The World Crisis: prelude to a new war?
The contradictions of late-capitalist system are many, starting with the fact that the dynamics of capital is based on speculation as its highest expression. This means that the economic power of the so called G-8, and particularly the U.S. is divided on the use of financial resources arising from speculative capital "move" freely about the conceptual foundations of the so-called "globalization" or globalization. Precisely because it is so, is that we understand the "urgency" with the acting presidents of large countries and their financial representatives, who after decades of advocating non-interventionism of the nation state in economic affairs of the market, came swift and fast in support of banks and other entities that play under rules of speculation - that govern the world-system-register the financial system to collapse.
This economic crisis has huge similarities with the crisis of 1929 that ushered in the Second World War. How to be remembered, then - as now, there was a speculative rise in market values \u200b\u200bof many different companies on stock exchanges located in major capital the world. The manner in which the hegemonic sectors of the economy, linked to the control of the means of production, managed the performance of capital, coupled with the fact that both the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), USA, France, England and China itself were in a geostrategic game - such as today, which included the use of financial capital to shore up its military strategy was an incentive to evade controls on any system must generate speculative dynamics. However, in the 1st half of the twentieth century, as in the 1st half of this century, those checks were unsuccessful, plunging the world system in a fight for financial control.
From what we talked about is how the great powers, in the logic of development of late-capitalist system, seek to accumulate as much financial and economic capital and thus aiming to shore up its strategic military deterrent device, a dynamic that seeks to neutralize the weapons efforts of its geopolitical rivals through the real or perceived threat of moving the "vital space" of "other." It should be remembered as Hitler's Germany, since the rise to power in the early twentieth century proposed recovery areas or territorial areas considered "vital" to the existence of the German nation, implying This is not only a process of rearmament, but also the use and operation of the means of production to strengthen the military power. That action led to Hitler to expand on the Rhine, taking Austria, invade Poland and Russia signed an agreement with non-aggression that will facilitate strategic move to areas controlled by Britain and France in Western Europe. When we see what drove this situation, we realize that all countries - including the U.S., used the path of military confrontation to revive the economy in crisis since the beginning of the decade of the 30's of last century. In making the comparative analysis, we realize que ayer como hoy, la crisis es producto de la especulación y que la existencia de la misma pone en serio peligro la dinámica de desenvolvimiento de los factores de poder. Ayer como hoy vemos como las potencias comienzan a movilizarse en una acción expansiva hacia “áreas de influencia” del otro: los EEUU se moviliza y actúa sobre Georgia, buscando con ello afectar el flujo de petróleo desde el Cáucaso – vital para la Rusia de Putin- mientras Rusia aumenta su presencia económica y su asesoría militar en Latinoamérica- zona vital por excelencia de los EEUU- como nunca había ocurrido siquiera durante la Guerra Fría.
Lo que planteamos es que la crisis financiera mundial y las escasas posibilidades you have to correct deficiencies and imbalances that generated by the absence of state controls and global world of speculative activity, may become a new great confrontation that can be disastrous, given the significant development of military capability to destroy everything in its path . This confrontation can be taken as "a way out of crisis", to reactivate the productive apparatus being connected to the military and thus generate a new dynamism to produce a rebalancing of capital itself. This hypothesis - crazy in our view, not as you do see the perspective of the huge vested interests and is contextualized in a scenario where energy consumption continues to rise and global reserves are reduced to the maximum. We also have to dress this with the fact that, as happened in the prelude to the Second World War, the hegemonic power then - England was losing deterrence and progressively displaced by emerging powers - the U.S. and Germany, which accelerated the final confrontation that would generate a new world order. Today the situation is similar: the U.S. hegemonic status is in doubt, there are new emerging powers - China, the recovery of Russia, Brazil, India, which felt the brunt of the crisis and building this state of weakness can search speed the U.S. military crisis. On the other hand we must consider that in the U.S. are aware of this situation and handle well the hypothesis of war as a scenario of economic recovery, as happened with the First and Second Gulf War. As we are at a historical juncture which must be seen to care about the implications it may have. Dr. John E.
Romero Universidad del Zulia
17/12/2008
0 comments:
Post a Comment