Matty_UK
20th March 2010, 09:10
Some interesting predictions by Wallerstein that, simply according to intuition if nothing else, seem to be very feasible.
The Current Conjuncture: Short-run and Middle-run Projections
by Immanuel Wallerstein
1. Where We Are:
a) The world has entered a depression, whose greatest impact is yet to come (in the next five years).
b) The United States has entered a serious decline in geopolitical power, whose greatest impact is yet to come (in the next five years).
c) The world environment is entering into serious crisis (and nothing much will be done about it) (in the next five years).
d) The rumblings of left-oriented social movements are everywhere, but they are poorly coordinated and lack clear tactical vision (because they lack clear middle-run strategic vision).
e) Far-right forces have clearer short-run tactical vision than the left (a combination of preparing for violence and a refusal of all centrist compromise), but they too lack clear middle-run strategic vision.
f) The future (both short-run and middle-run) is very, very uncertain.
2. Most Possible Developments in the Next Five Years
a) Explosion of last bubble — (most of all, but not only) sovereign debt, especially of the United States.
b) Consequences of this:
b1) Significant drop in value of U.S. dollar, and hence move into genuine multi-currency world-economy;
b2) Significant increase in world unemployment rates, everywhere;
b3) Absence of safe havens leading to wild fluctuations in currency exchange rates, and hence unwillingness to invest.
c) Enormous (much increased) turmoil throughout Middle East, and notably:
c1) Probable military regime in Pakistan, backing more or less openly Taliban in Afghanistan;
c2) De facto control of Afghanistan by Taliban;
c3) U.S. full military withdrawal from Iraq, and possibly even Afghanistan;
c4) 50% chance of Israeli bombing of Iran, followed by fierce worldwide reaction against Israel;
c5) Shaky regime in Saudi Arabia, with possible military coup.
d) Consequences within United States:
d1) Fierce demonization of Obama (and Democrats) for treason;
d2) At best, narrow Obama reelection in 2012;
d3) Ultra-rightwing push for military takeover, with at least widespread creation of armed militias defying government.
e) Creation of non-U.S.-centered geopolitical blocs:
e1) Strengthening of Western Europe-Russia geopolitical ties;
e2) Strengthening of China-Japan-South Korea geopolitical ties;
e3) Strengthening of South American geopolitical ties, led by Brazil, with multiple attempts of rightwing coups (success uncertain).
f) Environment: No significant lessening of environmental degradation and no achievement of major counter-measures.
3. Likely Developments of Next 15-25 Years:
a) Open recognition by major controllers of capital of impossibility of significant future capital accumulation, and therefore active search for alternative systemic models that would enable them to retain three key features of current system (hierarchization, exploitation, and polarization),
b) Slower recognition by world “left” that active issue is not whether or not to end capitalism but how to organize for successor system that will be in process of construction,
4. What Kinds of Policies for the World Left?
a) Neither “left” governments nor “left” social movements can do much more in the short run (next five years) than engage in defensive actions, whose guiding characteristic should be actions that “minimize the pain” of the working strata generally, and the most oppressed and poverty-overwhelmed in particular. All “left” governments continue to live within the constraints of the capitalist world-economy.
b) The actual policies that would “minimize the pain” vary, depending on the political structure of the state and the economic position of the state in the world-economy. There is no state in which the working strata will not suffer in the coming five years (including in the North), and there is no program that is applicable everywhere. Organized left movements need to respect bottom-up popular pressures.
c) The crucial battle is in the middle-run (next 15-25 years). This is a battle not about capitalism, but about what will replace it as an historical social system. Both the right forces and the left forces exist throughout the world. The battle is not between states but between worldwide social forces.
d) Neither the left forces nor the right forces are presently unified worldwide, and in both camps there are serious internal struggles over the correct strategy to pursue.
e) The outcome of the internal struggles in each camp and the outcome of the struggle between the two camps are both completely uncertain at the present time. History is on no one’s side. The ultimate outcome may be far better or far worse than the present capitalist world-system.
f) The key mode of proceeding is (1) achieving analytic lucidity, (2) followed by fundamental moral choice, (3) followed by intelligent, effective political action. Not at all easy.
I'm sure most of us here agree capitalism is unlikely to survive the current crisis, but what I find most intriguing about Wallerstein's claims in this article is the possibility that the global ruling class will eventually be forced to realise this and start looking for something to replace it with. This is something also touched on by Zizek recently in "First as Tragedy, Then as Farce," where he suggests the conflict will not be between socialism and capitalism but between socialism (as in, a socialised planned economy which nevertheless maintains the old inequalities, albeit [according to Zizeks speculations] through rent rather than exploitation of waged labour) and communism. A successor to capitalism will not necassarily be more just, democratic and egalitarian.
This is something the left should keep in mind, watch out for, and be ready to pre-empt. We have an advantage in that we have the opportunity to be theoretically one step ahead, seeing as we aren't ideologically compelled to insist on the eternity of capitalism and can prepare ourselves well in advance of the ruling class, which still doesn't entirely grasp or want to grasp the enormity of the crisis facing capitalism and humanity in general. Is this not the trump card Marxists have always held? Would Communists in Russia and China have been successful if it wasn't for the fact they grasped before any other group that the Tsarist regime or the feudal-comprador Guomindang were running against the tide of history? Both Zizek and Wallerstein are right to emphasise that history is not on our side - history is, however, certainly not on the side of capitalism, and as progressives we have a good opportunity to get our bearings and develop a decisive strategy while the reactionaries are still shell-shocked and dazed by the crumbling of their ideological world.
The Current Conjuncture: Short-run and Middle-run Projections
by Immanuel Wallerstein
1. Where We Are:
a) The world has entered a depression, whose greatest impact is yet to come (in the next five years).
b) The United States has entered a serious decline in geopolitical power, whose greatest impact is yet to come (in the next five years).
c) The world environment is entering into serious crisis (and nothing much will be done about it) (in the next five years).
d) The rumblings of left-oriented social movements are everywhere, but they are poorly coordinated and lack clear tactical vision (because they lack clear middle-run strategic vision).
e) Far-right forces have clearer short-run tactical vision than the left (a combination of preparing for violence and a refusal of all centrist compromise), but they too lack clear middle-run strategic vision.
f) The future (both short-run and middle-run) is very, very uncertain.
2. Most Possible Developments in the Next Five Years
a) Explosion of last bubble — (most of all, but not only) sovereign debt, especially of the United States.
b) Consequences of this:
b1) Significant drop in value of U.S. dollar, and hence move into genuine multi-currency world-economy;
b2) Significant increase in world unemployment rates, everywhere;
b3) Absence of safe havens leading to wild fluctuations in currency exchange rates, and hence unwillingness to invest.
c) Enormous (much increased) turmoil throughout Middle East, and notably:
c1) Probable military regime in Pakistan, backing more or less openly Taliban in Afghanistan;
c2) De facto control of Afghanistan by Taliban;
c3) U.S. full military withdrawal from Iraq, and possibly even Afghanistan;
c4) 50% chance of Israeli bombing of Iran, followed by fierce worldwide reaction against Israel;
c5) Shaky regime in Saudi Arabia, with possible military coup.
d) Consequences within United States:
d1) Fierce demonization of Obama (and Democrats) for treason;
d2) At best, narrow Obama reelection in 2012;
d3) Ultra-rightwing push for military takeover, with at least widespread creation of armed militias defying government.
e) Creation of non-U.S.-centered geopolitical blocs:
e1) Strengthening of Western Europe-Russia geopolitical ties;
e2) Strengthening of China-Japan-South Korea geopolitical ties;
e3) Strengthening of South American geopolitical ties, led by Brazil, with multiple attempts of rightwing coups (success uncertain).
f) Environment: No significant lessening of environmental degradation and no achievement of major counter-measures.
3. Likely Developments of Next 15-25 Years:
a) Open recognition by major controllers of capital of impossibility of significant future capital accumulation, and therefore active search for alternative systemic models that would enable them to retain three key features of current system (hierarchization, exploitation, and polarization),
b) Slower recognition by world “left” that active issue is not whether or not to end capitalism but how to organize for successor system that will be in process of construction,
4. What Kinds of Policies for the World Left?
a) Neither “left” governments nor “left” social movements can do much more in the short run (next five years) than engage in defensive actions, whose guiding characteristic should be actions that “minimize the pain” of the working strata generally, and the most oppressed and poverty-overwhelmed in particular. All “left” governments continue to live within the constraints of the capitalist world-economy.
b) The actual policies that would “minimize the pain” vary, depending on the political structure of the state and the economic position of the state in the world-economy. There is no state in which the working strata will not suffer in the coming five years (including in the North), and there is no program that is applicable everywhere. Organized left movements need to respect bottom-up popular pressures.
c) The crucial battle is in the middle-run (next 15-25 years). This is a battle not about capitalism, but about what will replace it as an historical social system. Both the right forces and the left forces exist throughout the world. The battle is not between states but between worldwide social forces.
d) Neither the left forces nor the right forces are presently unified worldwide, and in both camps there are serious internal struggles over the correct strategy to pursue.
e) The outcome of the internal struggles in each camp and the outcome of the struggle between the two camps are both completely uncertain at the present time. History is on no one’s side. The ultimate outcome may be far better or far worse than the present capitalist world-system.
f) The key mode of proceeding is (1) achieving analytic lucidity, (2) followed by fundamental moral choice, (3) followed by intelligent, effective political action. Not at all easy.
I'm sure most of us here agree capitalism is unlikely to survive the current crisis, but what I find most intriguing about Wallerstein's claims in this article is the possibility that the global ruling class will eventually be forced to realise this and start looking for something to replace it with. This is something also touched on by Zizek recently in "First as Tragedy, Then as Farce," where he suggests the conflict will not be between socialism and capitalism but between socialism (as in, a socialised planned economy which nevertheless maintains the old inequalities, albeit [according to Zizeks speculations] through rent rather than exploitation of waged labour) and communism. A successor to capitalism will not necassarily be more just, democratic and egalitarian.
This is something the left should keep in mind, watch out for, and be ready to pre-empt. We have an advantage in that we have the opportunity to be theoretically one step ahead, seeing as we aren't ideologically compelled to insist on the eternity of capitalism and can prepare ourselves well in advance of the ruling class, which still doesn't entirely grasp or want to grasp the enormity of the crisis facing capitalism and humanity in general. Is this not the trump card Marxists have always held? Would Communists in Russia and China have been successful if it wasn't for the fact they grasped before any other group that the Tsarist regime or the feudal-comprador Guomindang were running against the tide of history? Both Zizek and Wallerstein are right to emphasise that history is not on our side - history is, however, certainly not on the side of capitalism, and as progressives we have a good opportunity to get our bearings and develop a decisive strategy while the reactionaries are still shell-shocked and dazed by the crumbling of their ideological world.