The result of the UK referendum has sent a seismic shock, not only through Britain but Europe and the world.

More... (http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/06/24/brex-j24.html)

#Brexit triumphed, but Capitalism is still here

COMMENTARY:

With 52% over 48%, the voters in Britain decided in favor of a Brexit in yesterday's EU referendum. The Communists of Britain who stood against the EU and the mainstream media propaganda deserve our congratulations for their stance and struggle. A significant proportion of Britain's working class- the class which has been largely affected by the antiworker, antipeople EU policies- voted in favor of 'Leave'. However, the triumph of Brexit does not change the capitalist framework of the country: the power remains in the hands of the bourgeoisie, the monopolies continue being the dominant force of British economy, the working class remains under capitalist exploitation.

Britain's working class must have no illusions whatsoever: Unemployment, zero-hour contracts, layoffs, cuts in wages and social services will continue. The country, as a powerful imperialist member-state of NATO, will continue paying huge amounts in defense budget and participating in criminal, imperialist interventions.

The competition between different sectors of the British bourgeois-class in the Brexit vs Bremain referendum's campaigns will have consequences for the working people. The working class and the low-income people of Britain will be called to pay the bill for new 'structural' economic reforms- that probably means new austerity measures and invigoration of capitalist exploitation.

What is the conclusion? Brexit triumphed indeed, but the real enemy is still here. The real enemy is the exploitative capitalist system and the dominance of the monopolies. The struggle of the Communists, of the working class must aim towards the overthrow of this system. It must be a struggle- a continuous and painful one- for the total revolutionary transformation of the society, for people's power, for people’s ownership of the means of productions, for Socialism. The War is going on...

http://communismgr.blogspot.gr/2016/06/brexit-triumphed-but-capitalism-is.html

This alone almost worth the price of admission.

A bolt from the blue
24-Jun-2016 03:40 pm
Our product range, according to several confused comments, evaluate the results of the referendum of the British discouraged. Matviyenko called them "bolt from the blue" . Concern (not dull by foreign ministry, and the most that neither is true) is understandable: in the nomenclature and in their offspring evrograzhdanstvo and unimpeded passage to Europe. And the loot taken Hove in England - the good, the British are getting richer its status as the world's financial capital and highly favorable to investors, buying and investing their money in it, in this case are not particularly interested in their origins, although, if desired, can be quickly and fiercely, and to find and select from anyone and anything. Now our thieves are coming hard times, if after all the English really begin divorce continental Europe - how to be a prohibitively acquired and hidden? You can accidentally get under someone else's dismantling, and certainly someone who, as all the indigenous British dud able to undress like no other - the good, the experience Ogogo. At the slightest impact on the British elite in our no - relationship and without refrenduma marred thoroughly and for a long time. Now, we need to understand the English general lost all interest observe politesse with respect to Russian criminals and bandits (her know what to do), but because it will be - no one knows. Hence, the nervous fidgeting on the leather seats

http://el-murid.livejournal.com/2854329.html

Google Translator

the triumph of Brexit does not change the capitalist framework of the country: the power remains in the hands of the bourgeoisie, the monopolies continue being the dominant force of British economy, the working class remains under capitalist exploitation.

Well, that much is obvious.


Britain's working class must have no illusions whatsoever...<> The country, as a powerful imperialist member-state of NATO, will continue paying huge amounts in defense budget and participating in criminal, imperialist interventions.

This is interesting: Britain as "a powerful imperialist member-state of NATO". I think that it is a little more than that - or a little less. "Member-state" is an interesting phrase. One thing should be crystal clear to everyone, there can be no "Brexit" from NATO. That cannot even be brought to a vote. Britain belongs to the US, lock, stock, and barrel. It would be almost impossible to conceive of the US allowing Britain its freedom. So, "member-state"? Okay, so long as everyone understands the euphemism.

Exit EU? Doable - done! Exit NATO? Eh? What was that? I don't understand what you mean?

This alone almost worth the price of admission.

And it isn't just the Russian mob (ruling class), this morning on the nationalist news there was breathless doom-saying from every corner. The stock markets were down 4 points! Wait, 4 points? Two weeks ago the finance minister of Germany went in for prostate treatments and the markets dropped 5 points.

The Bank of England made an announcement this morning. It said, "Everyone take a breath. This is a minor shock and will be short lived." These were the exact words of Charlie Rose on that women's morning talk show he's on.

This is from CNBC this morning.


"The biggest thing is markets are operating and there isn't a liquidity crisis. This isn't a Lehman moment," said Chris Gaffney, president, EverBank World Markets.

"I think investors mispriced the risk and quickly repriced it," he said. "That's what we're seeing now, the repricing of risk with heightened uncertainty."

U.S. stocks surged into the close Thursday amid increasing expectations that Britain would vote to stay in the European Union. As of the close Thursday, the major U.S. stock indexes were tracking for weekly gains of nearly 2 percent or more.

So, the real reason most of the markets are "upset" this morning is because they were all gambling on Britain staying. Thursday night the stocks all rose. Then the financiers lost their bets and the market dropped. This has much more to do with stock market gaming than with "real" economics. The capitalist system is essentially unstable, that is its very nature; so any kind of change can cause fluctuations. It is telling that the Gaffney putz in the quotation mentioned Lehman's. It is the same kind of situation, just not as big nor widespread.

This is from CNBC this morning.



So, the real reason most of the markets are "upset" this morning is because they were all gambling on Britain staying. Thursday night the stocks all rose. Then the financiers lost their bets and the market dropped. This has much more to do with stock market gaming than with "real" economics. The capitalist system is essentially unstable, that is its very nature; so any kind of change can cause fluctuations. It is telling that the Gaffney putz in the quotation mentioned Lehman's. It is the same kind of situation, just not as big nor widespread.

Gold jumped around $60 last night to about 1340, but lost about half that gain since. Still, highest it's been in a couple years. And so the legend of the 'safe haven' continues.

Gold jumped around $60 last night to about 1340, but lost about half that gain since. Still, highest it's been in a couple years. And so the legend of the 'safe haven' continues.

Is it weird that gold keeps this kind of mystique through the years, decades, centuries, hell, millennia? Or is there something else, here? What did Anax used to say? Something about "durability" and "malleability" - I guess diamonds would have the same kinda thing.

Is it weird that gold keeps this kind of mystique through the years, decades, centuries, hell, millennia? Or is there something else, here? What did Anax used to say? Something about "durability" and "malleability" - I guess diamonds would have the same kinda thing.

Diamonds, despite being 'the hardest substance in the world' are actually kinda fragile and chip pretty easily, which ruins there value. Also, once cut the diamond is subject to 'taste'. If ya want a stone that retains value get a round one. Gold of course can be melted again & again, the labor resides more in the substance than in it's form.

A VICTORY FOR POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY – a defeat for the EU-IMF-NATO axis
worker | June 24, 2016 | 8:33 pm | Communist Party Britain, political struggle
Communist Party statement 24 June 2016

The referendum result represents a huge and potentially disorientating blow to the ruling capitalist class in Britain, its hired politicians and its imperialist allies in the EU, the USA, IMF and NATO.
The people have spoken and popular sovereignty now demands that the Westminster Parliament accepts and implements their decision. The left must now redouble its efforts to turn this referendum result into a defeat for the whole EU-IMF-NATO axis.
But it is clear that the Cameron-Osborne government has lost the confidence of the electorate and cannot be trusted with the responsibility of negotiating Britain’s exit from the European Union. It should resign forthwith.
The Communist Party also has no confidence that a Tory government led by other pro-big business, pro-imperialist and pro-neoliberal MPs such as Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Liam Fox and Iain Duncan Smith would withstand the pressures from the City of London, big business, the US and NATO to prevent Britain’s exit from the EU.
If no alternative government can command a majority in the House of Commons, a General Election must therefore be called without delay.
This makes it all the more important that the Labour Party leadership immediately pledges to respect and implement fully the referendum decision. Moreover, it should make clear its determination to negotiate exit terms and future treaties with the EU and other countries on the basis of new arrangements that put the interests of working people here and internationally before those of big business and the capitalist ‘free market’.
In any event, it will also be vital to counteract the upsurge of xenophobia and racism unleashed by leading forces on both sides of the referendum campaign.
The unity and mobilisation of progressive and labour movement forces is essential in order to explain the benefits of immigration and counter the divisive and anti-working class appeal of UKIP and other right-wing and far-right parties.
We now need to fight to ensure that a Britain outside ‘Fortress Europe’ uses its freedom to welcome people to work, study and live here from around the world and leads Europe in providing a safe haven for asylum seekers and refugees.

http://houstoncommunistparty.com/a-victory-for-popular-sovereignty-a-defeat-for-the-eu-imf-nato-axis/

Why Wall Street fought so hard against Brexit
By Renae Merle June 24 at 3:15 PM

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_960w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/06/24/Foreign/Images/2016-06-24T064717Z_01_LON903_RTRIDSP_3_BRITAIN-EU.jpg&w=1484
A taxi driver holds a Union flag, as he celebrates following the result of the EU referendum, in central London. (Toby Melville/Reuters)

NEW YORK -- For decades, Wall Street has considered London a beacon through which it could reach the rest of Europe. Large U.S. banks moved thousands of employees there to trade currencies and complex financial products. A couple of years ago, Goldman Sachs began building a massive new headquarters to house its 6,000 employees in the city.

But Britain’s stunning vote on Friday to divorce itself from the European Union has thrown London’s status as Europe’s financial center into question -- and with it, the city’s relationship with New York bankers.

From London, Wall Street has been able to sell its services across 28 nations without the headache of having to get regulatory approval from each individual country. The prospect of a more complex, and potentially costly, regulatory structure has some banking officials worried, analysts said. U.S. banks could move more than 10,000 employees out of London after Britain completes its exit from the European Union, according to Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, a boutique investment bank.

"U.S. banks have used London as a primary center for activity, not only to operate in the U.K., but to provide services across Europe," said James Chessen, chief economist for the American Bankers Association.

The shock of the British vote tanked U.S. markets Friday with the financial sector taking among the toughest hits. Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase were both down 7 percent. Morgan Stanley tumbled 9 percent.

Britain's exit is also expected to impact other U.S. industries. Technology firms have jousted before with European regulators, but that process could become more complicated as populist leaders call for referendums in France and the Netherlands to leave the EU, as well.

On Friday, shares of Apple fell 2.5 percent. Alphabet, Google’s holding company, lost 3.5 percent and Yahoo and Microsoft were each down about 4 percent.

In energy stocks, BP was trading down 5 percent, and Shell, domiciled in both Britain and the Netherlands, was down 6 percent after news of the “Leave” vote. American crude oil prices dropped $2.54 a barrel, or 5 percent.

Oil prices stiffened in the weeks leading up to the vote, as the “Remain” camp surged in polls. The Brexit caught investors by surprise. They rushed to sock assets away in non-eurocentric currencies and products, opting for American investments instead, or staying out of the market completely.

But the impact on U.S. banks is expected to be among the most severe, and the industry was both vocal -- and aggressive -- in its opposition to Britain leaving the EU.

Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase, the country’s largest bank by assets, contributed 500,000 pounds, then about $720,000, each to the campaign to keep the status quo in the European Union, according to people familiar with the matter. Citigroup and Morgan Stanley donated 250,000 pounds each, according to the Sunlight Foundation.

On Friday, U.S. banks quickly began to draw up plans to deal with the fallout.

Citigroup created a "group of senior leaders from across our businesses and functions to ensure we were prepared for this possible outcome," Mike Corbat, the bank's chief executive, and Jim Cowles, its chief executive in Europe, Middle East and Africa, said in a letter to employees. "While the result of the vote is not what we would have preferred, our diligent work over the past six months means we can be confident that Citi is well positioned to serve our clients."

Britain's finalization of its exit from the E.U. is expected to take at least two years, and banking industry officials say they will carefully watch the process for clues into how vast the fallout will be. Britain, for example, may be able to establish a financial regulatory framework that is harmonious with the rest of Europe. That would minimize the potential impact, analysts said. But if that is not possible, banks may be forced to move jobs to Frankfurt or Dublin, they said.

"Likely London will lose some influence," Erik M. Oja, equity analyst for S&P Global Market Intelligence. But it depends on the negotiations that will occur over the new few years, he said: "These banks have invested a lot into the London hub, it’s not like they will move overnight."


On Friday, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon told employees in a memo that the bank will maintain a large presence throughout Britain. "In the months ahead, however, we may need to make changes to our European legal entity structure and the location of some roles," Dimon said. "While these changes are not certain, we have to be prepared to comply with new laws as we serve our clients around the world."

Dimon said earlier this month that Brexit could force the bank to relocate thousands of employees. "After a Brexit we cannot do it all here, and we will have to start planning for that. I don't know if it means a thousand jobs, 2,000 jobs. It could be as many as 4,000," he said from Bournemouth on the southern coast of England, according to the BBC.

Bank of America, which considered contributing to the Remain campaign, but ultimately stayed neutral, according to news reports, said it was still assessing the fallout from the vote.

"In the coming months, we will get a much clearer understanding of what the implications of this might be for our business, as well as the decisions that we will need to make before the change in membership becomes effective," Alex Wilmot-Sitwell, president of Bank of America's Europe, Middle East and Africa division, said in a letter to employees.

The most significant impact may be for Goldman Sachs, which isn’t expected to finish its new London headquarters until about 2019. “We have had a strong team focused on this potential result for many months,” Lloyd C. Blankfein, Goldman Sachs’ chief executive, said in a memo to employees.

Jacob Bogage contributed to this report
Renae Merle covers white collar crime and Wall Street for The Washington Post. Follow @renaemerle

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/24/why-wall-street-fought-so-hard-against-brexit/

Brexit to help US hegemony: Chinese state media
June 25, 2016, 9:39 am

http://thebricspost.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/1701872.jpg
File photo: Chinese President Xi Jinping and UK’s Prime Minister David Cameron at a British pub northwest of London on 22 October 2015 [Xinhua]
Chinese state media on Saturday criticised the instability created by Britain’s decision to quit the European Union.
“Britain’s exit reflects the general decline of Europe,” argued an editorial of the influential Chinese daily the Global Times, published by the ruling Communist Party.

Britain’s vote to leave the bloc sent shockwaves around the world on Friday as global markets plunged and the pound saw its biggest one day drop in history.

“The world’s center used to lie on the two sides of the Atlantic. Now the focus has shifted to the Pacific. East Asia has witnessed decades of high-speed growth and prosperity. Europe stays where it was, becoming the world’s center of museums and tourist destinations,” Global Times said.

Ratings agency Moody’s has downgraded UK’s credit rating outlook to “negative” following Thursday’s vote.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry on Friday said it respected the choice of the British people but warned of serious ramifications arising out of Britain’s exit from the EU.

Global Times, known for its strident editorials, said on Saturday that it anticipates “no direct political impact on Russia and China” from UK’s shock exit from the 28-member bloc.

Instead, the editorial argued, the decision would aid the hegemony of the US.

“Such changes will benefit the US, which will lose a strong rival in terms of the dominance of its currency. Politically it will be easier for the US to influence Europe,” the editorial said.

This was in stark contrast to western media reports quoting former diplomats that said the Brexit referendum would “weaken Washington’s influence in European policymaking” bemoaning the “loss of the strongest pro-U.S. voice within the EU”.

Editorials of state-owned media in China, like Global Times, generally reflect the Communist Party viewpoint.

China and the UK have extensive business ties. The two countries signed $54.78 billion in business deals, including the financing of nuclear power stations during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit last year.

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said he wanted to begin negotiating Britain’s departure immediately.

“Britons decided yesterday that they want to leave the European Union, so it doesn’t make any sense to wait until October to try to negotiate the terms of their departure,” Juncker said.

http://thebricspost.com/brexit-to-help-us-hegemony-chinese-state-media/#.V26QWvkrLZb

Are there Trots in the Politburo? I think this incorrect, 'rivals in currency", from Britain? Really? I will not be surprised when this is superseded by subsequent analysis.

Gold of course can be melted again & again, the labor resides more in the substance than in it's form.

Right. The "durability and malleability" make it ideal for use or hording.

This makes it all the more important that the Labour Party leadership immediately pledges to respect and implement fully the referendum decision. Moreover, it should make clear its determination to negotiate exit terms and future treaties with the EU and other countries on the basis of new arrangements that put the interests of working people here and internationally before those of big business and the capitalist ‘free market’.

Well, that ain't going to happen. The Labour Party is a bourgeois party, inextricably tied to capital. There is a reason KKE doesn't make statements like this - the KKE know that SYRITZA is a tool of the monopolies and imperial capitalism and in no way represents the working class in Greece or anywhere else. Same with Labour. Admonishing a capitalist party to discard its capitalism is stupid. Call for replacing the Labour Party with a real working class party (we know what that is called). The same with the Democratic Party in US - don't try to change it, discard it.

Are there Trots in the Politburo? I think this incorrect, 'rivals in currency", from Britain? Really? I will not be surprised when this is superseded by subsequent analysis.

I agree. Makes no sense. I thought it was saying that the Euro was the rival, but that doesn't track because UK never adopted the Euro. I don't know, does sound like Trot muddle.

Well, that ain't going to happen. The Labour Party is a bourgeois party, inextricably tied to capital. There is a reason KKE doesn't make statements like this - the KKE know that SYRITZA is a tool of the monopolies and imperial capitalism and in no way represents the working class in Greece or anywhere else. Same with Labour. Admonishing a capitalist party to discard its capitalism is stupid. Call for replacing the Labour Party with a real working class party (we know what that is called). The same with the Democratic Party in US - don't try to change it, discard it.

Might be that Brexit ain't gonna happen either. RedK is of that opinion, this enormous petition (2M+ earlier today) and the heavy drama the EU honchos are attaching to their meeting might imply that. The fact that a number of national referendums against the EU have been overturned in distinctly undemocratic manner compound that possibility.

A select group of hedge funds made some serious money on Brexit

The UK has voted to leave the European Union, a shock decision that sent markets crashing on Friday.

For a small band of hedge funds, the decision, and its impact on the market, led to outsize returns.

The gains are especially noteworthy, as many funds went in to the vote having reduced risk.

"An unusually low number of client incoming calls and modest trading volumes away from the Russell rebalancing may speak to the already light positioning ahead of the UK referendum," Credit Suisse said in a note Friday.

In addition, betting on a binary outcome such as Leave-Remain is a brave bet. Four out of five European hedge funds polled expected Britain to stay in the EU, according to a Preqin poll earlier this month, and most polling immediately before the vote suggested Remain would carry the day.

Still, several funds posted impressive returns. The NuWave Matrix Fund was up 12% on Friday, putting it up around 10% for the year, according to chief operating officer Craig Weynand.

The fund, which manages about $60 million, runs a CTA/systematic macro strategy, meaning it makes trading decisions based on historical patterns rather than gut decisions.

"It's true that Brexit was a binary outcome, but by the same token, history has a number examples of binary outcomes," Weynand said, citing the Federal Reserve decisions and shock events like tsunamis. "History doesn't repeat itself, but it usually rhymes."

Another macro manager, Quadratic Capital Management, posted its best ever returns since it launched in May 2015, according to a person with knowledge of the matter.
Quadratic didn't make money betting on a Leave vote, but rather by deploying options strategies that make money during risk-off events like the one Friday, the person said.

Quadratic manages about $428 million and is run by one of the industry's few female hedge fund managers, Nancy Davis.

Schonfeld Strategic Advisors, which manages two funds alongside billionaire Steve Schonfeld's money, also did well. The firm is performing in the low double digits this year and was in positive territory early Friday, according to CIO Ryan Tolkin.

He declined to share exact performance figures or assets under management, but said Schonfeld manages about $12.5 billion, including leverage.

Schonfeld, like many hedge funds, didn't take a concentrated bet on the outcome of the Brexit vote.

"We try not to take binary views on things like this," Tolkin told Business Insider.

Rather, the firm, which uses market-neutral equity and quant strategies, reduced its overall market exposure in hopes of capitalizing on post-vote volatility, Tolkin said.

"Now we're in a good position to try to take advantage of some price points that we've now got," he added.

Other managers seem to have taken advantage, too. Winton Capital's systematic trading strategy gained 3.1% Friday, according to Reuters.

And ISAM Systematic Master fund, launched by ex-Man Group manager Stanley Fink, gained 4% early Friday, according to a person who had seen the figures. ISAM didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

Crispin Odey, who manages about $10.2 billion at his macro-focused firm, told Reuters Friday that his fund would gain 15% from the Brexit outcome, regaining some of its losses this year.

George Soros and Stanley Druckenmiller, both legendary investors, also profited from the market drop, according to CNBC. Spokespeople for Soros and Druckenmiller declined to comment.

http://www.businessinsider.com/hedge-funds-trading-on-brexit-2016-6

Well, it is a little like a casino, isn't it? But over-all there was a lot of 'creative destruction'.

The Imminent Dodging Of Brexit - A Gift For The Fascist Right

We claimed that BREXIT - is not gonna happen and pointed to a propaganda campaign (see further examples in the comments there) launched to reverse the Brexit votes. Within that campaign two memes get pushed:

First, young voters feel cheated of their future because some old, grumpy people voted for Brexit. Well, these young voters of age 18 to 24, tearfully interviewed by the BBC and Channel 4, constitute only 5% of the electorate. Only a third of them voted at all, 70% of those 1/3 of 5% for "Remain". This is a small part, and a not very interested one, of the population. Who are they to deserve some special attendance?

The second meme pushed is the "success" of some petition for a #ReverseBrexit vote someone set up on the UK parliament website. It now has more than a million "signatures". That is a lot in a short time frame. But wait, any dog on the Internet can "sign" that petition provided it has some throw-away email address. I, a German in Germany, "signed" to test the procedure. It took me about 30 seconds.

This propaganda campaign will not have any tangible success, but it sets a certain atmosphere which then will be used to stall the exit process.

The EU exit mechanism is build in a way that allows for an endless postponement of the actual procedure. This is the way the British politicians will likely take. The Jack of Kent Blog explains how this works:

The UK did not [immediately] send to the EU the notification under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty on European Union which would have commenced the withdrawal process.
The Article 50 process is the only practical means by which the UK can leave the EU.
...
And so unless and until the Article 50 process is commenced and completed, the UK will stay as a member of the EU.

In short: no Article 50, no Brexit.
...
And it is entirely a matter for the Member State to choose whether to make the notification and, if so, when.

The UK immediately filing Article 50, as Cameron once promised, would trigger a two year long negotiation period with the EU which would end with the legal exit independent of the negotiation results. After filing Article 50 the clock would run down to the deadline likely without any serious concession from the EU. The UK has therefore an interest to negotiate before filing Article 50. To negotiate before filing is its only chance to apply some pressure.

But the EU has no reason, or legal basis, to negotiate at all before the UK files. Why should it make concessions to a divorce letter that was not filed and may not ever arrive?

It is a stalemate situation. The powers that are against Brexit will use this to blockade any move.

The six founding EU members claim to push Britain to file the Article 50 application immediately. But that is just playing to the gallery. In reality they want the never ending stalemate:

There is no desperate rush for Britain to trigger the process for it to leave the European Union, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Saturday, leaving London some space to work out its next move after a referendum vote to leave the bloc.
Despite the British voter decision for Brexit business as usual will continue with absolutely no change in sight:

Jack of Kent:

It is not impossible to imagine that the Article 50 notification will never be made, and that the possibility that it may one day be made will become another routine feature of UK politics – a sort of embedded threat which comes and goes out of focus. The notification will be made one day, politicians and pundits will say, but not yet.
And whilst it is not made, then other ways of solving the problem created by the referendum result may present themselves: another referendum, perhaps, so that UK voters can give the “correct” result, or a general election where EU membership is a manifesto issue, or some other thing.

This will not please Leave campaigners, and rightly so. It means the result of the referendum will be effectively ignored.

While this may be a convenient way forward for the EU bureaucrats and the politicians committed to neo-liberal globalization, the damage in the long run will be much more severe than a chaotic Brexit procedure.

Brexit will join a number of other issues on which the democratic will of the people has been ignored. This further de-legitimizes the EU and whatever it undertakes.

People who argue that a violent overthrow of the system is the only way forward will gain credibility.

The aborted Brexit will also give further impetus to the hard-rightwing parties currently cropping up in several European countries. These parties ostensibly cater to the "small people" who feel unrepresented and on the economic losing side. But the economic programs of these parties are anti-social and would only further inequality. They (ab-)use the grievance of the poor and middle class to gain even more power for the rich.

What is missing in Europe are leftwing parties that take the romantic longing for local nationalism - in opposition to bone-crushing globalization - seriously and merge it with socialist policies. The social-democrats once had that role but under Blair, Schroeder and Hollande they waft away into the anti-nationalism, neo-liberal globalization sphere. Nationalism has, for them, become a dirty word. This at the time as nationalism gains new popularity as the anchor for common people lost in the sea of neo-liberal arbitrariness.

The space left empty by them will be filled by fascism.

Posted by b on June 25, 2016 at 10:32 AM | Permalink

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/06/the-pending-stalling-of-brexit-a-gift-for-the-fascist-right.html

What is missing in Europe are leftwing parties that take the romantic longing for local nationalism - in opposition to bone-crushing globalization - seriously and merge it with socialist policies. The social-democrats once had that role but under Blair, Schroeder and Hollande they waft away into the anti-nationalism, neo-liberal globalization sphere. Nationalism has, for them, become a dirty word. This at the time as nationalism gains new popularity as the anchor for common people lost in the sea of neo-liberal arbitrariness.

The space left empty by them will be filled by fascism.

Jack has summed things up pretty well, except for this last paragraph. The KKE, while in no way pandering to nationalism, has staked out the only feasible, left stand on EU. The KKE has also very correctly identified EU with NATO, imperialism, and ravenous capitalism - all under strict US hegemony. And sorry, but SD never had this role in any conceivable way.

It will be interesting to see how the British people deal with their ruling class' complete rejection of democratic government.

Is it weird that gold keeps this kind of mystique through the years, decades, centuries, hell, millennia? Or is there something else, here? What did Anax used to say? Something about "durability" and "malleability" - I guess diamonds would have the same kinda thing.

Funny thing. They called Bernanke to a hearing once and amongst other things he was asked your question: "Why is gold still valuable?" To which he replied "Tradition, I suppose". Maybe that was part of the hiring interview: if you can't slough off burning theoretical questions which you haven't a clue how to address and have vexed you for decades -- then what good are you when we really need you? Luckily for Chopper Ben, he passed with flying colors.

At any rate, you're confusing/conflating the use value of gold with its social stature as capital. Gold is the commodity in which the value of all other commodities is measured. Wildly important.

Jack has summed things up pretty well, except for this last paragraph. The KKE, while in no way pandering to nationalism, has staked out the only feasible, left stand on EU. The KKE has also very correctly identified EU with NATO, imperialism, and ravenous capitalism - all under strict US hegemony. And sorry, but SD never had this role in any conceivable way.

It will be interesting to see how the British people deal with their ruling class' complete rejection of democratic government.

I also think that nationalism ain't what it used to be and will be an unreliable asset for the ruling class.

Post-Brexit: Imagine a New European Community

by Martin Winiecki, June 26th 2016


The news of Brexit triggered shock waves around the globe, with many people wondering how could the Brits make such a foolish choice. But actually there is good reason why many people in Europe hold the EU in low esteem.

The European Union has alienated countless millions of workers and ordinary people all over the continent; for many “EU” has become the very synonym of a hostile “establishment.” While it began as a progressive project for freedom and solidarity among the peoples of Europe, committed to never again repeat the terrible wars of the 20th century and authentically humane initiatives, the EU has developed into an anti-democratic, neoliberal technocracy with ever decreasing legitimacy and benefit for the people. Preaching noble values of human rights, social democracy and peace, the rulers of the EU have led a scrupulous austerity regime, gradually expanding precarious work conditions for millions. The wide gap between its social rhetoric on the one hand and the implementation of free market policies on the other, gave many people the feeling of being constantly betrayed by an anonymous superstructure, which they cannot participate in or reach out to.



In their blind obedience to the orders from Washington and the corporate world, European leaders have endlessly fooled their people. Whether it is about secretly handing the last remaining democratic powers over to multinationals and abolishing fundamental environmental, consumer and workers rights, as it is prepared to do in the TTIP negotiations, or about ruining their own countries’ trade by installing economic sanctions against Russia, or about participating in the extremely dangerous deployment of NATO troops to Eastern Europe – there hardly seems to be any demand from the US government, which EU and European leaders would not fulfill, however devastating its consequences for Europe may be. Just how narrow the ideological tolerance within Europe has become, could be seen last week when German foreign minister Frank Walter Steinmeier courageously dared to condemn the military drills in Eastern Europe as “warmongering” against Russia. As he stated the obvious, he provoked pure outrage from fellow politicians and the media in the Western world.



Or take Greece – a year ago, the EU establishment carried out collective punishment against an entire nation for being so impertinent to demand an exit of the austerity policies. How enthusiastically have countries like Greece, Portugal and Ireland joined the EU, dreaming of economic progress, continental integration and solidarity and how badly have they been impoverished and robbed their sovereignty by being trapped in astronomic debt. However, this is not an issue of Southern vs. Northern Europe, but one of redistributing wealth from the 99% to the 1% throughout Europe, which can be felt by the people from Athens to Liverpool. “Austerity is,” as Chomsky noted, “really class war.”



Capitalist globalization has corroded the social fabric of societies around the world, destroyed solidarity among people and established an anonymous hyper-individualized climate of fierce competition, loneliness and struggle for survival. People are left without any positive prospect for the future, feel constantly cheated on by something or someone that they cannot even precisely name – and immense anger ensues in people’s hearts. People thus readily buy in to the xenophobic propaganda telling who to blame for this situation.



The Brexit vote was in big part the expression of a nationalistic reaction to the alienation of neoliberalism. As they spread fear and tried to make immigrants responsible for the economic failures of the Europe that the EU has shaped, the powerful capitalist class (what in the US they call the 1%) provided the foundation for right-wing nationalists to present themselves as “populists” caring about the well-being of those hurt by economic globalization. These right-wing rabble-rousers divert peoples’ attention from the obvious injustice of the economic system. Thereby they turn the genuinely revolutionary potential of people’s anti-establishment sentiment into the most reactionary direction. As liberal and bourgeois parties increasingly lose popular support in the entire Western world, the far right is becoming the most important political power to keep the current system in place. The tension emerging from the extreme levels of inequality, corruption and lack of prospects for large sections of working peopled has become massive in nearly all Western countries today. Societies – both in Europe, North America and basically worldwide. These societies cannot be kept together for much longer on the basis of the existing social, political and economic orders. If we do not want right wing extremists like Farage, Le Pen, Trump and the likes to take over, another alternative has to become visible worldwide.



In France there have been endless mass protests and strikes against the neoliberal labor reform of President Hollande for months now. It is a resistance of dimensions unheard of in recent decades; a few days ago the police were exhausted from the street battles they asked protesters to give them a break. Some already speak of the “second French Revolution.”



On Sunday, Spaniards will elect a new government; there is a realistic chance the new president will be Pablo Iglesias, the young charismatic political science professor from Madrid leading a creative grassroots movement called “Podemos,” which emerged from the 2011 Indignado protests all over the country. Podemos is an anti-capitalist party; their number one goal is to take down the austerity regime in Spain and across Europe.



In addition, there is the ticking time bomb of the Greek debt crisis, there is a looming global financial meltdown, there is a refugee crisis, which we have not solved but just sealed from our attention. Furthermore we have ecological crises of planetary dimension with existential threats to our survival… Brexit is just a tiny puzzle piece in a much larger process of entropy taking place all over the world – the systems of society, politics, economy, but also of culture and people’s coexistence are bound to disintegrate because they have produced crises that have corroded social cohesion and destroyed our basis of life on this planet.



We live in the beginning phase of a global revolution which will turn societal conditions upside down. We cannot stop this transformation, but we can influence where it will go. Will the disintegration of the globalized systems lead to fascist violence and molecular civil wars as some fear or will it lead to a process of planetary renewal and liberation?



Alongside the collapse of the inevitable old system and rise of right-wing specters, there is another vision for the future. The entropy of the centralized systems of power must not lead to chaos and destruction, but to the emergence of a new type of free society based on autonomous communities. Community is the key word for a humane future in Europe and worldwide. We human beings are communitarian beings in essence, we genuinely thrive to the extent that we are bound with fellow human beings in solidarity and trust. The insanities of today’s late stage capitalism could only be invented and executed by people who have lost their social and ethical anchor. The era we are coming from, the epoch of patriarchy, imperialism and capitalism has systematically destroyed communities and isolated people from one another.



Imagine if the collapse of this system is accompanied by the emergence of new types of communities everywhere – in cities and on the countryside. People would develop an autonomous cultural life; they would organize new networks of regional self-sufficiency and take basic resources back into their own hands, creating authentic forms of bottom-up grassroots democracy. They would develop new forms of social coexistence based on transparency; people would participate in each other’s lives instead of closing their private doors behind them. Imagine people could dare so much truth and compassion among each other that a society would come into being that no longer needs to be kept together by static rules, police and authoritarian structures, but by the quality of life we all most desire: trust.



Imagine a new European community and eventually planetary community will develop, replacing the centralized power systems with an alliance of interconnected autonomous communities setting the foundations for a new epoch based on solidarity among people and cooperation with the powers of nature. Imagine this growing planetary movement would share an essential ethical code and would replace the drive for personal profit with the drive towards participation in and service for the greater benefit of humanity and the Earth. Imagine this movement would gradually dissolve the old nation-states, power blocs and cultural borders. Communities would be home to people from all over the world, including refugees from crisis areas. Once people have again found home in a real community, they no longer need to violently defend the construct of their “fatherland” against people from elsewhere. (Isn’t nationalism anyways just a compensation for the sense of “home” we have lost as humanity!)



In order to start such a transformative movement, we need models which show that a new society based on communitarian coexistence, trust between people and regenerative autonomy is possible. We need places for new types of holistic research to develop the ecological, technological, economic, political, social, spiritual and sexual structures necessary for our society to become once again compatible with life, nature and humanity’s deeper longings and motivations. There already exists an enormous amount of knowledge and solutions in this direction, but they need to be fused into a coherent blueprint, a concept for a new global culture. The Healing Biotopes Plan attempts to introduce such a process of cultural creation.



You say this is too utopian and far-fetched? Well, the more we see the dimensions of the current global crisis we also see the necessity for a fundamental redesign of the way we inhabit this planet. This is not the time to be “realistic” in the narrow conventional sense, because if we think like this we do not even have to begin. It is not the time to think about slow incremental change, but to think about complete revolution, to dare a lot, dream big and see the most beautiful vision of what our world can be. This is what it is to be radical in times of such tremendous transformation.

Evolution does not advance gradually, but in leaps – once a pattern of organization is no longer functional, living systems undergo a period of turbulence until they suddenly leap into a more complex pattern of organization. This is the process we are undergoing as a species right now, the process we are participating in and co-creating. The clearer our vision, the more we can help birth the future we want. We cannot leave this up to some president, institution or guru; nobody else will do it for us. Now is the moment to start building a new humane culture and it begins by seeing its actual possibility.



I’ve written more about this in the Fall 2016 print edition of Tikkun Magazine. I hope you’ll subscribe to Tikkun so you read it there at www.tikkun.org/subscribe.



Martin Winiecki, born in Dresden, Germany in 1990, is a writer, speaker, and coordinator of the Institute for Global Peace Work at Tamera, Portugal.

http://www.tikkun.org/nextgen/the-real-meaning-of-brexit

"The Healing Biotropes"? Complete and utter bullshit, from the ground up. New Age, gentry, yuppie crap.

The whole first part of this guy's piece is spot on - then the kicker at the end: we can all float off into the Never-Never and rule the world from beyond the grave! Jesus fucking Christ...

http://www.tikkun.org/nextgen/the-real-meaning-of-brexit

...and suddenly he began speaking in tongues. Anything but communism.

It doesn't take much (any?) prescience to understand what is really happening here and, consequently, what our thrust should be:

Imperialist divisions and fracturing always prophesy war.

Out of NATO! Down with national parliaments! Only a United Europe under workers' control can stop world war. International solidarity!

$10 trillion dollars swirling in the ether with nowhere to rest. Capitalist hordes marshalling on the doorsteps of Russia and China (under the flimsiest of pretenses -- when they bother to conceal their blood lust!). The prospect of white enclaves ringed by razor wire and cruise missiles...if you think the brownshirts are the worst they can do, you are mistaken.

"Brexit" is entirely beside the point except as an omen

Our job is to bring on the Terror that puts these guys out of business once and for all.

PS I think the KKE is wrong to endorse an unqualified "Leave" vote and especially to vouch for the other "radical" parties that have also called for Leave. Those would be the same "radical" idiots who insisted that the Wall falling would open up new "spaces" for the Left. New spaces where -- in prison cells and mass graves? What the KKE is saying smacks of "commentary" on current events. Leave that to wsws (right, wrong, whatever..they're idiots too).

They/WE have got to make the connection to the portent of war/barbarism, and the need for WORKER political unity as separate and apart from capitalist integration (in fact, in direct and open hostility toward such integration).

Now more than ever, we MUST stand on principle rather than convenient but crude slogans that can only exist within a concrete context (ie Out of the EU!). I get the appeal but they're taking up the wrong mantle of "Stalinism".

It doesn't take much (any?) prescience to understand what is really happening here and, consequently, what our thrust should be:

Imperialist divisions and fracturing always prophesy war.

Out of NATO! Down with national parliaments! Only a United Europe under workers' control can stop world war. International solidarity!

$10 trillion dollars swirling in the ether with nowhere to rest. Capitalist hordes marshalling on the doorsteps of Russia and China (under the flimsiest of pretenses -- when they bother to conceal their blood lust!). The prospect of white enclaves ringed by razor wire and cruise missiles...if you think the brownshirts are the worst they can do, you are mistaken.

"Brexit" is entirely beside the point except as an omen

Our job is to bring on the Terror that puts these guys out of business once and for all.

PS I think the KKE is wrong to endorse an unqualified "Leave" vote and especially to vouch for the other "radical" parties that have also called for Leave. Those would be the same "radical" idiots who insisted that the Wall falling would open up new "spaces" for the Left. New spaces where -- in prison cells and mass graves? What the KKE is saying smacks of "commentary" on current events. Leave that to wsws (right, wrong, whatever..they're idiots too).

They/WE have got to make the connection to the portent of war/barbarism, and the need for WORKER political unity as separate and apart from capitalist integration (in fact, in direct and open hostility toward such integration).

Now more than ever, we MUST stand on principle rather than convenient but crude slogans that can only exist within a concrete context (ie Out of the EU!). I get the appeal but they're taking up the wrong mantle of "Stalinism".

Whatever else these shitheads are up to Barbarrosa 2.0 ain't it. Gonna that a whole lot more forces to make that feasible. All of the noise we're hearing about asymmetrical warfare and the like have a basis in reality: regular forces cannot accomplish what their masters require. Conventional warfare as practiced by the US in the ME has won most of the battles but still lost the wars. As with late Rome where the regular legions fossilized into liminate, mobile forces of 1/2 size legions(2k men) and 500 strong heavy cavalry regiments became the fist of imperial policy. And so today we have 'special forces', to the number of a couple hundred thousand(counting airborne, mountain, marine formations), who will be the sharp point of policy. The NATO fandango on Russia's border is bluff, and that might be enough to cow Russia's liberals. Not even Bismark engaged in war when goals could be accomplished by less expensive means. Which ain't to say that the slaughter will be any less, just dispersed.(and less noticeable to the public, not an inconsiderable thing. How many people in the US got any idea the extent of overseas military basing? Out of sight, out of mind.) The capitalists are trying to finesse their savagery, not lessen it, but that means that rather than railing against cataclysm, which doesn't quite happen (Iran?)and might invoke the boy/wolf thing, that another angle of approach might be better, perhaps concentrating on the extent and expense of empire? It is outrageous on any scale.

Brexit is looking more like Grexit every day, for all the same reasons. It only remains for Britain to be spanked. The torture never stops. Or nobody is getting out of here alive or some other r&r reference.

Whatever else these shitheads are up to Barbarrosa 2.0 ain't it. Gonna that a whole lot more forces to make that feasible. All of the noise we're hearing about asymmetrical warfare and the like have a basis in reality: regular forces cannot accomplish what their masters require. Conventional warfare as practiced by the US in the ME has won most of the battles but still lost the wars. As with late Rome where the regular legions fossilized into liminate, mobile forces of 1/2 size legions(2k men) and 500 strong heavy cavalry regiments became the fist of imperial policy. And so today we have 'special forces', to the number of a couple hundred thousand(counting airborne, mountain, marine formations), who will be the sharp point of policy. The NATO fandango on Russia's border is bluff, and that might be enough to cow Russia's liberals. Not even Bismark engaged in war when goals could be accomplished by less expensive means. Which ain't to say that the slaughter will be any less, just dispersed.(and less noticeable to the public, not an inconsiderable thing. How many people in the US got any idea the extent of overseas military basing? Out of sight, out of mind.) The capitalists are trying to finesse their savagery, not lessen it, but that means that rather than railing against cataclysm, which doesn't quite happen (Iran?)and might invoke the boy/wolf thing, that another angle of approach might be better, perhaps concentrating on the extent and expense of empire? It is outrageous on any scale.

Brexit is looking more like Grexit every day, for all the same reasons. It only remains for Britain to be spanked. The torture never stops. Or nobody is getting out of here alive or some other r&r reference.

What we have is a ruling class without constraint. And 'unconstrained' in a way and to a degree that is even in excess of the ruling classes at the end of the nineteenth century. From the 1880s on there was a growing and increasingly active and organized labor movement, communism was on the rise and "haunting" everywhere. When the bosses cracked down on workers, the movement grew and sentiments hardened. By the twenties even black sharecroppers in Alabama were going Red.
Almost none of that pertains now. And, of course, it shouldn't because conditions change; but the reversals of the working class have been cataclysmic. A hundred years since the Russian Revolution and nobody even grasps what the "working class" is. (I remember as a kid, my old man was as anticommunist as any Wallace supporter, anywhere. When he said "better dead than Red", he actually meant it. But even he would say with pride that he was a "working class man" and with equal pride, a "union man". There was a huge contradiction there, he didn't see it, but that was primarily situation, upbringing and education; you can't hardly get anyone to acknowledge their class anymore, regardless of any situational factors.)

"Whatever else these shitheads are up to Barbarossa 2.0 ain't it." It isn't a new "Barbarossa", because it doesn't have to be - not yet, anyway. The elements that make imperial war (at some level) more likely is China and Russia making agreements for an "all-embracing and strategic partnership" ( article http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/russian-president-putin-meets-chinese-leaders-40124248). Much depends upon how "all-embracing" this "partnership" is. The US empire is engaging Russia in Europe and China in the Pacific in escalating confrontations and there is the fear that something could go "wrong" and a war could be started. How likely any of this is, or how the "sides" would manage such a crisis, I have no idea. But one thing is true, only the working class can stop this idiocy. But it has to be a conscious working class. How does one force an entire class - the overwhelming majority of humans on the planet - to look in a mirror?

What we have is a ruling class without constraint. And 'unconstrained' in a way and to a degree that is even in excess of the ruling classes at the end of the nineteenth century. From the 1880s on there was a growing and increasingly active and organized labor movement, communism was on the rise and "haunting" everywhere. When the bosses cracked down on workers, the movement grew and sentiments hardened. By the twenties even black sharecroppers in Alabama were going Red.
Almost none of that pertains now. And, of course, it shouldn't because conditions change; but the reversals of the working class have been cataclysmic. A hundred years since the Russian Revolution and nobody even grasps what the "working class" is. (I remember as a kid, my old man was as anticommunist as any Wallace supporter, anywhere. When he said "better dead than Red", he actually meant it. But even he would say with pride that he was a "working class man" and with equal pride, a "union man". There was a huge contradiction there, he didn't see it, but that was primarily situation, upbringing and education; you can't hardly get anyone to acknowledge their class anymore, regardless of any situational factors.)

"Whatever else these shitheads are up to Barbarossa 2.0 ain't it." It isn't a new "Barbarossa", because it doesn't have to be - not yet, anyway. The elements that make imperial war (at some level) more likely is China and Russia making agreements for an "all-embracing and strategic partnership" ( article http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/russian-president-putin-meets-chinese-leaders-40124248). Much depends upon how "all-embracing" this "partnership" is. The US empire is engaging Russia in Europe and China in the Pacific in escalating confrontations and there is the fear that something could go "wrong" and a war could be started. How likely any of this is, or how the "sides" would manage such a crisis, I have no idea. But one thing is true, only the working class can stop this idiocy. But it has to be a conscious working class. How does one force an entire class - the overwhelming majority of humans on the planet - to look in a mirror?

Yeah, "something going wrong" would be hot warfare of major powers, and that would not be cynical coyness. They'd rather win through subversion in any of a raft of variations. The combination of color revolutions, small wars and economic warfare has worked pretty well for them last few decades, why stop now? And you can bet that none of W Europe wants war with Russia. If NATO can pressure Putin out because he ain't comprodor enough or not quick enough about it he'll be replaced by someone like that asshole in Brazil, who put national assets on the market in record time. Why risk it all on one throw when you're winning anyway?

The sons of bitches are killing thousands a day worldwide in a multitude little wars and simply by 're-branding' as 'humanitarian intervention', 'restoring order' and other euphemisms the public is lulled, as long as the body bags are at a minimum.

Whatever else these shitheads are up to Barbarrosa 2.0 ain't it. Gonna that a whole lot more forces to make that feasible.

Part of my argument is that Barbarrosa isn't really the face of imperialist war but rather the most extreme Counter Terror witnessed by mankind. Nor does it matter that what we're seeing now is (likely) bluster. The underlying dynamic isn't going to swing on a bluff (ask Khruschev).


(I remember as a kid, my old man was as anticommunist as any Wallace supporter, anywhere. When he said "better dead than Red", he actually meant it. But even he would say with pride that he was a "working class man" and with equal pride, a "union man". There was a huge contradiction there, he didn't see it, but that was primarily situation, upbringing and education

Not so uncommon. Got an Uncle just like that. Union man who'll catch you up-to-date on last nights Fox News broadcast..whether you ask him to or not

elements that make imperial war (at some level) more likely is China and Russia making agreements for an "all-embracing and strategic partnership"

Is China still the maquiladora you think it is? What of the post crisis inflection/turn towards domestic development? It appears that there was a parasitic relationship in play -- the US is perceived as a safe haven due to its political stability but its political stability is tied heavily to its "haven" status. China has certainly played a role in undermining this correlated relationship, but so have the (increasingly) ineffectual power plays of the US imperialists.

The Red Horse doesn't loom because the US is an overwhelming unstoppable monolith but rather because they are losing their grip. Its not just a matter of America crumbling -- the entire edifice is contingent upon Empire. Without that center of gravity, the clock is ticking towards 1914..and it will enter astride a Pale Horse.


The sons of bitches are killing thousands a day worldwide in a multitude little wars

This is why INTERNATIONAL solidarity is so vitally important. Maybe more than anything else, the KKE should be forging fraternal bonds with the Central and South American workers. Different battlefields, but but brothers in arms.

Part of my argument is that Barbarrosa isn't really the face of imperialist war but rather the most extreme Counter Terror witnessed by mankind. Nor does it matter that what we're seeing now is (likely) bluster. The underlying dynamic isn't going to swing on a bluff (ask Khruschev).

Putin behaves as if nothing is going on, at all. He appears to ignoring the "bluff" and on about his business. It is as if he either knows something no one else seems to know, or he simply doesn't believe the US.

The "underlying dynamic" is the nature of US hegemony. It appears that Russia, China, et al, accept that the US is the hegemon; the problem seems to be what are the relationships that the position entails. Here are some questions:

How actually threatened is the US by Russia or China?
Is this threat legitimate?
What is the exact nature of that threat?
If these threats are purely market oriented, what does it mean to be 'hegemon'?
Does China actually accept the US as hegemon?


Russia seems to absorb all the abuse and damage the US can dish out and still smile and ask for another. Encirclement by NATO, a Nazi regime on its border, sanctions, the artificial oil glut to damage Russian petrochemical industry, and on and on. Still Lavrov refers to US/NATO/EU/Nazis as "our partners".

I don't think you could ask even Khruschev about this one.

Think of it as biblical infanticide. You can't kill every babe in the cradle -- but you can't sit idly by either. In the end they breed what they fear the most. And the legions of mouth pieces (or cod pieces) and sayers of sooth will tremble and fall in their turn before the harsh reality.

Imperialism (http://www.thebellforum.com/category/africa/imperialism)


http://blackagendareport.com/sites/all/modules/service_links/images/forward.png Forward (http://blackagendareport.com/forward?path=node/5188) http://blackagendareport.com/sites/all/modules/service_links/images/print.png Print HTML (http://blackagendareport.com/print/brexit_africa_neocolonialism) http://blackagendareport.com/sites/all/modules/service_links/images/reddit.png Reddit (http://reddit.com/submit?url=http%3A//blackagendareport.com/node/5188&title=Brexit%3A%20A%20Nail%20in%20the%20Coffin%20of%20Neo-colonialism%20in%20Africa) http://blackagendareport.com/sites/all/modules/service_links/images/viadeo.png Viadeo (http://www.viadeo.com/shareit/share/?url=http%3A//blackagendareport.com/node/5188&title=Brexit%3A%20A%20Nail%20in%20the%20Coffin%20of%20Neo-colonialism%20in%20Africa) Google Plus One (http://blackagendareport.com/node/5188) Linkedin Share Button (http://blackagendareport.com/node/5188) Share on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php) Tweet Widget (http://twitter.com/share?url=http%3A//blackagendareport.com/node/5188&count=horizontal&via=blkagendareport&text=Brexit%3A%20A%20Nail%20in%20the%20Coffin%20of%20Neo-colonialism%20in%20Africa&counturl=http%3A//blackagendareport.com/node/5188)
http://blackagendareport.com/sites/default/files/styles/image-400x300/public/Freeman_HailBREXIT.jpg?itok=f5VXnh3L (http://www.thebellforum.com/brexit_africa_neocolonialism)

by Netfa Freeman Brexit is cause for celebration for the peoples of Africa, Asia and Latin America. The European Union is the historical heir to the Berlin Conference of 1884 that divided the world into Euro-North American spheres of dominance. Europe has inflicted immense suffering on the rest of the planet. “Believing Brexit could represent the beginning of the end for international cooperation, is to believe that the world does or should revolve around Europe.”
Brexit: A Nail in the Coffin of Neo-colonialism in Africa by Netfa Freeman “The economic and political hegemony enjoyed by both Western Europe and the U.S. is at the expense of the “underdeveloped” world.”
While much of the discourse and debate around the UK referendum to leave the European Union (EU), a move known as Brexit (= Britain + exit), seems centered solely on its impact on Britain, Western Europe as a whole, and the U.S., Foreign Policy Magazine (FP) warns us, “Brexit Is Bad News for Africa. Period (http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/06/27/brexit-is-bad-news-for-africa-period/).” Before listing a litany of cons, from the “loss of British leadership in places like Somalia” to “South Africa, where many large companies are co-listed on the London Stock Exchange,” FP explains a re-worked UK-Africa policy, “even unencumbered by EU inefficiencies, …will leave Britain with a fraction of the influence it currently wields in Africa.” It will also disrupt if not discontinue many UK-led EU initiatives in Africa, according to FP.
The Thursday June 23rd referendum turned out 71.8% of UK voters, deciding 52% to 48% to leave the EU. It was the highest turnout in a UK-wide vote since the 1992 general election.
For some, Brexit has called into question the purpose of the EU and for some white liberals it has sparked concern over the possibility that it marks the end of internationalism (http://fpif.org/brexit-vote-mark-end-internationalism/). “The UK will split apart as Scotland goes ahead with a second vote on its own independence. Referendums on EU membership will follow in France and in the Netherlands. Brexit would be a tipping point for the Swedes and their growing Euroskepticism. Economic contagion could spread to Ireland, which is so closely linked to the British economy, and to Portugal, which is so close to default.”
“Europe eliminated or overrode most existing forms of African autonomy and self-governance.”
After the EU comes apart at the seams, then perhaps all the various international efforts to pool resources and find common purpose — NATO, ASEAN, the OAS — will suffer a similar failure to cohere.
Surely all of this spells disaster for the whole world, yes?
The 1993 formalizing of the EU was for Africa no different than the 1884 Berlin Conference where Europe united to regulate and cooperate in its Scramble for Africa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramble_for_Africa) during heightened colonial activity by European powers. This predecessor union of Europe eliminated or overrode most existing forms of African autonomy and self-governance. Today in Africa the EU plays the role of enforcing neo-colonialism (http://www.socialismonline.net/sites/default/files/Kwame%20Nkrumah%20-%20Neo-Colonialism%20-%20The%20Last%20Stage%20of%20Imperialism.pdf) through its Africa Working Party (COAFR) (http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/council-eu/preparatory-bodies/africa-working-party/) and so-called Africa-EU Strategic Partnership (http://www.africa-eu-partnership.org/en/about-us/what-partnership) that ensure neo-liberal economic policies dominate Africa. We can be sure that when the partnership claims to cooperate on issues like governance and human rights it is not talking about how European countries are governed or human rights abuses in those countries. It is based on the paternalistic premise that Africa is inherently savage and contemporarily corrupt and naturally prone to abusing human rights.
Believing Brexit could represent the beginning of the end for international cooperation, as some have put it, is to believe that the world does or should revolve around Europe. The late Pan-Africanist Kwame Ture (aka Stokely Carmichael) pointed out that those whose thinking is dominated by Euro-centrism and white supremacy often mistakenly “make the particular history of Europe the general history of the world.”
Karl Marx demonstrated this when he asserted that religion is the opium of the masses based on its particular history in Europe. Yet ,on the contrary, other parts of the world were able to experience religion in their histories as an enlightening and morally grounding force.
“Euro-centric thinking commits the error of believing that the particular interests of Europe are the same as the general interests of the rest of the world.”
In Walter Rodney’s seminal book, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa (http://abahlali.org/files/3295358-walter-rodney.pdf) he explains, “The first significant thing about the internationalization of trade in the 15th century was that Europeans took the initiative and went to other parts of the world. No Chinese boats reached Europe, and if any African canoes reached the Americas (as is sometimes maintained) they did not establish two-way links. What was called international trade was nothing but the extension overseas of European interests. The strategy behind international trade and the production that supported it was firmly in European hands, and specifically, in the hands of the sea-going nations from the North Sea to the Mediterranean.”
In scholarly detail, Rodney outlines how the development of Europe meant the underdevelopment of Africa and vice versa. Through centuries of enslavement, the appropriation and refinement of Africa’s raw materials, setting inequitable terms of trade that favor Europe, and brain drain, and through the rape of Africa and other continents Western Europe has become self-appointed as the First World along with the U.S.
To follow Euro-centric thinking is to also to commit the error of believing that the particular interests of Europe are the same as the general interests of the rest of the world. It assumes that the internationalism facilitated by institutions like the EU, NATO, and the UN serves the best interests of Africa, Latin America and Asia. Fundamentally, the economic and political hegemony enjoyed by both Western Europe and the U.S. is at the expense of the “underdeveloped” world, secured by these institutions.
The epic tug-of-war between the internationalism of communist versus capitalist was not the only type of internationalism to emerge from the 20th century. A non-Western Euro-centric reflection recognizes the history of the movement for Pan-Africanism in the struggle for a united African continent under a socialist government. The original Organization of African Unity (OAU) – now the African Union (AU) – was a direct attempt toward that.
“Today in Africa the EU ensures neo-liberal economic policies dominate Africa.”
There was also the internationalism of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), a group of states declaring no formal alignment with or against any major power bloc. Its purpose was to ensure "the national independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and security of non-aligned countries" in their "struggle against imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism, racism, and all forms of foreign aggression, occupation, domination, interference or hegemony as well as against great power and bloc politics." A milestone of NAM was the 1955 Bandung Conference of Asian and African states hosted by Indonesia that gave a significant contribution to promote the movement under the leadership of President Sukarno.
Then there is the very contemporary internationalism of Latin America, ALBA, (the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America), an intergovernmental organization based on the idea of the social, political and economic integration of the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean.
All of these types of internationalism recognized the inherently inhumane nature of capitalist imperialism but, in addition, understood the need to address the cultural white supremacy and racism of global Euro-centrism.
By playing the overall role of maintaining both the domination of international finance capital and the centrality of Western Europe and the U.S., the EU serves in making these three things virtually synonymous and by no means a friend to Africa regardless of official claims (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV%3Ar12540) in mission statements and benevolent public pronouncements.
Today the EU enforces sanctions (http://eeas.europa.eu/cfsp/sanctions/index_en.htm) on African countries that attempt to exercise their right to national self-determination or who in anyway don’t submit to the self-appointed benevolence of Western Europe and the U.S. Openly the EU admits that it imposes, “Sanctions – also referred to as restrictive measures – against third countries… to bring about a change in policy or activity by the target country, part of a country, government, entities or individuals.”
“The moral orientation of Western Europe and it’s NATO ally, the U.S., has not changed since the Berlin Conference.”
Currently the EU is imposing sanctions (http://eeas.europa.eu/cfsp/sanctions/docs/measures_en.pdf) on 37 countries around the world. Sixteen of those are African countries.
Because history has unfolded in a way that the former colonial powers have set the disposition of economic and political power in the world, sanctions can’t really be enforced against the U.S. or Western European countries, making them altogether unjust, immoral and essentially a tool of neo-colonialism.
The moral orientation of Western Europe and it’s NATO ally, the U.S., has not changed since the Berlin Conference, on through to it conspiring to thwart the African independence movement that swept the continent in the 1950-60s, until now with its use of the CIA, MI6, Interpol, USAID, UK’s DFID to maneuver iron fist and velvet glove type strategies to dominate the world and Africa.
If Brexit represents the beginning of the end of the EU, the only appropriate African response would be to celebrate and forge on to make it represent a nail in the coffin of neo-colonialism.
Netfa Freeman is an organizer in Pan-African Community Action, the Events Coordinator at the Institute for Policy Studies, and radio producer and host for Voices With Vision on WPFW 89.3 FM, Washington DC.




More... (http://blackagendareport.com/brexit_africa_neocolonialism)

Brexit As Working Class Rebellion Against Free Trade (print)
worker | June 29, 2016 | 9:34 pm | Analysis, political struggle, UK
https://jackrasmus.com/2016/06/25/brexit-as-working-class-rebellion-against-free-trade-print/

June 25, 2016 by jackrasmus
Class, nationalist, and ethnic elements are all involved in the Brexit vote in a complex integration of protest. Press and media emphasize the nationalist and ethnic (immigrant-anti-immigrant) themes but generally avoid discussing or analyzing the event from a class perspective. But that perspective is fundamental. What Brexit represents is a proxy vote against the economic effects of Free Trade, the customs union called the European Union. Free trade deals always benefit corporations and investors. Free trade is not just about goods and services flows between member countries; it is even more about money and capital flows and what is called direct investment. UK corporations benefit from the opportunity to move capital and invest in cheap labor elsewhere in Europe, mostly the newly added members to the EU since 2000, in eastern europe. Free trade also means the unrestricted flow of labor. Once these east european countries were added to the EU treaty, massive inflows of labor to the UK resulted. Just from Poland, more than a million migrated to the UK alone.

In the pre-2008, when economic conditions were strong and economic growth and job creation the rule, the immigration’s effect on jobs and wages of native UK workers was not a major concern. But with the crash of 2008, and, more importantly, the UK austerity measures that followed, cutting benefits and reducing jobs and wages, the immigration effect created the perception (and some reality) that immigrants were responsible for the reduced jobs, stagnant wages, and declining social services. Immigrant labor, of course, is supported by business since it means availability of lower wages. But working class UK see it as directly impacting wages, jobs, and social service benefits. THis is partly true, and partly not.

So Brexit becomes a proxy vote for all the discontent with the UK austerity, benefit cuts, poor quality job creation and wage stagnation. But that economic condition and discontent is not just a consequence of the austerity policies of the elites. It is also a consequence of the Free Trade effects that permit the accelerated immigration that contributes to the economic effects, and the Free Trade that shifts UK investment and better paying manufacturing jobs elsewhere in the EU.

So Free Trade is behind the immigration and job and wage deterioration which is behind the Brexit proxy vote. The anti-immigration sentiment and the anti-Free Trade sentiment are two sides of the same coin. That is true in the USA with the Trump candidacy, as well as in the UK with the Brexit vote. Trump is vehemently anti-immigrant and simultaneously says he’s against the US free trade deals. This is a powerful political message that Hillary ignores at her peril. She cannot tip-toe around this issue, but she will, required by her big corporation campaign contributors.

Another ‘lesson’ of the UK Brexit vote is that the discontent seething within the populations of Europe, US and Japan today is not accurately registered by traditional polls. This is true in the US today as it was in the UK yesterday.

The Brexit vote cannot be understood without understanding its origins in three elements: the combined effects of Free Trade (the EU), the economic crash of 2008-09, which Europe has not really recovered from having fallen into a double dip recession 2011-13 and a nearly stagnant recovery after, and the austerity measures imposed by UK elites (and in Europe) since 2013.
These developments have combined to create the economic discontent for which Brexit is the proxy. Free Trade plus Austerity plus economic recovery only for investors, bankers, and big corporations is the formula for Brexit.

Where the Brexit vote was strongest was clearly in the midlands and central England-Wales section of the country, its working class and industrial base. Where the vote preferred staying in the EU, was the non-working class areas of London and south England, as well as Scotland and Northern Ireland. Scotland is dependent on oil exports to the EU and thus tightly linked to the trade. Northern Ireland’s economy is tied largely to Scotland and to the other EU economy, Ireland. So their vote was not surprising. Also the immigration effects were far less in these regions than in the English industrial heartland.

Some would argue that the UK has recovered better than most economies since 2013. But a closer look at the elements of that recovery shows it has been centered largely in southern England and in the London metro area. It has been based on a construction-housing boom and the inflow of money capital from abroad, including from China investment in UK infrastructure in London and elsewhere. The UK also struck a major deal with China to have London as the financial center for trading the Yuan currency globally. Money capital and investment concentrated on housing-construction produced a property asset boom, which was weakening before the Brexit. It will now collapse, I predict, by at least 20% or more. The UK’s tentative recovery is thus now over, and was slipping even before the vote.

Also frequently reported is that wages had been rising in the UK. This is an ‘average’ indicator, which is true. But the average has been pulled up by the rising salaries and wages of the middle class professionals and other elements of the work force in the London-South who had benefited by the property-construction boom of recent years. Working class areas just east of London voted strongly for Brexit.

Another theme worth a comment is the Labor Party’s leadership vote for remaining in the EU. What this represents is the further decline of traditional social democratic parties throughout Europe. These parties in recent decades have increasingly aligned themselves with the Neoliberal corporate offensive. That’s true whether the SPD in Germany, the Socialist parties in France, Spain, Italy, Portugal, and Greece, or elsewhere. As these parties have abdicated their traditional support for working class interests, it has opened opportunities for other parties–both right and left–to speak to those interests. Thus we find right wing parties growing in Austria, France (which will likely win next year’s national election in France), Italy, Netherlands, and Scandinavia. Hungary and Poland’s right turn should also be viewed from this perspective. So should Podemos in Spain, Five Star movement in Italy, and the pre-August 2015 Syriza in Greece.

Farther left more marxist-oriented socialist parties are meanwhile in disarray. In general they fail to understand the working class rebellion against free trade element at the core of the recent Brexit vote. They are led by the capitalist media to view the vote as an anti-immigrant, xenophobic, nationalist, right wing dominated development. So they in a number of instances recommended staying in the EU. The justification was to protect the better EU mandated social regulations. Or they argue, incredulously, that remaining in the free trade regime of the EU would centralize the influence of capitalist elements but that would eventually mean a stronger working class movement as a consequence as well. It amounts to an argument to support free trade and neoliberalism in the short run because it theoretically might lead to a stronger working class challenge to neoliberalism in the longer run. That is intellectual and illogical nonsense, of course. Wherever the resistance to free trade exists it should be supported, since Free Trade is a core element of Neoliberalism and its policies that have been devastating working class interests for decades now. One cannot be ‘for’ Free Trade (i.e. remain in the EU) and not be for Neoliberalism at the same time–which means against working class interests.

The bottom line is that right wing forces in both the EU and the US have locked onto the connection between free trade discontent, immigration, and the austerity and lack of economic recovery for all since 2009. They have developed an ideological formulation that argues immigration is the cause of the economic conditions. Mainstream capitalist parties, like the Republicans and Democrats in the US are unable to confront this formulation which has great appeal to working class elements. They cannot confront it without abandoning their capitalist campaign contributors or a center-piece (free trade) of their neoliberal policies. Social-Democratic parties, aligning with their erstwhile traditional capitalist party opponents, offer no alternative. And too many farther left traditional Marxist parties support Free Trade by hiding behind the absurd notion that a stronger, more centralized capitalist system will eventually lead to a stronger, more centralized working class opposition.

Whatever political party formations come out of the growing rebellion against free trade, endless austerity policies, and declining economic conditions for working class elements, they will have to reformulate the connections between immigration, free trade, and those conditions.

Free Trade benefits corporations, investors and bankers on both sides of the ‘trade’ exchange. The benefits of free trade accrue to them. For working classes, free trade means a ‘leveling’ of wages, jobs and benefits. It thus means workers from lower paid regions experience a rise in wages and benefits, but those in the formerly higher paid regions experience a decline. That’s what’s been happening in the UK, as well as the US and north America.

Free Trade is the ‘holy grail’ of mainstream economics. It assumes that free trade raises all boats. Both countries benefit. But what that economic ideology does not go on to explain is that how does that benefit get distributed within each of the countries involved in the free trade? Who benefits in terms of class incomes and interests? As the history of the EU and UK since 1992 shows, bankers and big corporate exporters benefit. Workers from the poor areas get to migrate to the wealthier (US and UK) and thus benefit. But the indigent workers in the former wealthier areas suffer a decline, a leveling. These effects have been exacerbated by the elite policies of austerity and the free money for bankers and investors central bank policies since 2009.

So workers see their wages stagnant or decline, their social benefits cut, their jobs or higher paid jobs leave, while they see immigrants entering and increasing competition for jobs. They hear (and often believe) that the immigrants are responsible for the reduction of benefits and social services that are in fact caused by the associated austerity policies. They see investors, bankers, professionals and a few fortunate 10% of their work force doing well, with incomes accelerating, while their incomes decline. In the UK, the focus and solution is seen as exiting the EU free trade zone. In the US, however, it’s not possible for a given ‘state’ to leave the USA, as it is for a ‘state’ like the UK to leave the EU. And there are no national referenda possible constitutionally in the US.

The solution in the US is not to build a wall to keep immigrants out, but to tear down the Free Trade wall that has been erected by US neoliberal policies in order to keep US jobs in. Trumpism has come up with a reactionary solution to the free trade-immigration-economic nexus that has significant political appeal. He proposes stopping labor flows, but proposes nothing concrete about stopping the cross-country flows of money, capital and investment that are at the heart of free trade.

http://houstoncommunistparty.com/brexit-as-working-class-rebellion-against-free-trade-print/

**********************************************************************************

Brexit and the Ideology of Free Trade
worker | June 29, 2016 | 9:36 pm | Analysis, political struggle, UK
https://jackrasmus.com/2016/06/27/brexit-and-the-ideology-of-free-trade/

June 27, 2016 by jackrasmus
In response to my recent post on ‘Brexit as a rebellion against free trade’, a commentator to the piece raised an important, reasoned question, my response to which I’d like to share more visibly with readers of this blog. The question(s) have to do with the relative effects on wages and jobs between countries jointly involved in a free trade agreement. The question the commentator raised addresses the typical apologists of free trade argument that while some workers wages in some countries may fall due to free trade, workers’ wages in other countries rise. The net effect, according to the apologists’ argument, is that wages overall rise–i.e. wage benefits from free trade in the one region or sector rising more than it falls in the other country or region. This apology is a corollary of the general free trade theory argument that ‘all parties to free trade’ benefit from it. Here is my reply to that important question. First, is an excerpt from the commentator’s question (whose full response can be read at the end of my previous post on ‘Brexit as Working Class Rebellion to Free Trade’). That is followed by my own further comments on free trade and a critique of the apologists who argue free trade always benefits all parties at all times, and wages on net rise from it–declining in one or some country, but rising more in others so that the net effect is positive wage gains throughout the free trade zone.

Commentator’s Statement (excerpt)

“You sum up by saying: “Who benefits in terms of class incomes and interests? As the history of the EU and UK since 1992 shows, bankers and big corporate exporters benefit. Workers from the poor areas get to migrate to the wealthier (US and UK) and thus benefit. But the indigent workers in the former wealthier areas suffer a decline, a leveling.” Can you further give us your thoughts on “workers” or the indigent in the global south? Do you believe that free trade has basically immiserated everyone but the rich (with the exception of ‘poverty alleviation’ in China, which, as is often noted, does not necessarily have to do with free trade as such) in the south? Or would you say that part of its ‘distributional effect’ has been to partly redistribute some of the North’s previously greater working class prosperity to the South. I ask because your post otherwise seems to be saying something that left commentary seems generally to avoid wanting to say: that within the North, at least in part, working class animosity to free trade is legitimately rooted in the fact that “immigrants are taking our jobs.” .

My Response to the Commentator:

First, I’m going to assume his remarks re. ‘north’ and ‘south’ refer to two countries who are participants in a free trade treaty. My response does not assume it is just a question of north-south trade in general, where a free trade treaty is not in effect. Here’s my comment to the question.

“As I noted, free trade is not just about goods and services flows, but money capital flows as well. Read the NAFTA agreement and it’s clear US elite’s emphasized the right to invest directly in Mexico (foreign direct investment rights) and repatriate profits with minimal interference from Mexico’s legal system. As FDI and money flows from the north to the ‘south’, in this case, multinational companies that expand their operations in the ‘south’ often do pay higher wages and some benefits compared to the domestic businesses compensation packages. So wages in this select group of relocated companies (or expanded companies) do rise, but it is a relatively small proportion of the total work force. The booming economies (initially) in the south (say, Central AMerica, as example) from the massive money capital inflows also results in some additional rise in wages. But the wage gains are not significant in terms of longer term; they eventually dissipate and disappear when the business cycle turns down again. This is now evident in central america, again for example, as the money flows into the region reverse and return to the US as capital flight out of the emerging markets. So, yes, there is some wage gain in the south from free trade, but it is not significant as part of the total work force and tends to be temporary and reverses with the next cycle. Yes, defenders of free trade often cite this effect, but don’t provide data that shows how much free trade boosts ‘south’ wages. They typically assume all the change in wages is due to free trade, which of course is nonsense; and they always cherry pick the point in time when the wage increases rise the most and ignore the subsequent wage retreat that also occurs under free trade. Their argument is not an economic but a false moral one: free trade is good overall for workers everywhere because it rises for some in the south. Their data also does not compare the relative gains in the south to the losses in the north (which must include adjustments for price systems to be accurate). That free trade results in wage compression in the north is evident in what is called the ‘export-import wage differential’. THis has been compressing over time due to free trade. It means jobs and wages lost to free trade imports in the US exceed jobs and wages gained from an increase in US exports. The net result is a combined wage (and job) decline in the US. The US decline tends to be permanent, while the south gain tends to be temporary. Is this net US decline greater than the net south gain–in the longer run? is the key question. But I’ve seen no analyses by apologists for free trade to add up the data and evidence. In short, they make an assumption with little or no evidence, or evidence that is selective. That’s not economics, that’s economic ideology, which is what free trade is essentially about.”

http://houstoncommunistparty.com/brexit-and-the-ideology-of-free-trade/

The abolition of capital is one helluva beautiful thing to behold, no? Burn this shit down.