Speaking about the internal political crisis in the United States, we have repeatedly noted its direct dependence on the global systemic crisis — the crisis created by the United States of the world political and economic system, which (by design) was supposed to ensure the eternal dominance of the United States, but lasted hardly twenty years.
Though, for ten years it has been in a permanent progressive crisis.
We also noted that the internal crisis in the United States took the form of a struggle between financial (comprador) capital and industrial (national) capital. In this struggle, the Democratic Party as a whole found itself on the side of finance capital, while the Republican (thanks to the Trump phenomenon) on the side of industrial capital.
However, the parties are not completely united in their choice. Among the Democrats, there are «renegades» who put forward a program similar to Trump’s, and among the Republicans there are many supporters of finance capital. Thus, we have a classic split of the elites, which entails a split in society. Moreover, this split of elites does not occur along established lines, but draws new ones. At least for today, American experts do not exclude a split not only in the Republican Party (which could be explained by its current defeat), but also in the Democratic Party (even though it seems that on the crest of success, supplemented by repressions against dissent, the party-temporary winner should have been consolidated).
This is all absolutely clear and transparent. But all this does not give an answer to the key question — what America (or rather what Americas) do the opposing political forces want to build? And why did Republicans in a fractured American society find themselves supported by right-wing traditionalists and Democrats by left-wing liberals? That is, why did finance capital, which previously relied on the extreme right-wing forces, suddenly draw a conclusion twenty or thirty years ago in favor of the Trotskyist-like leftists? It is the Trotskyist-like, not the Trotskyist, because in comparison with the current left-wing liberals, Lev Davidovich, with his theory of permanent revolution, reliance on the labor army and, therefore, on the power of state suppression, would seem more right-wing than Trump.
It is in this, in the question of the attitude towards the state, that the main contradiction in the outlook on the future of the opposing American camps lies. Those who want to make America great again need a strong state. A state that is strong, both politically and economically. That is why Trump not only tried at any cost to return industrial enterprises to the United States and provide the real sector with working capital, tempering the greed of bankers, but also did not dare to respond to [the Democratic] violent seizure of power by force.
For conservative Trumpists, legality is a major fetish. Although the elections are rigged and the courts make unjust decisions, they cannot and do not want to break the law even in defense of the law. It is no coincidence that Trump publicly admired Putin on several occasions. He, like Putin in his time, entered the fight against the oligarchy, and, like Putin in Russia, he was guided by the creation of a bureaucratic republic in the United States. Bureaucracy is a class (I think that for modern society it would be more correct to say a social group), which is most interested in a strong state. The state is the main asset of the collective bureaucracy. If this asset is under the complete control of the bureaucracy, then there are no oligarchs in the country, since any person, even the richest, must bow before the law, and the law can redistribute any wealth at any time (as the ancient Romans said: «The emperor has a great right of confiscation»).
For an individual bureaucrat, a bribe may be an entirely acceptable way of enrichment, but for a healthy bureaucratic organism, such behavior is unacceptable, since it weakens the position of the collective bureaucracy, creating conditions for the seizure of control over the state by moneybags and turning them into oligarchs. Therefore, a healthy bureaucratic republic fights corruption in the ranks of the state apparatus especially consistently. Corruption cannot be defeated, but one can make it not a rule, but an excess, which is already enough for the normal existence of a bureaucratic republic.
Recall that Trump kept accusing his opponent and his team of pervasive corruption. That is, he demonstrated to the state apparatus, the American bureaucracy, that the Democrats are an unacceptable choice for it, as they seek to establish an oligarchic regime in the country, turning bureaucrats from masters of the state into lackeys under the oligarchs. In part, the bureaucracy heard this message and Trump received surprisingly serious support in state structures, although it was not enough to parry the pro-Biden putsch.
I say that the support was surprisingly serious because, firstly, the oligarchization of the American state took place a long time ago, that is, the bureaucracy was already quite decayed, while a serious purge of its ranks was not carried out. However, there is nothing to blame Trump for, the same Putin by the end of the first term was just beginning to cleanse the state apparatus and did not complete it even by the end of the second [term], although he made serious progress, made the apparatus a sufficiently reliable and manageable support. So reliable that he could even allow [Dmitry] Medvedev to work as president for four years.
Secondly, — and this time it is Trump who completely guilty of an inadequate assessment of the intentions of his political opponents — he was sure that the Democrats, like himself, would not destroy the American state for the sake of momentary success, since it is the same highest value for them, as well as for him. Therefore, Trump’s team was confident that by collecting sufficient evidence of [election] fraud, relying on solid political support and the work of the best legal team in the United States, they would easily outplay their opponents.
It is this mistake of Trump that testifies to the fact that even the American elites did not fully understand, and perhaps even now still do not fully understand, how far things have gone. Indeed, when Trump fought for the presidency with Clinton, pro-oligarchic Democrats needed a strong America as much as pro-bureaucratic Trumpists. At that time, American financial capital still believed that it could fight to maintain its global hegemony. Therefore, then, in November 2016, the Democrats, coming close to the brink of a coup, still did not dare to take it. They started a color revolution against Trump, but did not bring it to the end, limiting themselves to paralyzing a significant part of the state apparatus and limiting the capabilities of the president’s team.
Much water has flowed under the bridge over the past four years. Trump managed to reorient American foreign policy somewhat. But the main thing is that the United States continued to weaken ahead of time and by this time it became clear that they would no longer be able to restore global dominance. The American oligarchy no longer needs a strong state. They need power over its remnants.
We see how the Ukrainian oligarchy, having destroyed their state as a bureaucratic apparatus operating on the basis of certain rules, nevertheless, with minimal external support, continues looting for seven years, robbing the corpse of the Ukrainian statehood. The American oligarchy is in a better position.
The United States, after the elections, is already ridiculous, but still strong. Their political and economic influence, even in the regions of the world under their control, will collapse, but it will not drop to zero tomorrow. The dollar is still the main currency of world reserves and world trade transactions. Even if the rest of the world crowds it out in an orderly and coordinated manner, it will take several years, while there is a long way to go before coordination and even elementary harmony in the world.
The United States still has a huge, well-armed army, which in the next five years will be a significant argument in regional conflicts (then the technical lag will begin to make itself felt more and more). The United States possesses a huge nuclear arsenal that allows them not to fear a direct military attack in ten years, and also makes it possible to reduce the effectiveness of a possible defeat for the United States in some of the regional hybrid conflicts — requiring a compromise based on nuclear blackmail. That is, those functions of American statehood, in which the oligarchy is interested, will persist for a sufficiently long time not to think about an unpleasant future today. At the same time, the withering away of the function of democratic elections (turning them into fiction), as well as the equality of all before the law, ensured by a fair court is a natural process. The oligarchs do not need it. The oligarchs are destroying these functions in the United States as quickly as they destroyed them in Ukraine, going over to direct open forceful suppression of their political opponents, even at the cost of destroying statehood.
The oligopolies (TNCs) have demonstrated sufficient power to carry out a coup d’etat. They are confident that their capabilities will be sufficient to suppress hypothetical intra-American resistance in the future. Again, there is an example of Ukraine that testifies in their favor. The absolutely weakened, practically destroyed Ukrainian state does not prevent the Ukrainian oligarchs from securing their power with the help of terror, carried out both by private armies and gangs of Nazi mercenaries (in the manner of death squads), and parts of the former state power structures privatized by the same oligarchs. American oligarchs believe that if their little Ukrainian lackeys succeed, then they will succeed since they are so great.
Formally, the American oligarchs complied with all the norms. Trump went to court, his supporters demanded an investigation by Congress and were refused everywhere. This did not add Trumpist recognition to the Biden team. Even for many of their own supporters, rigging and abuse of the law were all too obvious. But, I emphasize again, the formalities have been complied with and now the Bidenites represent themselves as defenders of the law from «terrorists»-trampists. They need this for a short while, until they have strengthened the newly seized power, it is necessary to exclude possible organized resistance of the bureaucracy. The [bureaucratic] apparatus can eat up any politicians and not choke, but having strengthened in power, politicians can clean up the apparatus.
As I wrote above, the actions already taken and the future actions of the Democrats are destroying American statehood. However, the American oligarchy felt itself global and became so insolent that it is no longer afraid of being left without a state behind its back, hoping that if they had enough of their own resources to seize America, then they would have enough to defend their interests in a changing world.
Why is it important for us to thoroughly understand what is happening in the United States? Because the left-liberal (including pseudo-communist) movements around the world are guided by the financial oligarchy. Some of them are sincere (due to innate stupidity), and some for money are screaming at every step that they are fighting for the destruction of the «bourgeois state», boasting about Marx and Lenin, whom they did not read, and those who read did not understand anything.
They really work to destroy the state. Russian [left-liberal movements] of theirs, German of theirs, French of theirs and so on. Whatever they think, de facto they are doing it in the interests of the trans-national oligarchy, the global financial capital, which is ready to devour the corpses of the USA, Russia, China, the EU and others, just as it is now devouring the corpse of Ukraine. Strong bureaucratic republics hinder them in this regard. They don’t need strong states. They want tiny debris.
That is why the internal political struggle in the United States is not just an interesting spectacle for us, but a scientific experimental base for the struggle for our statehood against international financial capital (transnational globalist oligarchy) and its left-liberal mercenaries.
Rostislav Ischenko, 17.01.2021 / Source.