AU:
AFRICAN UNION
BRICS:
BRAZIL, RUSSIA, INDIA, CHINA, SOUTH AFRICA
ECA:
ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR AFRICA
EPA:
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT
FDI: FOREIGN
DIRECT INVESTMENT
GDP:
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT
IMF:
INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND
LDC:
LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRY
NATO:
NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION
NEPAD:
NEW PARTNERSHIP FOR AFRICA’S DEVELOPMENT
NGLS:
NON-GOVERNMENTAL LIAISON SERVICE
SAP:
STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT PROGRAM
UNCTAD:UNITED
NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE & DEVELOPMENT
WSF
: WORLD SOCIAL FORUM
WTO:
WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION
