ECONOMIC BASIS OF IMPERIALIST COMPETITION
We have to see how this competition goes, starting from the economic base, as we will in the following pages. Keeping in mind that the first world is being redefined, which is expressed in the process of sinking of the only hegemonic superpower, US imperialism, in a long but sure process with temporary blooms and relapses; and, in in which the second world imperialist powers are treading its heels. All of this within the overall process of collapse and sweeping away in which imperialism is in by the world revolution, where the Third World is the base.
We, as Chairman Gonzalo teaches us, are in favor of Chairman Mao’s theory of the “three worlds are delineated” to set the strategy and tactics of the world revolution and, therefore, are opposed to the Teng´s revisionist theory of the “Three Worlds” which is nothing but to lag behind one of the two superpowers.
We have to see what impact the global crisis of 2008 and the current relapse has had on the hegemony of US imperialism and on the claims of its rivals; but keeping in mind what was treated before about the process or development of bureaucratic capitalism, which imperialism drives in the oppressed colonial and semi-colonial countries, according to the socioeconomic conditions prevailing there. Everything within the current process of further maturation of the objective conditions for world revolution.
So, first, let’s see how inter-imperialist competition is, what the economic basis for US hegemony is.
In this new delivery or continuation of our Notes on the international situation, we continue with what is offered, ie the analysis of the objective situation, exposing economic data set, which show us very clearly how goes the dispute between monopolies and imperialist countries for world domination and, therefore, the economic base of the only hegemony of US imperialism and increased oppression and pillage of the vast majority of countries and people of the world by a small handful of imperialist countries.
Data, that have to be understood in relation to the ones already published, about the process of bureaucratic capitalism in world. All this shows, then, that imperialism is increasingly monopolistic, more parasitic and in most advanced rot or decay and sinking hopelessly into a complex series of wars of all kinds. And, after imperialism what is next? Therefore, all of it proves how imperialism mature even more the conditions for the world revolution. Like its been sweep away since the 80’s of the last century. We are at stage of strategic offensive of world proletarian revolution. From here, it expressed, worldwide, the development of the revolutionary situation in uneven development, mainly at the base of the world revolution in the oppressed countries of the Third World, coming to Europe itself. We are at new wave of the world proletarian revolution. In summary: the world revolution, despite its long and hard vicissitudes, can only end in victory which demands world peoples war. And the hub of the entire situation, as national and international, is the Communist Party, Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, mainly Maoist, militarized to initiate and develop people’s war in each country, inseparable and irreconcilably struggling against imperialism, reaction and revisionism.
To do so, we’ll use a recent study about the subject from Raúl Ornellas (7), to illustrate better the development of the struggle for a new distribution between the imperialists, in relation to changes in economic strength between these, in light of the recent crisis and relapse suffering, which currently do not end up leaving, noting the class limitations of the study, interpreting their results in light of our ideology Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, calling things by their name and we will synthesize our own point of view about it.
The study cited above, for example, deals with ” business competition and world economic leadership contention,” based in part “on data for the five hundred largest companies ranked by sales” by the Fortune Global 500 magazine, where “an analysis of the sales and profits by groups of undertakings” is made, ie, the struggle among the largest global monopolies, as part of inter-imperialist competition. This is of utmost importance to understand the changes in the other hill. Lenin taught that “the deepest economic foundation of imperialism is the monopoly”, which has been generated by financial capital, “first monopolistic associations divide up domestic market among themselves, then divide the world market directly to each other and among a handful of imperialist countries. ” (8)
The study for “five hundred companies” gives the following result:
Income Evolution between 1994 and 2008:
Two general trends stand out: the high concentration in the six groups of dominant companies, which have their origin in the United States, Japan, China, Germany, France and England, which account for over 70% of revenues during the study period. The emergence of an incipient diversification of business sources is also observed, reflected in the increased share of the group “Other”, which concentrates 27% of the total income of the five hundred in 2008 (…) highlights the predominance of the US business group, which since 1996 has the largest share of the dominant groups, although between 2007 and 2008 it lost dynamism. Correspondingly, the group of Japanese origin suffers a constant crash and lost 60% of its quota. European companies have a stable behavior tends and a slight increase towards the end of the period; the German group has the best performance, with a share of more than 11% of the income of the five hundred in 2008. Undoubtedly the most notable performance is the group of companies of Chinese origin, which within only fifteen years passed from a completely marginal share to the level of the European powers. However, an important asymmetry between the US group and other companies (…) is maintained. “(9)
Here it is necessary to comment briefly on the part of the above quote, saying: “group of Japanese origin suffers a constant crash”. On this, we consider that the study does not take into account the income of its subsidiaries operating, for example, as seen in the delivered notes on bureaucratic capitalism, in Southeast Asia, as the income of this group; such as, for example, in Taiwan and South Korea granddaughters or subsidiaries in China, it is counted as if they were “new companies” of the host countries. No one takes into account that with the so called “restructuring of Japanese industry”, Japanese imperialism, through the use of direct investment, loans, technology transfer, especially in Asia, increased its monopoly position in the world market, increased its power and thus its parasitism, living from the clipping coupons, thereby also deepened its decay, its collapse. And that goes for the case of the group “Other”, which according to the statement made by us it does not come to be anything other than affiliates of the largest imperialist or subject to these monopolies, by an intricate web of relationships to the “holding system”.
Therefore, this index of “500” does not express to the full extent the accumulated power of the greatest imperialist monopolies. It does not express how power and wealth is concentrated globally more markedly in fewer hands. Therefore, the Ornella´s study, based on this index of “500”, we take it as a reference to contrast with other sources that we are quoting here and to better illustrate the findings in each part as we go on.
The increased power of Japanese imperialism shown in our footnotes to bureaucratic capitalism, shows that these imperialists, particularly in Asia, but also in the rest of the world have been able to develop as much as the Yankee monopoly networks or chains with its subsidiaries and other forms of penetration in oppressed countries whose main oppressor is Yankees, all of which occurs within the current stage undergoing imperialism. It is an expression that shows that imperialism is monopolistic, the most parasitic and is sinking deeper. That is, the more it advances in its process the more its own contradictions develop and it sinks further, as demonstrated by each of its cyclical crises within its general and final crisis.
We recall that subsidiaries global growth of the mothers monopolies has been very fast, so between 1946 and 1961 were found 3,550 new subsidiaries (daughters), and from that year until 1996 according to UN figures were created 260,000, which Hübner quotes, who concludes: “While the developed capitalist economies represent the headquarters of the business centers, they give the economies of the Third World and the middle eastern Europe the role of headquarters of their subsidiaries”. (10)
The monopoly profits for the period:
(…) Until 2006, the profit concentration in the groups of dominant firms, as in the case of income, is equally marked. The years 2007 and 2008 show a significant drop in the shares of these groups, except for the Chinese group. By 2008, 48% of the profits, greatly reduced, of the most important companies were generated outside dominant firms groups (…) The share of total profits of the US group is reduced to just 25% in 2007 and 2008, reflecting the depth of the crisis and the breakdown of the financial accumulation mechanisms. It is stressed that even in the midst of what some analysis advertised as the end of the economic supremacy of the United States, its leading-edge companies keep a significant share of the profits. Instead, the group of companies of Japanese origin reached absolute losses in 2008, while the Chinese companies had a growth in their share to reach 12% of all “. (11)
Then Chinese companies begin to decrease even after “the Chinese government injected since 2008 copious amounts of credit in the economy over the past four years. But every year, economic growth has gone down.”(12) Therefore, the corporate debt has immensely increased. These data bring out what´s the current state of the imperialist struggle for economic domination of the world market, where we find the US imperialism dominance and in the struggle for sources of raw materials, the results are not very different. We have to give the corresponding interpretation to the “advance of the Chinese group” or “dominant companies with a Chinese origin”, we need to relativize their true economic weight in the light of all data, conclusions which we will extensively discuss in these pages. As for the Chinese firms controlled by the state, now it is spoken of “the rise and fall of the firms under state control” as “PetroChina” mainly by “the decline in commodity prices and the recent decline in sales in emerging markets “(13).
What the imperialism beautifiers, such as the opportunistic Hudson(14) , hold is that the rising prices of “raw materials, mainly oil”, will benefit the countries where these sources are located and that it “threats the stability of the world´s economy “. Such claim is completely overridden since reality is quite different, and most of the benefits, most of the earnings compounded by the rising commodity prices like oil, etc. end up mainly in the multinationals, so to say, in the imperialist countries. This, without counting the enormous benefits that the imperialist states collect from the taxes applied to energy derivatives. The smallest part of the earnings went to the bureaucratic capital “transnationals” of the Third World that show their role as intermediaries for the imperialist capital, dependent or subjected to these same imperialist countries. The imperialist companies, although most of the sources are outside their territories, control the production of products with higher added value and thus, in fierce competition among them, control the main profit source. And this struggle for control, the Yankee imperialism not only maintains but it increases its dominance.
The current state of the struggle for energy sources and raw materials, according to the study above:
“(…) the extractive activities, especially petroleum refining, have become the activity, undertaken by major companies, with the highest revenues reports. The share of oil refining jumps from 7.8 to 17.7% of the total revenues of the sample between 1994 and 2008 (…) The companies in the United States and England-Netherlands are clearly dominating this activity: they concentrate more than 30% of the total mining activity revenue between 1994 and 2006 (…), their share increased exceeding 40% despite the crisis. Another unusual feature of competition in this activity is that the groups of dominant firms accentuate their control over income, reaching a maximum combined market share of 66% in 2007. Companies from China significantly increased their share of total income (8.7% in 2008) as a result of the high number of overseas acquisitions. These features indicate that the companies from the United States and England-Netherlands compete from a particularly strong position, these countries long ago have managed to control much of the hydrocarbons sources and have the largest processing capabilities (…) the high level of concentration that characterizes the mining activity can be seen: Thirteen companies contribute more than 66% of the total revenue from this activity.
Of these, the Americans are the most numerous, with Exxon at its head during twelve of the fifteen years considered. British companies play a primary role in this activity; Royal Dutch Shell narrowly competes with US companies and the BP shows an upward performance until 2004. In recent years, Chinese companies Sinopec and China National Petroleum developed their productive capacities and placed themselves behind the United States and England-Holland´s companies”. (15)
The data shows, as a whole, the role of the Third World, where most of the hydrocarbons sources are, and the role of the bureaucratic capitalism “transnational”, such as “transLatins”, etc.
“(…) From these data, draws attention the limited role of big national producers, Petroleos de Venezuela, Petrobras, Petronas, Pemex, and the absence of corporations of the united Arab emirates. This reveals the control of the transnational on the most profitable segment of refining; leaving domestic companies the role of mere hydrocarbons extractors. ” And as a conclusion of this struggle Ornellas says: “In short, competition in the oil and mining activities shows that US companies still have the most important part of the market, which is reinforced by formal and informal partnerships that have been webbed with the Anglo-Dutch companies. The other companies groups concentrate on satisfying their energy needs, as they are dependent on external supplies. This feature centrally concerns the Chinese companies.” (16)
The emphasis of the quotation is important because it shows that, in this key economic activity for world domination, US imperialism maintains control and the Chinese imperialists seek to develop to meet their own needs. The difference is important. In September 2013 American oil Exxon Mobil (second place) and Chevron (ninth place) appear among the 10 largest companies in the world by market value. Therefore they are at the head of the oil companies worldwide.
And the struggle for raw materials among the imperialists will intensify and our countries are the spoils of that dispute. That is the imperialist monopolies´ interest and that is their states’ interest, as we read in the quotation of a senior German government official, that we cite to better illustrate this, in this regard, it states:
“Almost half of the 54 states of the African continent are counted as rich in raw materials. Here licenses are awarded in the next ten years for exploration and exploitation for decades, with vast economic, social and environmental consequences (…) all of us in politics, economics and science should not be innocent: the World Trade organization´s (WTO) agreements do not determine, at the end, the rules but only the power of the interests at stake. Not only with authoritarian societies but also with the intended or true friends. While in the past 20 years many people in the economy and politics thought, that row materials security would be reachable only with free trade in the world market, few believe in this now. My position is clear: We need a state policy for raw materials. “(17)
All these facts and figures, as well as the quotation of the representative of German imperialism on the control of resources, teach us what the basis of the imperialist wars of aggression against the oppressed countries is, its true character is that of a predatory war for the new distribution after the bankruptcy of the other superpower, the collapse of the Soviet social imperialist superpower, who is reduced to Russia today, but yet nuclear superpower.
The Yankee imperialism, in collusion and conflict with the other imperialist powers, develops this predatory imperialist war in all the vast war theater ranging from Afghanistan to sub-Saharan Africa, area that would further expand. Wars where our countries are the booty. Which involve the development of two contradictions, ie the worsening of the contradiction between the oppressed nations and imperialist countries; and the third contradiction, the inter-imperialist contradiction. As Lenin clearly shows “the class character of the struggle” “even if the forms of struggle varies” (18) and thus we see what the results of almost 25 years of wars are. In addition, the imperialist war of aggression has to affect the imperialist countries themselves, as it is already doing in the class struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, namely, more mature objective conditions for the task of reconstituting the Communist Parties in the bowels of the imperialist beast.
Let us continue with this international situation radiography, where we will continue proving how the US imperialism has used its status as a sole hegemonic superpower by economic and extra-economic mechanisms such as the “neo-liberalism” and the war of aggression, to take advantage of their rivals, continuing as well with its collapse, in the cited study we read:
Competition in financial activities:
“Given the depth of the crisis, competition in today’s financial activities is crucial (…) In the face of catastrophic interpretations, emphasizes the strengthening of the US-based banks, whose share in the total revenues is steadily increased between 1994 and 2002 to stabilize around 16% in the recent years. Although this performance is not a crucial competitive advantage, it does indicate that, through deregulation and concentration, US banks have overcome their lag behind Asian and European banking, to emerge as the dominant group in this activity. The 2008 data reflects the first bankruptcies and revenue reductions occurred since 2007, although it is expected further adjustments for 2009 “.
In this regard we say that in his capacity as hegemonic superpower US imperialism imposed on them the other “financial deregulation” despite their efforts to counter the advantage of US imperialism in the framework of agreements on “Basel” (now already in the “Basel III”) And nothing happens! Because the effectiveness of these “agreements” is similar to the “WTO agreements” as the representative of the German government in the appointment (No. 17), which we repeat in part: “agreements … determined not to end the game rules but the power of the interests at stake. ”
The study to draw corresponding conclusions, took the data of competition in the financial activity until 2008. In the following years this trend continued. In 2013, we read in the European edition of WSJ that the result is that “banks (US) who were giants before the crisis are now even bigger.” (19)
Continuing with the Ornellas analysis:
“The British and French banks consolidate their shares in total revenues, with which they place themselves near the US banks, while the group of German origin back up in their participation. The Chinese banks increase their presence in recent years with 7% of total revenue in 2008, although its average share for the period is 4%. This increase reflects the balances of the financial crisis. ”
Let’s also see in the light of these facts, the interimperialist contradictions in the “European Union”. The Chancellor Merkel´s budgetary savings plans, representing the interests of German imperialism, shows the fight in regards to banking and other financial services control. In the aforementioned WSJ article, regarding the banking union proposed by German to the states of the Union as a solution to the problems created by the financial system, a Brussels official said:
“The basic idea is that the monetary union can only be stable if the banking system is international,” says Mr. Wolff (…) “The only possibility to quickly move capital from north to south is through the taking of Spanish and Italian banks, by Germany or Austria´s banking institutions, said an official in reference to the plan.”(20)
This is the struggle within the EU among imperialist banking monopolies and the countries to which they belong. And that’s the basis of what is in the news. But let us continue with Ornellas:
“These trends provide an important hue to the idea of an unstoppable rise of Chinese enterprises. At least in the financial sector, it’s strengthening finds strong obstacles and notes the importance of the accumulated knowledge and the installed capacity of large corporations in the United States, Europe and Japan. Competition between TNCs allows contrasting the merely rentier activity which means buying debt titles with the complex productive activities such finance. From this perspective, Chinese capitalism still stands some productive revolutions behind its rivals”. (21)
When we deal specifically with China and “merely rentier activity which means buying debt “, we will see the domestic and global implications of this. For now, to get more accurate conclusions about changing power relations among the superpower and the imperialist powers, for redistribution, as taught by Lenin, and specifically to answer: why is China at present time forced to act as a “soft power” at the level of world politics?, Let’s weigh some more data on other activities, which gives us the cited study.
The commerce competition:
“In trade, the first distinctive feature is that the groups of dominant firms account for 90% of revenues and leave little room for other competitors. US dominance is undeniable: their companies account for over 50% of the total revenue from 2003 and even so in 2008, the year of crisis. This has as a corollary the constant decline in the share of companies of Japanese origin, going from 59 to 9% between 1994 and 2003, to slightly increase to 13% of the total revenue in 2008. Among the European powers, French companies show the best performance to almost triple its share in total revenues. Chinese companies have a rising trend, but its 5.3% share in 2008 does not seem to correspond to the importance of the “new workshop of the world”.(22)
This panorama of competition in the intermediation trade activity points out the importance of foreign capital in the vigorous growth of the Chinese economy. So what national financial records recorded as Chinese exports reappears in the transnational trade companies’ distribution channels, supporting the positions of US, Japanese and European companies” Ornellas, cited study (23).
Regarding the “share of the companies of Japanese origin” the shown percentages reveals only the appearance, hiding the true power of these companies through the FDI, as already noted above. The underlines in the quote above is important in terms of the real world economic force of China, to illustrate this situation, we quote the results of a “microeconomic” study on the export of a “high technology” commodity “made in China “, which states:
“A micro-economic analysis of the international value chain of the iPod has clearly demonstrated the discrepancy between trade performance and value creation across countries (Linden et al., 2009). Using firm-level information, the analysis showed that China was merely specialized in the assembly of the imported intermediates into the final product which is typically generating relatively little value. The largest part of the value creation throughout the production process was done and captured by the producers of high value components (United States and Japan) and the seller of the iPod (Apple in the United States). The iPod example shows that the concept of competitiveness may sometimes need to be assessed at a detailed level, in order to fully understand what drives the international performance of countries.”(24)
This is how a “double count” is made in international trade, which distorts the correct estimation of international economic relations.
THE US IMPERIALISTS HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE FROM THE CAPITAL EXPORTS
The data previously mentioned, is a clear example of how the struggle for redistribution of the world among the great imperialist monopolies is given and, therefore, among the imperialist states, a report of a German imperialism institute, explains:
“Hanson et al. (2005) examine the vertical fragmentation of activities around the globe by US multinational firms. They find that US headquarters’ demand for intermediate inputs imported from their affiliates abroad is higher when affiliates face lower wages for less skilled workers. This is in line with the hypothesis that production is offshored to affiliates in low cost locations and their output is then used by headquarters as inputs in the US. ”
The US imperialists have taken advantage in the capital exports in this form, but is also practiced by multinationals from other imperialist countries like France, England, Germany, etc. As the report of that institute cited says:
“Close by Central and Eastern European countries and new European Union member states are attractive locations for German firms, and not only for low wage manufacturing activities. However, the value generated in these countries and flowing to German firms is still small …recording a much faster growth than other countries menbers of EU.” (25)
Here we see the role of the EU market in the global competition, first, to German imperialism´s benefit in competition with the USA superpower and, second, how the inter-imperialist is given struggle in Europe, among the member countries of the called European Union (EU), where the one to take greater advantage is who wields hegemony in this imperialist association and third, how the division among imperialist countries and semi-colonial countries is given, and what are the spoils to be divided among them, the “countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the new member states”. That is, in this case, the remains of the former Soviet social imperialism. “Third World that goes right into Europe” (Chairman Gonzalo).
Also in the arms industry and arms exports:
As for the arms industry, here is clearly shown how the imperialist forces are, the struggle among them and the objectives that go along with arms sales, the largest arms exporting countries are: 1. USA 2. Russia 3. Germany 4. France 5. China 6. Britain, Spain 7, 8. Italy.
“anyway is a snapshot, soon would likely dramatically grow the amount of weapons transfer, since currently as part of the policy (the report refers to the EU) as well as industry a full-scale arms exports offensive is being launched “(… ..) Said a consulted source.
YANKEES RECOVER IN THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
In the automotive industry, continuing with Ornellas´ study, we have:
“Despite all that has been argued about American decline in the automotive industry at the level of the largest companies, the group of US companies remained ahead until 2003. They were moved by the Japanese companies that maintained a share of total revenues close to 30% during all the period. German companies show a rising trend with 27% of total revenues in 2008. Chinese companies show significant progress since 2005, but its market share was only 3.7% in 2008, below from Italian and Korean.” (26)
The companies that dominate the car sales world market by volume to January 1, 2013, are: Toyota (Japan) in the first place, followed by General Motors (Yankee) and Volkswagen (VW, Germany, Third place). The latter plans to move to first place in sales volume in 2018, with sales of 10 million cars of its different brands per year, currently, its sales in billions of Euros is 192.7, while that of Toyota is 196.9.(27)
As for the Chinese car companies, they produce cars in joint ventures where the foreign partner, as a part of their “technology transfer” investment package, provides the auto parts package for final assembly in China with little value added. Or in other cases a company is created to produce cars as Joint Ventures, for example Chinese-Israeli, and auto parts (pack for self-assembly) comes from Austria and Canada (technology). But in the headlines it reads “Auto of Chinese production passes difficult test made by the EU” (28).
The imperialist companies that dominate the global automotive market, are competing to fill a “gap” in the existing Chinese market with respect to small luxury cars and in India with small cars with affordable prices to the potential customers in those countries.
The greatest imperialist crisis: The vast socially produced wealth is constantly increasing, but this socially produced wealth is increasingly appropriated by a handful of big monopolists from the imperialist countries and by the third World countries´ great bourgeois of bureaucratic capitalism at the imperialist´s service. That is, increasing private appropriation of socially produced wealth (the socialization of production worldwide grows ever more steadily with the growth of monopolies and global activity, such as so-called “global production value chains “) and the increase of power throughout the world of the imperialists and their lackeys, with the result of increasing impoverishment and oppression of the masses in the imperialist countries and, to a much greater extent of the masses of the backward countries.
The result of all the progress and all the wealth: sharper and continuous (shorter cycles) economic crisis within the general and final crisis that overwhelms imperialism- the fiercest struggle (sometimes violent and sometimes not violent) among the finance capital monopolies and imperialist countries by exporting capital and goods; fiercer struggle for raw materials and other natural resources and cheap labor of oppressed countries.
Better objective conditions for the world revolution, the masses are rising in rebellion throughout the world – Further collapse of imperialism, complex series of wars in which imperialism will be definitely sweep away by world revolution- period of 50-100 years, stage of the strategic offensive of the world revolution, new great wave of revolution- wars of resistance and people´s wars which are strategically principal in perspective.
Development of the subjective conditions, hard struggle against revisionism, difficult, complex but tenacious struggle by the heroic fighter who leads the revolution: the Communist Party. The international proletariat and peoples of the world are advancing by embodying Maoism, generating Marxist-Leninist-Maoist militarized Communist Parties to initiate and develop people’s war until obtaining worldwide people’s war to finally sweep imperialism from the face of the Earth.
We say again, each new global economic crisis, cyclical crisis that happens within the general crisis of imperialism leads to a sharper struggle for markets around the world through the “economic territory”, becoming acuter the contention.
For example, the bad situation in the Southern Europe markets, Volkswagen´s traditional markets where it operates with some daughters companies and with some brands (Seat for example), makes the struggle sharper to expand their market shares in countries like the imperialist China and semi colonial India, that although are also affected by the economic cycle and the general crisis, have a “car market on development because of the contained consumption ” and they seek to satisfy with small cars appropriate to their consumption ability, as seen before.
The same automotive monopoly, VW and its daughter company “Audi”, who in turn has its businesses in Hungary, Belgium, Spain, India, China and Indonesia, expands its capital and commodities exports like this:
“In 2016 a new factory in Mexico will begin operation. And quickly there will also roll in the production line Audi cars in Brazil. The head of the Board of Audi, Rupert Stadler and the head of Production will meet on Tuesday in Brasilia with Chairman Dilma Rousseff, to close the deal for the construction of two variants of the Audi A3 model in Curitiba (Brazil), after many months of negotiations. Stadler wants to increase the sales volume by 2020 to two million cars –by the end of this year the 1.5 billion cars mark is expected to be passed. Brazil is in this strategy an important part (…) From the logistics center in Diusburg the A3 model auto parts are to be sent by sea to South America. ” (29)
This is very important to show the economic essence of imperialism and bureaucrat capitalism. But how will this hit the news? Surely doing great propaganda of the “industrial development of Brazil in an industry such as the automotive one”.
But in relation to this direct investment, there is another story in the same magazine issue, which must be related, to show how the link is made between imperialist finance capital and the government of the imperialist country, representing those interests and, on the other hand, the role of semi-feudal and semi-colonial country´s government serving those interests, the bureaucratic capitalism, in this case Brazil´s.
The news is: “The fall in prices of raw materials, the depressing growth rate, a shaky housing market and rising inflation have disenchanted the economic miracle country: Brazil. The Falling value of the Bonds and the Shares are the consequence. But now, after the collapse of the emerging countries, a very promising speculation possibility opens for risk-lovers investors: such as Real Brazilian currency bonds issued by the Credit Institution for Reconstruction (KfW, for its acronym in German ). Still until spring (in the Northern Hemisphere, our note) bonds were rated 100 percent, and then fell in July to 91 percent. At this time these bonds are at 92.30 percent of their value. Having a 9.4 percent yield for each year running up to March 2016. The loss in the course of the bonds (ie Brazilians “sovereign bonds” ¡”sovereign”! how can it be?, our note ) is due in part to confusion. Because behind the Real-Bond is not the emerging country Brazil (as you will see now the media use the term “emerging” quite ironically, our note), whose rating by Standard & Poor’s in June as debtor has a “negative” observation (where the BBB rating always mean investment grade). Bonds´ guarantee is the federal development bank KfW, and it has – as the Federal Republic of German- the maximum AAA rating. With this should be ensuring that the bonds at their spire date in March 2016 will be paid at 100 percent. An open flank is naturally currency. In 2010 the Brazilian Real was 46 cents per Euro, today it still is 33 cents of value. That makes 28 percent less in three years. To balance such bankruptcy, an annual yield of about nine percent would be needed – but that’s just the yields of the KfW bond until 2016 “. (30)
Continuing the Ornellas study:
In the informatics industry:
“As in any other activity, the leadership of US originated corporates is solid, controlling between 65 and 80% of the income of this activity. Japanese companies have over 20% of the market share, but its presence is based on -and limited to – its domestic market and in the manufacture of peripheral equipment rather than more complex and profitable systems and products.
In informatics we found again the paradox that the “Made in China” of a growing number of software products and services does not represent the emergence of Chinese companies, but the export success of large US, Japan, Singapore and Taiwan transnationals, that leverage the economic and social conditions of the Chinese territory to internationalize their productions. “ (31)
Here, it´s worth to make a brief comment on the quotation, in the part pointing to Singapore and Taiwan, clarifying that these countries have bureaucratic capitalism and its companies are subject to the “holding system” mainly of large Yankees or Japanese monopolies, as we have seen.
As we will see below, as for China and its “export model”, it is in full deflation, since the growth in exports that occurred between 2003 and 2007 had an average annual growth of 30%, then went in 2011 to 19%, has declined to an average of 9.2% in the first eight months of 2013, and lastly the growth forecasts for the end of year fell to 7.8% and are now at 7.0 percent (falling slope). Domestic consumption in China is about 36% of GDP while in the United States is 70% of GDP. And this despite the huge injections of credit from the Chinese government to its economy. All this, in advance, shows the deformation of the Chinese economy´s growth.
In conclusion, from what has been explained up to now about the inter imperialist competition, the monopolies of Yankee imperialism keeps its dominance over its competitor, the monopolies from other imperialist countries in Asia or Europe. The Social imperialist Chinese companies are still far behind, as the aforementioned study notes:
“In general, companies from China show significant growth but are still well below the most powerful transnational corporations, particularly in the studied activities “.
About the “Transnational” or “multinational’s property:
In this regard, when we study the penetration of imperialist capital in other imperialist countries or in oppressed countries, we must always keep in mind what Lenin teaches us: “we must devote special attention” to the holding system”, according to which “the parent company ” exercises dominion of the “subsidiaries” that it´s enough to own “40% of shares” of the “parent company” to exercise control over it and over its subsidiaries, because the scattered actions only serve to “reinforce the power of the financial oligarchy.”(32) In the struggle among the imperialist monopolies over the division of the world, the spoils are the Third World (main contradiction), a number of associations are woven to accommodate each other and dominate the world and consequently with this to dived it among the imperialist countries (third contradiction).
Continuing on, in the aforementioned study, though it lacks to disaggregate the “European investors”, there is important data on how the fight among the imperialist monopolies is given, as to one aspect of this “holding system.” The study reads:
“To observe the evolution of these processes, we selected 94 companies operating in the fourteen activities with greater weight within five hundred largest companies in the world. Taking as a criterion the revenues and profits performance, we considered these 94 companies as global leaders. Thanks to the “One Banker” database of the consulting firm Thomson, we determined the holders of these leading companies, for the year 2008, were 5,231 stoke holders who report owning shares for a total value of 3.8 billion. The first feature that jumps out is the high concentration that is achieved when reducing the stoke holders to those with investments of 1000 million dollars or more; 332 actors handled 3.4 billion, ie 90% of the total. With respect to the international hierarchy, we note that more investors are based in the United States. There are 170 firms that manage investments for 1.8 billion and represent 48% of the total. The 114 investors from Europe hold shares of the leading companies for $ 1.1 billion, representing 29.4% of the total. In this group the investors based in the UK stand out and handle 10.5% of the total value of the shares. The shares of Asia are mainly explained by the shareholding of the Chinese telecommunications giant, China Mobile, whose capital is held by the China Mobile Hong Kong (BVI) Limited holding, luckily this investment does not affect the internationalization of property. From Japan there are twenty investors who own shares worth 116,000 million, representing 3% of total reported value.
This first approach reveals that capitalism, seen from the perspective of the ownership of the giant corporations, is strongly regionalized. The capital of the companies from a region is in the hands of financiers and shares buyers in the same region. Certainly there is the phenomenon of internationalization of the property, but it has a marginal character, without a decisive foreign presence, at least in respect to major corporations “. (33)
When it says that “it is strongly regionalized”, like is clear from the quote as a whole, it cannot be hidden that most of these “giant corporations” are Yankee imperialist capital, then British, Japanese, etc. From other sources we have the following data:
The largest monopolistic firms by market value:
Here we are referring to the market price of the monopoly companies in the stock market. In September 2009, in the list of the top ten there were only three from US. American-Exxon Mobil, Microsoft and Walmart, the list was dominated by the giant Chinese state enterprises. “Today, nine out of the ten most valued companies are American. The country had not dominated for a decade. If we take a look at the first 50 firms, the American part is much lower. But that part easily passes 50% and has recently begun to grow (…) On September 2 Verizon, a telecommunications New York based company, said it wanted to take complete control of the wireless branch (…) On the following days, Microsoft announced it was purchasing the struggling industry Nokia phone. Which had been, in the previous thirteen years, the 16th largest firm worldwide. Now America dominates the wireless industry (…) more than half of the firms located in the 11th to the 30th place in ranking are American. ” (34)
Then, the development of the struggle among the monopolies and therefore, among a handful of imperialist countries shows that US imperialism maintains its hegemony and completely denies all these thesis of imperialism´s beautifiers, of the “dependency relationships among countries”, they try to hide the true nature of these relations, ie domination and violence and present a distorted reality of the current development of imperialism in its period of collapse and sweeping away.
THE REVISIONIST´S DREAM IS TO TURN SOCIAL IMPERIALIST CHINA IN A SUPERPOWER TO CONTEST FOR WORLD HEGEMONY
We have to begin to analyze this Chinese development, which is so highly praised, so then we can relate and understand it framed by the entire global economy and show what is in fact happening. But we cannot get clarity about the global economy if we do not see the current reality of imperialist exploitation of the oppressed countries, the vast majority of which are semi-feudal and semi-colonial countries where bureaucratic capitalism develops, that’s why we deal with this first.
We can not be misled, the reactionary and opportunistic academics, as their imperialist bosses, mix different concepts to confuse. As happens with the BRICS, these are countries that have nothing in common among them, rather than being exporters of raw materials or maquila goods. Under this heading, it is intended to put under a common denominator oppressed countries with a nuclear superpower, Russia; deliberately confusing the concepts of economic growth and economic development; they mixed imperialist countries that show that are behind in their internal economic process, such as Russia and China, with semi-feudal and semi-colonial countries where bureaucratic capitalism develops, such as Brazil, India or South Africa.
HOW THAT CHINA IS AN EMERGING COUNTRY?
That is a name set by investment banks to classify countries according to the opportunities of countries for financial speculation. That, therefore, tries to deny the division of the world between oppressors and oppressed countries and China as an imperialist country belongs to the first named countries. That also does not take into account the particularity of this imperialist country; namely that China was a socialist country that after the counterrevolutionary coup of Teng in 1976, undertook the capitalist road (restoration).
With the counterrevolutionary revisionist blow came the change of the proletarian leadership by the revisionist leadership, the party line changed and so it became a fascist party, the dictatorship of the proletariat become a bourgeois dictatorship and a fascist government was established, and the PLA and people’s war to defend the peoples and proletariat were abandoned, and the army changed character and a bourgeois military line was imposed. All of this to serve two objectives: internally, the restoration of capitalism and the total dismantling of socialism and deletion of all the conquests of the proletariat and the people; change to a capitalist China in the time of dominance of monopolies and finance capital, in this case to a social imperialist China; and, externally, from the beginning the revisionist, with Teng at the head, set out to turn China into an imperialist superpower in the century to come. This is their claim and tendency, i.e. the revisionist dream.
THE FINAL BANKRUPTCY OF CHINESE REVISIONIST IS INEVITABLE
But, we have to consider the opposite trends, as Lenin teaches us. What history has seen so far, in the ongoing era of imperialism and proletarian revolution, is that revisionism always gets bankrupt, regardless of what they do, that´s how they will end up and that´s how these new “emperors” would end.
The old revisionism sank with the First World War; the second revisionism of Khrushchev to Gorbachev sank without world war, the revisionist USSR imploded. The Chinese revisionists are in serious trouble, the struggle within, among groups and cliques, is sordid but sharp, and what is central to the revolution, is that the oppression of the bourgeoisie over the proletariat in China is becoming more and more unbearable, 1% of the big bourgeoisie owns 60% of the national wealth, while 750 million people live in the countryside, most in poverty and backwardness, with the consequence of the of the internal migration problem, there are 260 million footloose workers, that although subjected to the vilest super exploitation produce a super surplus value for the large bourgeois revisionists, workers that are, for that reason, a great potential for the revolutionary struggle of the proletariat to do the counter-restoration. These 260 million workers are only one part, the poorest, most deep and profound class, of that immense mass that makes up the proletariat in China. See that since the fall of the Manchu empire no one has been able to govern China quietly for long. All of this leads the proletariat in China to reconstitute their party and carry forward the counter-restoration through people’s war.
Also, we need to keep in mind that the restoration was fostered by imperialism and, shortly after the anti-communist coup, US imperialism agreed with the Chinese revisionists, to promote their exports to the United States with the implementation of the most favored country clause. This is a special protection for Chinese goods entering the US market, passed by Congress as an amendment to the trade law, which is renewed annually; in exchange for special treatment to Yankee companies (Yankee transnationals) to partner with Chinese enterprises in Joint Ventures). All of this within the process of dismantling socialism and the restoration of capitalism, under the revisionist Teng Xiao-Ping´s damn slogan of the “four modernizations”(35).
The Joint Ventures were the most significant “participation” method of the imperialist capital in China since 1977. Another was the establishment of the “special economic zones” such as Shenchen, Chunchai, Shant-ou and Hsiamen. In these, the establishment of imperialist capital companies was allowed. “They have emerged as a result of the policy followed by Deng Xiao-ping, of reform and opening”. In these “zones”, the Chinese revisionists put at imperialist capital ´s service the corresponding infrastructure and cheap and disciplined labor, where the imperialist enterprises should make modern factories. These “zones” would also serve as a bridge to Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan.
While thousands of Chinese were sent to study in the imperialist countries, mainly the United States, the agriculture was de-collectivized to increase cheap labor; causing the exodus from the countryside, as we have already mentioned, currently, as a consequence of which, to mention just a symptom, there are more than 260 million “footloose” workers in the cities, migrants from the countryside, subject to the worst operating conditions. “With the establishment of the ‘socialist market economy’, industrial production, under a central plan, fell to a minimum; in 1995, it comprised only 10% of what it used to be “. (36)
THE CHINESE REVISIONISM PRACTICES THE DAMN TENG´S “THREE WORLDS THEORY”
As we see, the economic process of the revisionist China, from the beginning goes hand by hand with imperialism, mainly Yankee, closely linked to the needs of Yankee monopoly finance capital and the North American market. Why?
Remember that it was Teng who proposed his “Theory of the Three Worlds” to lag behind one of the two superpowers. According the bourgeois commentators, the Chinese revisionists with the sinister Teng at the helm, learn the lessons from the problems of the restoration of capitalism in the USSR that followed a slower “privatization” path and since 1998, the capitalist management of the state companies was declared as a model, the issue of shares and private enterprise as good at the service of socialism was authorized. The Chinese revisionists boosted since the beginning what has been called “economic liberalization” under the slogan of “the four liberalizations” for which they have to open the country to imperialist capital. While at the same time, subjecting the proletariat to the hardest fascist oppression.
But the Chinese revisionists, despite their convergence with the US imperialists, don´t have the same interests since they are rivals; the interest of the Chinese revisionists, always has been to finish with socialism and the proletarian dictatorship, fast forward on the path of capitalism, become a superpower to fight for world hegemony; and the interests of US imperialism, has always been to end the proletarian dictatorship and socialism for then conquering this huge potential market, while continuing their usual plan of the division of China, as history shows.
Without losing sight, what was exposed on China and in connection therewith, have also shown briefly, in the part corresponding to the bureaucratic capitalism, how the imperialism implemented their plans for world domination. When addressing the economic development history in Southeast Asia and the rest of Asia, we see that what the US imperialism did in china, when the conditions were right, with the Teng revisionism´s anti-communist coup, was to further implement the hegemonic economic plan that had already been in place to serve the restoration in China.
FINAL CRISIS OF “CHINESE MODEL” AND THE “REFORMS” TO COMPLETE IT, ARE ITS FINAL RUSH TO RUIN
On these notes, we have first seen the economic base of the struggle among the imperialists, but previously, in another part of these notes, we have gone over the Marxist-Leninist- Maoist position and viewpoint on bureaucratic capitalism, to understand the development of imperialism and its worldwide FDI, especially in Asia, ie the economic base of the main contradiction. Then we must relate the growth of FDI in China and the development of the external sector of the economy as a “global maquila” or “global export platform”. Above all, We have to see the specific nature of the imperialist capital exports of China, its difference from the capital exports of other imperialist countries, that has to do with the fact that it is an imperialist country of late development, product of the destruction of a more advanced economy, the socialist economy.
Is not the case of Japan and Germany in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, that because of its later development, were a young capitalism with respect to France and England (old capitalism), hence they exceeded them before the first World War, as will be shown here, crushing what the ROL says.
In turn, the imperialist countries see China as a new market opening, therefore, through their investments, the monopolies and imperialist countries seek to win the competition to take the best positions at the site of the development of this “potential gigantic market”. Potential market, because it still has no effective demand comparable to the size of its population: because of low incomes and restrained consumption (high savings rate). This becomes a negative phenomenon because it is subtracted from the internal reproduction process. In addition, the so-called national saving has had a large increase in the last two decades, but instead of using it to develop the economy and life of the masses, ie in the productive and households consumption, the revisionists thugs (capitrostes, translation note) in the state and economy power use it for financial speculation of all kinds, such as buying US Treasuries bonds.
The bourgeois economists find that China cannot invest this great mass of money at home because of the backwardness of the economy doesn´t have a place for it. The truth is that they are not going to invest that abundant capital in the development of the country and the welfare of the masses, but it will be exported looking for super-profits and buying US Treasuries bonds to keep the relationship dollar-Remin in benefit of their exports, to ensure foreign investment and because there isn´t a free Remin convertibility.
Such was confirmed by what was addressed on this regard on the Third Plenum of the CC (the XVIII Congress of the Chinese revisionist party) and the resulting new plans of the Chinese government to “stop the exportation model” to look for the expansion of domestic consumption. It is necessary to note that after the Teng´s anti-communist coup, China began the “reforms of the market economy” against the socialist planned economy, “reforms” that were formalized in the 1998 Plenum of the CC, which have developed over a long period and ” firmly took place in the early 90s; Deng Xiaoping’s ” trip to the south “of is a noticeable mark in the economic reforms in China. Such an event took place in 1992. ” (37)
The revisionist party new leader, just installed last year, traveled to the US and the countries of the EU, for what reason? To reassure the other imperialists that in the Chinese economic policy there won´t suffer fundamental changes. As we have said, by class nature the Chinese social imperialists are not on behalf of investing the large earned profits in the development of agriculture, in the balanced development of the country and in meeting the masses´ needs, on the contrary, each time they dismiss more people from the countryside to the cities through economic and extra economic means, to concentrate large armies of cheap labor for the maquila work of the imperialist capital; as all other imperialist they export their capital to more profitable locations for speculative imperialist super profits overseas. Within the approved plans at the Third Plenum of the Chinese revisionists party, there are measures aimed at the expropriation of peasant lands in favor of state monopolies or of native or foreign individuals to “empty the field.” For all this, we said in advance that this revisionist meeting sought to reconcile the interests of the big bureaucratic bourgeoisie with those of the faction of the big bourgeoisie that has seen increase its economic power with the past “exportation boom” that has lasted for more than two decades and together with representatives of foreign imperialist capital propagate the need for “greater openness of the economy.” So the struggle between the two factions of the big bourgeoisie will continue and the struggle of the proletariat and the peasantry will increase by taking the path of proletarian counter-restoration, which passes through the reconstitution of the Party to follow the Chairman Mao´s slogan ¡Back to the Ching kahn mountains!, ie the path of people’s war to counter-restore.
As stated above, in the face of the exhaustion of their “exportation model”, the Chinese social imperialists are seeking to reorganize and develop its banking, finance and general services sector. That is the core of the current “economic reforms” that the revisionists, usurping the CPC,have launched .
Pondering on information, such as one that says: “With the ‘economic liberalization’ during the 80s, the Chinese leaders established special economic zones in areas such as Shenzhen” (…) where the materials and components imports free of customs duties was authorized. That was a great success (…) to meet the global demand for inexpensive clothing and toys, made in China, in the global workshop “. (38)
Where this did led them to? This led China to its dependence on the world market and its crisis, the current “exportation model” of assembled products and raw materials -and in turn importer of intermediate products and raw materials, which has meant big profits for a handful of the large native and foreign bourgeoisie and has brought great calamities for the vast majority of the proletariat and people and large deformation of the social-imperialist country. It’s similar to the social imperialist Soviet model that since the 60s became dependent on oil and gas exports and then definitely sank.
The global crisis that began in 2008 with a prolonged recession in many parts of the world and low growth in others, which continues today, has shown “the limits of that model” and “the impossibility to lead a sustained growth “, as attested by neo-Keynesian bourgeois economists , in a purported neo-Keynesians manifesto, that prescribe to save the imperialist world economy the combination of the free market with the expansive state intervention in the economy (39).
For everyone it is clear that this “model” is already worn out. So the Chinese revisionists are forced to “reforms” that are nothing more than to “complete” the model followed up to the date. That is, what they want with the current “reforms” that are being launched is a scape. Continuing with the Wall Street Journal note we get more clarify about it, it adds: “While the plan for Shanghai´s FTZ (Free Trade Zone, our note) remains vague, it essentially combines four existing similar areas in the city and adheres some services liberalization (…) the old gradual regional experimentation program of 80 is little adapted to today challenges. A strong reform agenda is what is needed now.”
This means that for the US´ finance capital media (WSJ), the situation in China is at least difficult, they cannot go halfway. They want the revisionists to do more “liberalization” of the economy, but that would be to give up all to the other faction of the big bourgeoisie and a potential implosion similar to that of the former Soviet Union.
THE ANATOMY OF EXPORTS OF CHINA
Therefore it is necessary to study China’s exports, make out its anatomy, that’s why to save ourselves from long comments, we underlined in the presented quotations the most important aspects that have to do with the global economic role of China, ie the role playing as an imperialist country within the imperialist economy, which explains more than a thousand words the “Chinese economic miracle” and why China acts as it does on the world stage.
(To Be Continued)
(7) Raúl Ornellas*, THE CAPITALIST CRISIS, END OF THE US HEGEMONY? A STUDY FROM THE COMPETITION BETWEEN TNCs *This work is part of the project of investigation PAPIIT “TNCs and natural resources in Latin America” (IN-306609-3), page 209 and ss.
(8) Lenin, op. Cit., This process says: “The finance capital has created the epoch of monopolies. And monopolies introduce everywhere monopolistic principles: the utilization of “connection” for profitable transactions takes the place of competition on the open market leads.(…) The export of capital becomes a means to export of goods (…) the monopolist capitalist associations, cartels, syndicates and Trust first divided the home market among themselves (…) but the domestic market, under capitalism, is inevitably bound up with the foreign market. Capitalism long ego created a world market. As the exports of capital increased and as the foreign and colonial connections and ‘spheres of influence’ of the big monopolistic associations are expanded in all ways, things “naturally” gravitated towards an international agreements among association, and towards the formation of international cartels. This is a new stage of world concentration of capital and production “(…)” Some bourgeois writers (now joined by K. Kautsky (…) have expressed the opinion that international cartels, being one of the striking expressions of the internationalization of capital, give the hope of maintaining peace among peoples. theoretically, this opinion is absolutely absurd, while in practice it is sophistry a dishonorable defense of the worst opportunism. International cartels show to what point capitalist monopolies have developed and the object of the struggle between the various capitalist associations This last circumstance is the most important; it alone shows us the historic-economic meaning of what is taking place, for the form of the struggle may and do constantly chance (…) but the substance of the struggle, its class content, positively cannot change, while in classes exist (…) the epoch of latest stage of capitalism shows us that certain relationships among capitalist associations grow up, based on the economic division of the world: while parallel to and in connection with it, certain relationships grow up between political associations, between the states, on the basis of the territorial division of the world, the struggle for “spheres of influence”
(9) Raul Ornelas, ob. Cit.
(10) Kurt Hübner, Der Globalisierungskomplex, Research, Berlin, editorial Sigma, 1998.
(11)Raul Ornelas, ob. Cit., P. 211 et seq.
(12)The Wall Street Journal, December 12, 2013, europe edition, page 28.
(13)The Economist, 27TH-21ST september 2013, p. 22.
(14)Michel Husson, “UN PUR CAPITALISMO” , 2008, Edition Page deux, Lausanne Suiza.
(15)Ornellas, ob. cit., p. 214 et seq.
(16)Ornellas, ob. cit., p. 217.
(17) Günter Nooke, commissioned by German Chancellor staff at the Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development, “We should not be innocent, Africa / The rules of the free market do not determine the access to raw materials, but a game of interests- Germany needs a clear strategy to be credible and successful in securing its industrial interests”. In Wirtschafttswoche 16.09.2013, p. 31.
(18) Lenin, op. Cit.
(19) Ornellas, ob. Cit., Pág.217.
(20)The Wall Street Journal, Hair of the dog`Cure for Banks?, september 20-22, 2013, pág. 4.
(21) Ornellas, ob. cit., p. 217.
(22)Ornellas, ob. Cit., P. 222.
(23)Ornellas, ob. cit., p. 222 et seq
(24) Ministry of Commerce of Canada, Global Value Chains: Impacts and Implications, Canada Trade Policy Research 2011.
(25) Ministry of Commerce of Canada, op. cit.
(26) Ornellas, ob. cit., p. 225
(27)Wirtschafts Woche, N.38, 16.09.2013.
(28) Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 26.09.2013.
(29)AUDI, Standlers Samba-Parti, in the same number of Wirtschafts Woche cited above, p. 9.
(30)Wirtschafts Woche, 38, 16.9.2013, p a05, KfW / Real Bond Bet on Brazil.
(31) Ornellas, ob. cit., p. 225 et seq.
(32) Lenin, op. cit : ” Paramount importance attaches to the “holding system”(…) The German economist, Heymann, probably the first to call attention to this matter, describes the essence of it in this way:
“The head of the concern controls the principal company (literally: the “mother company”); the latter reigns over the subsidiary companies (“daughter companies”) which in their turn control still other subsidiaries (“grandchild companies”), etc. In this way, it is possible with a comparatively small capital to dominate immense spheres of production. Indeed, if holding 50 per cent of the capital is always sufficient to control a company, the head of the concern needs only one million to control eight million in the second subsidiaries. And if this ‘interlocking’ is extended, it is possible with one million to control sixteen million, thirty-two million, etc.” (…) divide a single business into several parts by setting up ‘daughter companies’ — or by annexing them. The advantages of this system for various purposes— legal and illegal — are so evident that big companies which do not employ it are quite the exception. (…) the “democratization of capital”, the strengthening of the role and significance of small scale production, etc., is, in fact, one of the ways of increasing the power of the financial oligarchy. (…) But the “holding system” not only serves enormously to increase the power of the monopolists; it also enables them to resort with impunity to all sorts of shady and dirty tricks to cheat the public, because formally the directors of the “mother company” are not legally responsible for the “daughter company”, which is supposed to be “independent”,and through the medium of which they can “pull off” anything. (…)A monopoly, once it is formed and controls thousands of millions, inevitably penetrates into every sphere of public life, regardless of the form of government and all other “details”. (…)The supremacy of finance capital over all other forms of capital means the predominance of the rentier and of the financial oligarchy; it means that a small number of financially “powerful” states stand out among all the rest. (…) It is particularly important to examine the part which the export of capital plays in creating the international network of dependence on and connections of finance capital”.
(33)Ornellas, ob. cit., page 229 et seq.
(34)The Economist, 21 september 27TH ST-2013, p. 21.
(35)China Today, January 1979, p. 79.
(36) Heilmann, S., Die Partei Chinas Kommunistische vor dem Zusammenbruch? (The Communist Party of China to bankruptcy?), Bericht des BioSt Nr. 58/1995.
(37)The Wall Street Journal, October 1, 2013, p. 28.
(38)WSJ cited above.
(39) “Act now! The Global Manifesto for the Salvation of the Economy “by Flassbeck, Davidson, Galbraith and others, Editorial Westend, Frankfurt /