Philippe Alcoy
Many of the capitalist regimes in Eastern Europe have faced continued instability as they are challenged by mass movements from below. What is the historical background to these struggles and what are the challenges and limits of these movements?It was 25 years ago when the German band Scorpions sang "Wind of change" to celebrate the fall of the Berlin Wall, the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the "socialist bloc" that followed it. With this sweet melody we were told about fraternity and the dreams of new generations. In the East, 25 years later there is nothing but poverty, unemployment, corruption and inequality. However in recent years there has been a social and political crisis also marked by grassroots mobilizations in the region. This social and political instability is becoming a concern among Western capitalists, is this going to mark the end of an era of working class paralysis?
In recent years, a number of countries were affected by popular
uprisings, political crises and social explosions. This is the case of
Slovenia, Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, Bosnia and Herzegovina and
Moldova. Hungary, Croatia, Montenegro and Albania have also witnessed
less intense mass mobilizations.
Obviously, these movements and crisis have had varying degrees of
depth and intensity in different countries. In some cases, they managed
to bring down the local and/or national governments; in other cases they
were not strong enough to do so. At the same time, we should point out
that the Ukrainian crisis - although it is a part of this series of
conflicts in the region - its severity, its geopolitical implications
and potential consequences, make it a special case.
In all these examples we have seen a reproduction of similar
dynamics. Even if the popular discontent could erupt for specific issues
(price increases of public services, repression of protests, corruption
scandals, suspicion of electoral fraud, etc.) very quickly the
questioning of a political “elite” became one of the principal focuses
of the struggle.
Beyond the real limits of these movements, the first thing that
should be noticed is that the masses of this region are taking little by
little the "habit" of direct action, of the fight in the streets
against the corrupt and repressive governments. We cannot deny that it
is the result of a spillover of mass mobilizations against the attacks
of capitalists, which took place in the countries of southern Europe and
North Africa.
This element gives them a different character from what were called
the "velvet revolutions" that were fomented by NGOs and by imperialist
foundations to install puppet governments favorable to Western powers.
Obviously, this does not mean that the imperialists through their
international institutions, foundations, political allies and the "civil
society" at the local level, did not try to channel and divert the
popular dissatisfaction to its own geopolitical and economical goals in
the region (on this point the example of Ukraine is emblematic).
This new tendency of mass mobilizations in Eastern Europe seems to
express an early change in the masses’ predisposition to struggle. It is
important considering the great demoralization and the loss of
confidence in the collective strength of the working class movement
which spread throughout the region in 1990-2000. It is clear that the
legacy of the Stalinist period and the process of capitalist restoration
(which meant a profound social, cultural and economic setback for the
popular classes) still weighs. This is what the objective and subjective
limitations of recent mobilizations suggest. But it is also important
to take into account that this change opens a lot of possibilities for
the working class and oppressed of the region to emerge.
Capitalist restoration and decomposing democracies
This new situation of social unrest - to which leaders of the Western
powers must adapt - is in opposition to the earlier period of the
bourgeois triumphalism in which the imperialism used the capitalist
restoration in the former "Soviet bloc" as one of the central elements
of its propaganda. The capitalist restoration in Eastern Europe was in
fact represented as one of the greatest victories of capitalism in the
twentieth century.
In the countries of the former "socialist bloc", or what we could
call more correctly ex-bureaucratised workers’ states, the
reintroduction of capitalism has involved a profound degradation of the
living conditions of the working class. The privatizations have resulted
in company closures and massive layoffs. In countries like the former
Yugoslavia, this process has also triggered the bloodiest armed
conflicts in the continent since the end of World War II.
The process of capitalist restoration was parallel to the
establishment of bourgeois democratic regimes. This was also an
important element of the imperialist political propaganda because it was
alleged that there was a correlation between (neo-liberal) capitalism
and "democracy." At the same time, communism, and any system that is not
a bourgeois democracy, was (and still is) equated with totalitarianism
and dictatorship.
But these bourgeois democratic regimes that were established in the
former bureaucratised workers states (as well in other regions of the
world) were of a pitiful quality. Even from the standpoint of the
capitalists. The decomposed and degraded nature of these "democracies"
can be found not only in the endemic corruption and clientelism, but
also in the quality of institutions.
What is usually called "the Rule of Law" is completely weak in these
countries. Not only the workers, but the general masses don’t trust the
institutions (justice, parliament) that are completely subservient to
governments or oligarchs.
For example, the complicity between the judiciary, large local
capitalists and multinational companies presents itself very openly and
shamelessly. Thus, in the face of repeated violations of workers’ rights
(that are already weak) from domestic and foreign employers, workers
know that it is useless to resort to the courts.
Another example of this direct link between the capitalist class and
the state is reflected in the many cases where the magnates of a
particular industry’s sector are simultaneously deputies or ministers at
local or national level (for example, in Ukraine the current president,
Petro Poroshenko, is the head of a big chocolate firm and other
companies). In other words, the local bourgeoisie, which is from the
former Stalinist bureaucracy, is often directly in political power.
To all this we should add the total control of the mass media by
oligarchic groups that are directly linked to the government and/or
imperialist powers... Not to mention the cases of direct repression
against opposition journalists or against those who are merely critical
of the authorities.
This poses a problem even for capitalists, because the corruption and
the lack of any independence between the state institutions, the
governments and local ruling classes, creates the basis for a possible
crisis of the state’s legitimacy. That crisis could develop not only
among workers but also among the middle classes - including its most
privileged layers. It is no coincidence that NGOs, foundations and
imperialist leaders insist so much on the importance of strengthening
the "Rule of Law" and the fight against corruption in these countries.
Global economic crisis and the crisis of capitalist triumphalism
The economic crisis that erupted in 2007-2008 is a historical crisis
of capitalism. It has affected the central imperialist countries like
the US and several major powers of the European Union (EU). However it
was the peripheral imperialist countries such as Greece, the Spanish
State, Portugal and Ireland that were the most affected. The
semi-colonial countries of the European periphery have also been hit
hard by the crisis.
As a result of capitalists’ attacks through their austerity plans,
the economic crisis has rapidly become a social and a political crisis
in several countries. In some cases, as in Greece and the Spanish State,
the economic crisis has also led to a crisis of the political system.
This is also the case in several Arab countries in northern Africa
where the revolutionary process that was born in Tunisia has led to the
fall of dictators who were in power for decades: Ben Ali in Tunisia,
Gaddafi in Libya and Mubarak in Egypt. Although these processes are
experiencing significant declines, they remain open.
These struggles and crises are undoubtedly a blow to the capitalists’ triumphalist speeches worldwide. Remember that in the 1990s the imperialists openly proclaimed the "end of history" and that "there was no alternative" to liberal democracy and capitalism.
The crisis of the EU and the "old democracies" is an additional
element of this crisis. The immense suffering that the "European
partners" impose on the masses in Greece and in other EU countries,
alongside the authoritarian, bonapartist turn of all political regimes
of the continent, makes "the European perspective" less attractive to
people in several peripheral European countries.
It is in this context that massive mobilizations and struggles have
begun to develop in different countries of Eastern Europe in recent
years. In none of these revolts was the requirement to move towards
"European integration" a central axis. Even in Ukraine where this claim
was initially important, the denunciation of the corrupt and repressive
government of Viktor Yanukovych was the main focus (at least until a
pro-imperialist government moved to Kiev and the conflict took the form
of a civil war).
Although the rejection of the political caste is something that is
gradually expressed in different parts of the globe and something that
has deepened with the progress of the crisis, we should point out a
particularity of Eastern European countries. In fact, given the form in
which most political regimes were formed throughout the last 25 years in
these countries (that is to say as "democratic counter revolution" and
restorationists regimes) the questioning of political parties and
governments is closely linked to questioning the whole process of
capitalist restoration.
In other words, in these countries it is difficult to question the
political caste in power since the early 1990s without questioning
privatization, factories closures, layoffs, the destruction of public
sectors, the loss social benefits, the deep deterioration of living
standards of the population in general and of the working class in
particular.
This obviously does not mean that the mass mobilizations in the
former bureaucratised worker’s states of Eastern Europe mechanically
lead to a questioning of capitalism. However, there is a tendency to
establish very quickly the link between the issues of the political
regime and economic issues, as if it was the same question.
Thus, in the mobilizations that took place in recent years it has
been observed that the requirement of resignation of governments went
with the revision of privatizations that took place in previous decades.
In the case of Bulgaria in 2013, for example, after the increase of the
price of electricity bills protesters demanded the renationalisation of
electricity suppliers and even of all the privatizations that took
place in the last 25 years. During the social explosion in Bosnia and
Herzegovina in February 2014 some even talked about the nationalization
under workers’ management of certain enterprises along with other
workers’ demands.
"Civil society" and class conciliation
What fundamentally characterizes these movements is their ideological
confusion and lack of an alternative program that responds consistently
to the interests of the working class, independently of the capitalist
political currents and imperialism.
Facing the political regime and a degraded democracy, protesters
often advocate for "strengthening civil society". On the issue of mass
privatization, it is not uncommon to hear the demand for "transparent
privatization". Somehow there are widespread illusions about the
possibility of building "good capitalism" and true liberal democracy.
That is to say, a class-conciliationist vision in which "good bosses",
middle classes and workers have a common objective: the fight against
the corrupt political class.
NGOs, foundations and international imperialist organizations help
instill the vision that bourgeois democracy and capitalism are
impossible to overcome. They present the "European horizon" as the only
salvation for Eastern European societies and use this ideology to
contain mass dissatisfaction.
However, even if local capitalists and imperialism are able to
deflect and/or contain different popular revolts, it does not mean that
the governments are stable and the sources of rebellion have
disappeared. On the contrary, these demonstrations and riots are a blow
against the regimes, weakening them and leaving open the possibility of
more social struggles in the future.
One of the problems of these mobilizations is that they take on a
polyclassist, “citizen” form where the working class participates, but
is diluted in the mass of ’’citizens’’. It makes the development of
class-oriented demands more difficult. Instead, it’s the middle class
that shapes the political demands.
The only example that has occurred in recent years in which the
workers’ demands were really the center of the movement was during the
social explosion in Bosnia in 2014. In this case, the movement was born
out of the struggle against the repression of the unemployed and
precarious youth in the (former) northeastern industrial city of Tuzla.
The unrest then spilled over into major cities, including the capital of
Sarajevo.
But there were still some limitations. For instance, the movement
failed to extend to the Serb entity, Republika Srpska. Furthermore, the
sectors in struggle were largely the unemployed, precarious youth, or
workers whose factories were in advanced stages of closure. Paralyzed by
fear of unemployment, the job-holding sectors of the working class were
not actively involved. The bureaucracies of major trade unions even
condemned the protests.
The main question is whether the working class, with other oppressed
sectors, will manage to intervene in future social explosions and impose
its own claims against the local ruling classes, imperialism and their
allies in the union bureaucracies.
The passage from “restoration" to "transition"
Defending a class program that is independent from the local ruling
classes and imperialists is fundamental. This is especially the case in a
region in which, in the 1980s many countries experienced major workers’
struggles that were against the Stalinist bureaucracies, but were
incapable of solving the economic and social crisis spreading across the
entire socialist bloc.
Popular uprisings in several countries have managed to reverse the
old Stalinist regimes, but have been capitalized and diverted by various
bourgeois and restorationists political alternatives. The pressure of
the working class is one of the main factors in the 1990s that led a
part of the Stalinist bureaucracy to adopt the path of capitalist
restoration.
In all of these cases, workers were unable to slow down the process
of capitalist restoration and halt the establishment of bourgeois
democratic regimes by defending their own program of political
revolution against the Stalinist bureaucracy – that is, to overthrow the
Stalinist bureaucracy and replace it with a regime based on proletarian
democracy with decisions taken in organisms of self-organization
(worker’s soviets or councils); to defend the economic bases of the
state (social property); thus allow for the improvement of living
conditions for the masses and begin an internationalist struggle for
socialism. Unfortunately it was not like that. A significant part of the
proletariat decided, though reluctantly, to support pro-capitalist
alternatives.
Radical demands
Today, as we begin to see emerging breaches in these regimes
introduced in the early 1990s, the working class should avoid making the
same mistakes. It is imperative that the alternatives are radically
different from the "solutions" provided by the bourgeoisie and the
imperialism.
Thus, when dealing with corrupt and repressive regimes, it is not
possible to propose superficial changes and reforms that are limited to
the existing framework. The framework itself must be reversed. In this
sense, the demand for a Constituent Assembly based on the
broadest democracy could become a first step to move towards meeting the
structural democratic demands of the masses.
In this way, workers, youth and all the oppressed could defend
measures (ie., all politicians should earn the same salary as a skilled
worker) that would prevent politics from becoming a source of personal
enrichment for a handful of corrupt politicians. This is a central
problem in all countries of the region that has generated a general
rejection, but does not ensure that the politicians will stop governing
for the interests of capitalists. Therefore, in addition to defending
the claim of the election of all positions in the state, we should
highlight that MPs, ministers, judges, etc. are revocable at any time.
In this region, the question of national oppression arises for the
concerned people not only against imperialism, but also within each
country. Nationalism has been used by several restorationist currents to
divide the exploited in order to reap benefits from the reintroduction
of capitalism. This is why the right to self-determination for
the oppressed nationalities of the region is also a central democratic
demand and the only way to lay the foundations of a real fraternity
among peoples.
Re-nationalization
In former bureaucratized workers’ states of Eastern Europe, one
question plays a major role – perhaps comparable to the question of land
reform in the past: the re-nationalization of all public companies and
services that were privatized during the process of capitalist
restoration, without compensation and under the management of workers
and the population. This claim could also be extended to the private
businesses that were opened during this period and are now in crisis,
deciding to close or implement massive dismissals.
While the private appropriation of wealth that was produced
collectively is one of the fundamental characteristics of capitalism in
the former bureaucratized workers’ states, at the same time capitalist
restoration involved the large-scale theft of property and national
wealth produced over several decades by the entire society. The openly
criminal character of this contemporary primitive accumulation of
capital allows the claim for re-nationalization to be fundamental and
clearly comprehended by the working masses in these countries.
This measure would not only be a way to address the urgent problem of
unemployment, especially among young people, but also a solid
foundation for the establishment of organs of self-organization of the
working class and masses; That would then provide an answer to the
question of "popular participation" in making economic and political
decisions in society. This self-organization of the masses could even
grow to create forms of dual power and dispute with the bourgeoisie.
Putting the working class into motion in defense of such a program
would require an organization – an organization that is able to respond
not simply to practical, but above all to political issues. In this
sense, one of the preparatory tasks preceding the (very) probable event
of social explosion and maybe revolutionary process is the construction
of a revolutionary party of workers, youth and all the oppressed; a
party that is completely different from those that have been developed
so far in the region; a party that is decidedly revolutionary and sides
with the exploited and oppressed; a collective organizer that is able to
learn from the past and recent struggles and thus prepare for future
victories. For this, the exploited masses’ recuperation of the regions’
political and ideological heritage of Trotskyism – the only Marxist
current that denounced from the beginning the bureaucratic deformation
of the former USSR dominated by Stalin – will be fundamental.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire