A Google translation
from Workers Communist-PCm Italy
July 3, 2012
July 3, 2012
the daily blog of proletaricomunisti:
The European Summit
held in late June, hailed as a victory for Italy and Spain supported by France
and as a partial defeat for Merkel, can not yet be considered a real and
important step for European governments to face in conditions of larger unity
the financial crisis by which are affected. It should be seen from different
sides: the relationships between the different European countries, the
relationships within the European countries, the overall scenario of the
relationship between governments, proletarians and masses in Europe.
The relationships
between the different european countries.
It is clear that the
fall of Sarkozy has temporarily weakened the Franco-German axis, which hitherto
had been a strong point, particularly for the German Government, that through
this axis was able to impose its policy. The so-called "Merkozy" can
not be quickly turned into the "Merkhollande".
In the course of the
Summit, this has encouraged the action of Italian and Spanish governments in
demanding a stronger and and less expensive support as a counterpart to the
strict policies they are applying. In this sense, indeed, the Spanish and
Italian governments have achieved on paper a result, that is concentrated on
the points concerning the mechanism "safe-spreads" and the "save-states"
Fund, ie an almost automatic intervention for the access and the use of this
Fund to counter the speculation and recapitalize the support to the banking
system whenever it is in serious difficulties. But it will be seen whether this
is actually implemented , because the the words of the agreement "in a
flexible and effective way" give room for interpretations which leave the
command baton essentially in the hands of Germany.
The summit also
produced an opening to the Eurobonds, in the form of the so-called
"project bonds" that should be used to finance infrastructure works,
basically a plan for a growth based almost exclusively on this. on this has
weighed the partial change of policy made by the Hollande government , closer
to the Eurobond setting than the Sarkozy government . In this sense, Merkel had
to take a step back compared to rigid statements of recent weeks.
Internally in Germany,
this has been reflected in motions within the parliament. Some members of the
majority disagreed, replaced by SPD opposition parliamentaries which support
the policies approved by Merkel at the summit. It is too early to see whether
these changes in relationships between governments reflect real political
changes.
The relationships
within the European countries.
Among these countries,
the governments of Italy, Spain and the new French have scored a point in
favour to the consistency of their parliamentary majorities and also to their
internal system relationships - employers, banks, etc.- while we have already said
that the government German meets a phase of lower internal consistency.
The Europe as a whole
takes from this passage an advantage in the overall international dispute,
because it gives a sign of greater internal unity. Again, it is still too early
to estimate whether this constitutes a signal towards a greater integration and
unity as bloc.
The overall scenario
of the relationship between governments, proletarians and masses in Europe.
From this perspective,
the summit marked a victory of the bourgeoisie and a very bad thing for the
proletariat and the masses.
Generally, is still
correct what we always pointed out: in the crisis, the bourgeoisie unloads on
the proletarians and masses the effects of it to safeguard the system and
profits and the proletarians are victims to sacrifice on the altar of the
safeguard and recovery of profits. Every step in this direction weakens the
working class and strengthens the bourgeoisie. The proletarians have no
interest on the exit of the crisis of the bourgeoisie, because the only exit
from the crisis that is on benefit the workers is one that involves the
overthrow of the bourgeoisie and the exit from capitalism.
The Summit definitely
confirms this view. The Italian and Spanish governments have relied on the
strength that came from having been able to realize internally the so-called
"reforms" that deeply attacked the proletariat and the masses.
In Spain, the only
countertendency that has currently emerged is the great struggle of miners of
Asturias, whose strong resistance challenges the State, bosses and government
in a situation of social conflict in which the "indignados" and the
so-called left opposition forces have
disappeared - we should not include in these the Socialist Party of the former
premier Zapatero, which easily surrendered to the new government because it
shares the policy and basic interests.
In Italy the situation
is even worse than in Spain. Monti resulted the moral and practical winner of
this summit and it is due to having been able to implement economic measures
against the workers and the people, the strategic pensions reform and the even
more strategic labor reform. Monti becomes a giant in Europe thanks to the
social bloc that supports him, the bosses, parliamentary parties and official
unions and due to lack of resistance and social revolt by the workers and broad
masses.
The Monti's and
Italian victory at the summit certifies the defeat of the proletarians of
Italy, who pay with tears and blood the cost of the crisis, opposing a too weak
resistance.
The change of
government from Berlusconi to Monti was healthy for the bourgeoisie and gave to
the current bourgeois government a seat at the table of the bosses of Europe,
with an active role, while it has been just the opposite for the proletarians
and the masses. The decay, human, political and moral of Berlusconi and his
government who had expressed the point of maximum weakness for the bourgeoisie
as a whole, has been replaced by a strong government with free hands, that has
translated into practice the modern fascism as dictatorship of technicians and
imposed, without a fight, policies that strike at the heart the condition of
workers and proletarians, their achievements in the past decades, of which the
Article. 18 of the Labor Code is rightly a symbol.
Any strengthening of
the government in the crisis goes along with the weakening of the proletariat,
lacking it a political and social resistance.
The Brussels Summit
encourages the European bourgeoisies to go ahead on their road, whatever the
name of their governments, whatever the majority that supports them. They are
all basically governments of national unity, that is 'business committees' and
repressive State apparatuses.
Encouraged by the
Summit, the Monti government prepares new devastating measures that behind
words "spending review" conceals the fierce cuts like in Greece, even
though we are not in the conditions of Greece.
The new attacks on the
health care, the public sector employment are not partial attacks but a further
link of the reactionary transformation of the State and the relationship
between State, social spending, living conditions of proletarians and the
masses.
Even if a part of the
trade union movement and of the Left Opposition develop parts of this
complaint, the overall framework of the situation is denied, obscured, diluted
and therefore, beyond the words, they do not struggle really against it.
The pensions reform
was not to pass, the labor reform and the attack on article 18 were not to
pass, the announced new “spending review” reform is not to pass, as well as in
the factories, the Marchionne’s plan and the bosses’ fascism were not to pass,
nor it was to pass the systematic use of the Police State, the trials, arrests,
fines, persecutions that daily hit those who oppose, the No Tav movement like
the unemployed in Taranto, the immigrant workers in Basiano, the local
movements, up to the students and anti-fascists.
But so far all this
has passed. Government, bosses and the State did not pay any serious political
price. Therefore, the situation, instead of getting better, worsens.
The levels of
consciousness of the workers and the masses did not grow.
Some struggles, cries,
anger, indignation, electoral abstention testified that a potential of struggle
and rebellion certainly exists as well as a willingness of the proletariat and
the masses to respond with the struggle, and even something more than the
struggle, to the front attack of which they are target, but it weighs the lack
of the even basic tools for a general answer.
The lack of these
tools does not depend mainly on objective conditions, but on the subjective
conditions and organizational forms that still exist in the ranks of the
proletariat and the masses: unions firmly on the side of the bosses, CISL and
UIL, and unions firmly in defense of the State and the general interest of the
bosses, even when they have contradictions with the government, or single
decisions of the bosses.
The role of played the
CGIL in the devastating escalation of unloading the crisis on the working class
is even more harmful than that of the trade unions openly on the side of the
bosses, because it aims at a consultation from the outside that is a decisive
glue to make pass the plans of bosses and government.
The ambiguous role of
the Fiom, with one foot in and one foot out, remains a weak link of the
workers' resistance and the necessary resumption of a general struggle.
Among the most radical
union opposition forces and the movements, the lack of understanding the nature
and forms with which to carry out this fight does not help to build, despite
the efforts, the strength for the counteroffensive. They do not understand or
want to understand that in order to defy the government, bosses, the State we
have to win the the two-lines-struggle and the "civil war" within the
working class and the mass movements against the opportunist and reformist
positions and groupings, of which the various former parliamentary left
transformists are part, Casarini, Bernocchi, etc.
The flag of the
current struggle is not and should not be the unity, but rather the struggle
for unity based on the clearness about what is the battle to do and the lot at
stake. we need the unity of the communists for a genuine revolutionary Party,
in theory and practice, we need the unity for a union of class and mass, going
beyond the current base unions and anomalous FIOM, we need the unity for a
people's and proletarian Front that puts the struggle and fight at the centre
of its activity.
If we were to watch
the outcome of EU summit, objectively we should be very optimistic, the
economic solutions of this Summit have no future. As someone correctly
observed, these solutions have been already applied in the US, under conditions
in which they can work better, and there they are not restraining the crisis,
but rather are preparing a new outbreak, in some ways tragic for the world
economy.
Europe follows the
path of US in much worse conditions and thus the "historical"
measures approved at last Summit will soon prove to be "talk and
badge". Clearly, this optimism just make us say that there are now, and
can grow in the future, the conditions for an adequate response of the
proletariat and the masses. Each signal in this direction, whatever the country
from which it comes, must be seen as an encouragement and indication - see the
ongoing Asturian miners great strike, but also the students strike in Quebec,
as well as the hundreds of outbreaks in all countries, including ours.
Marching along its
road, the Monti government sows wind and can reap storm, and every step of its
march may be the 'spark that ignites the prairie'.
Proletari comunisti-
PCm Italy 3rd of July 2012.
No comments:
Post a Comment