Latin America to unite in new union

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

http://rt.com/news/latin-america-celac-bloc-975/

The new bloc is said to be an attempt to replace the OAS, containing left and right leaders from Latin American countries.

I'm pretty pleased about this, in realpolitik terms. I have been advocating this ever since I got back from Cuba over a year ago. It's just a shame that this probably comes too late for Cuba to integrate itself into a regional Latin American market, as it is pretty much on the path to full-blown Capitalism already.

However, it might give the Social Democratic countries a better chance to develop their economies independent of the US, which of course gives the likes of the Venezuelan and Bolivian working classes more opportunities to force their will on the likes of Chavez and Morales.

Finally, it looks to me as if the realpolitik wars of the future will involve not countries and superpowers, but blocs and economic regions: Latin America, North America and Europe are all becoming very closely integrated, politically and economically. I know China and Russia have been hoping for similar, too.

[Smyg]

Well, I'm always in favour of decreasing American influence. :D

[dodger]

Yes Stammer, the US is and has never been the only game in town. Now this is proof positive. Like the Tiger/Celtic economies that turned into Pusseycats...this Superpower....maybe with attention switched to the Middle East and Gulf let attention slip away from 'it's own backyard'. Too late for Cuba? I do hope not....certainly it has come....but late as you say and late for a whole host of countries reduced to abject poverty and subservience to US interests. We will see how they(US) rise to this challenge, before long. Small producers here sold Bananas to Iran, it was banned, embargo. I was told Ecuador had stepped in to supply Iran. I was surprised, thinking Ecuador was more under the thumb than us. Now it makes more sense. Just how many UPPITY nations can the US deal with at any one time....let's see them kick the Hornets nest...now!

[Tim Cornelis]

Sounds like Pan-Americanist nationalist bullScheiß, but that may not be completely fair.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Finally, it looks to me as if the realpolitik wars of the future will involve not countries and superpowers, but blocs and economic regions: Latin America, North America and Europe are all becoming very closely integrated, politically and economically. I know China and Russia have been hoping for similar, too.

Europe's bloc isn't doing too well at the moment. One of the reasons the EU is splintering is precisely because of how closely the European markets are connected to each other...the foundation of Germany's economic power is the export markets in Europe, which is one of the reasons why Germany has a vested interest in trying to prevent economic collapse on the continent (another reason is the fact that the German and French banking systems would be wrecked...Germany holds over 100 billion euro in Italian debt alone.)

If I were to look at where the world was headed in 2000, I probably would've agreed insofar as blocs go, with globalization and NAFTA and the EU etc. I'm having serious doubts about that future now, though. In the USA there's a pretty big "circle the wagons" mentality.

[piet11111]

I always think about the pre-ww1 time when all sides where forming blocks too.

This will make tradewar and protectionism more likely and from that actual war might come.

But i still think a South American union would be progressive as a counter balance to North American economic dominance.

[Nox]

I just realised why what I wrote sounds so stupid

[Os Cangaceiros]

are you sure that you're an anarchist

[thefinalmarch]

Seems like a nice anti-imperialist union they've got there, best of luck to them.
lol this guy

[Nox]

me dun goof'd

[ColonelCossack]

me dun goof'd

What did you say?

[Q]

Bourgeois politics across the planet is concluding that it needs tighter integration in order to stand up in the competition between states. The EU is probably the oldest surviving and tightest integrated example, but there are others and this union would be the latest example.

I guess the background of this particular development could be placed against the decline of the hegemony of US power. For decades the OAS was the instrument through which the US ruled the American continents, through corruption, investments and the like. Now that the US can no longer play this role, the Latin American ruling classes are looking for their own interests and some sort of unity is a logical step.

From a working class point of view this too is to be welcomed. If the 20th century taught us anything, it is that socialism in one country will inevitably lead to disaster. Our goal must be the global democratic republic if humanity is to overcome capital and reach a higher form of society. This must, at the very least, include the capitalist core countries.

But fighting for continental democratic republics is already a major milestone on the road to global unification and can start to offer, though not immediately overcome, a positive alternative to the rule of capital. Therefore the political fight for democratic changes in supra-national blocs - such as the EU, the AU, ASEAN or this new Latin-American Union - unites and politicises the working classes over the continents and therefore offers the possibility of forming the working class as a class for its own, independent from the state. It can thus act as a jump board towards concrete proletarian internationalism.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

How is this anything but a south American version of the E.U? Is it a military defense pact? Are nations going to end aid in case of foreign invasion? If not and it has no anti-imperialists measures than I don't see much hope for it.

[FSL]

How is this anything but a south American version of the E.U? Is it a military defense pact? Are nations going to end aid in case of foreign invasion? If not and it has no anti-imperialists measures than I don't see much hope for it.

It isn't really. The strongest economies, Brazil for example, will find new export markets and places its capitalists can invest, while at the same time it will keep on having "favelas", sending the army in every now and then to -supposedly- take care of all those who have no means of subsistence but crime.


This is neither democratic nor progressive.

[Ocean Seal]

Sounds like Pan-Americanist nationalist bullScheiß, but that may not be completely fair.

Yes, it sounds like that because it is like that. But the important thing is that bourgeois states will behave like bourgeois states. Its important to note that bourgeois states fighting in their own interests makes them prey to a more militant working class. As I have said before, it is easier for the working class to overthrow national capitalism than comprador capitalism. That's a simple concept. When the shackles of imperialism and torn off, we become one step closer to the realization that capitalism as a whole is oppressive.

[Die Neue Zeit]

I'm pretty pleased about this, in realpolitik terms. I have been advocating this ever since I got back from Cuba over a year ago. It's just a shame that this probably comes too late for Cuba to integrate itself into a regional Latin American market, as it is pretty much on the path to full-blown Capitalism already.

However, it might give the Social Democratic countries a better chance to develop their economies independent of the US, which of course gives the likes of the Venezuelan and Bolivian working classes more opportunities to force their will on the likes of Chavez and Morales.

Finally, it looks to me as if the realpolitik wars of the future will involve not countries and superpowers, but blocs and economic regions: Latin America, North America and Europe are all becoming very closely integrated, politically and economically. I know China and Russia have been hoping for similar, too.

At last you're coming around to progressive takes on realpolitik. The Eurasian Union will press forward, I think, though I think China's ambitions in Central Asia might be dashed. :)

BTW, blocs and economic regions were already predicted by Lenin and Hilferding, Hobson earlier, and Kautsky the earliest, and not by Luxemburg or Bukharin.

[Die Neue Zeit]

If the 20th century taught us anything, it is that socialism in one country will inevitably lead to disaster. Our goal must be the global democratic republic if humanity is to overcome capital and reach a higher form of society. This must, at the very least, include the capitalist core countries.

But fighting for continental democratic republics is already a major milestone on the road to global unification and can start to offer, though not immediately overcome, a positive alternative to the rule of capital.

It should say, grammatically speaking, "start to offer a positive alternative to, though not immediately overcome, the rule of capital."

Also, some Stalinists - at least those more critical to how the petty Eastern European regimes were set up politically and economically - would argue that the Soviet Union's size was comparable to a continent, uniting multiple nations (something like "country /= nation").

[Nox]

I can't believe how dumb my first post was *covers face in shame*

[Q]

It should say, grammatically speaking "start to offer a positive alternative to, though not immediately overcome, the rule of capital."
Correct. These "engrish" constructions are a result of me editing posts on the fly to include more info. Most of the mistakes are removed in general, but sometimes some of these stick.


Also, some Stalinists - at least those more critical to how the Eastern European regimes were set up politically and economically - would argue that the Soviet Union's size was comparable to a continent, uniting multiple nations (something like "country /= nation").

Well, then it is up to us to explain that it is not about size, but more about the ability to positively overcome the capital relation. As capitalism is a global system, which features a global division of labour and a global state hierarchy, it can only be overcome on that level and must start with the capitalist core. Any autarkic alternatives are postively reactionary.

Europe is a principal arena for this fight due to its position within the capitalist system (many European countries belonging to the core) and due to the strong tradition of class struggle in many of those same countries.

But I remain positive about the potential of a united Latin-American Democratic Workers Republic.

[Smyg]

73igQe0LyHE

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

At last you're coming around to progressive takes on realpolitik. The Eurasian Union will press forward, I think, though I think China's ambitions in Central Asia might be dashed. :)

BTW, blocs and economic regions were already predicted by Lenin and Hilferding, Hobson earlier, and Kautsky the earliest, and not by Luxemburg or Bukharin.

No, i'm not coming round to the EU and other bullshit like that.

I'm merely saying that it is a (probable) reality of the future, though it may be more of a semi-permanent, rather than a permanent, feature.

I do not care for realpolitik.

[Franz Fanonipants]

a "north american" bloc is pretty much a pipe dream.