Editorial

Are We Witnessing a Crisis of Capitalism?

There is a debate raging amongst the Left about whether or not we are witnessing a crisis of capitalism. Some in this debate are arguing that this is a crisis of capitalism, that U.S. imperialism is collapsing and has lost its hegemonic position within the imperialist system of states. Others argue that capitalism is extremely resilient, the U.S. economy is still the largest economy in the world and that both the U.S. and world capitalist/imperialist system can recover from the current crisis. They argue that various economies may be going into crisis but that capitalism, itself, is not.

In a sense this debate is over the issue of whether or not the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism and its replacement by socialism is necessary or possible. Those who are arguing that this is a crisis of capitalism are actually suggesting that revolution is not necessary because capitalism will implode due to its inherent contradictions. Those who are arguing that this is not a crisis of capitalism are suggesting that, while the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism is necessary it is not possible at this time because capitalism is still too powerful and the working class too weak.

In the opinion of Modern Communism both sides in this debate are right and both sides are also wrong. First, of course this is a crisis of capitalism. Capitalism goes into crisis on a regular basis, approximately every 10 years, and has done so for its entire existence. Some of these crises have been relatively mild and some have been relatively severe. Some have affected a few countries and some have affected the entire world. Each time that capitalism goes into crisis huge amounts of capital are destroyed and workers are forced to shoulder the burden. This inevitably leads to questions about the usefulness of this system and the need to replace it with a more humane and less destructive economic system. The more severe the crisis, the broader is the questioning.

The issue that is really being debated is whether or not this is the crisis of capitalism, the crisis which brings the whole system crashing down. However, this is missing the point. There is no crisis which, by its very nature and severity, is the crisis which will bring an end to capitalism and imperialism. At the same time every crisis has the potential to bring capitalism to an end in one or more countries, those countries where the link in the imperialist system is weakest. For example, at the time of the First World War Russia was the weakest link in the imperialist system and capitalism was overthrown in that country. At the same time, there was no possibility that the capitalist system in the United States could be overthrown because the U.S. was not a weak link in the imperialist chain.

So, if we look at the current situation in Canada or the U.S. we may conclude that capitalism is still too powerful and that revolution is impossible. This may or may not be a valid conclusion because revolutions are extremely complex phenomena and a non-revolutionary situation can transform into a revolutionary situation in a matter of weeks or months. Furthermore, when the imperialist chain is broken in one place it encourages breaks in other places, but whether or not the working class is able to take advantage of such situations depends on its level of organization and its preparedness to go into action. So, the real issue is not whether or not capitalism is on the verge of collapse, but rather what the revolutionary forces need to do to prepare themselves and conditions for revolution in their own countries.

The situation at the end of the First World War is instructive in this regard. Russia was not the only weak link in the imperialist system at that time. Most of Eastern Europe, as well as Germany, France and Britain were also shattered by the war and there was a very real possibility that capitalism could fall in all of those countries. Yet revolution succeeded only in Russia. Why? Because the Russian working class was led by a revolutionary party with the theoretical, political and organizational capacity to take advantage of the revolutionary situation in Russia, while there was no such organization in any other country.

This underlines the fact that an economic or political crisis, no matter how severe, is not enough to put an end to capitalism, either in a single country or on an international scale. Capitalism can recover from any crisis so long as it is able to make the working class pay for it. There are those that think that the workers can prevent this from happening if they strengthen their trade unions and mount a militant fight-back. However, history does not support this thesis. The trade union struggle is not insignificant or irrelevant, but unless and until the working class is ready to challenge the capitalist class for political power it will always be forced to pay the bill. And for that the trade unions are not sufficient; a revolutionary political party of the working class is essential.

Therefore, in the opinion  of Modern Communism, the debate about whether or not this is a or the crisis of capitalism should be put to rest. The debate that has to be waged on the Left is how we can build a revolutionary organization capable of taking advantage of the opportunities that the deepening economic crisis presents to us to transform the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism from a necessity to a possibility to a reality. That is a debate with the potential to renew the revolutionary working class movement in Canada.

 


Back to Modern Communism