We are witnessing a profound historical transformation in the role and form of the modern state. Nation-states, which emerged as a response to the political fragmentation of the Middle Ages, have for centuries constituted the fundamental framework within which capitalism developed. Processes of centralization of power have enabled the unification of homogeneous economic spaces, serving the formation of national markets and the expansion of the bourgeoisie. In this context, the principle of state sovereignty and the construction of national identity have served as essential political tools for the organization and stabilization of social and productive relations.
The national market, far from being a neutral space, is configured as a political device regulated by the state and functional to the consolidation of economic and social power. The nexus between the nation-state and the national market structurally tends to generate competitive dynamics between states, as each is called upon to guarantee the conditions for capital accumulation within its own space and to project them externally. This results in systemic competition that, while taking historically variable forms, incorporates within itself the possibility of conflict, even war.With the national market consolidated, the dynamics of capitalist accumulation push toward expansion beyond state borders. The search for raw materials, new markets, and investment opportunities are not a contingency, but an intrinsic tendency to the valorization process. In this sense, imperialism and, in its early historical phase, colonialism does not constitute a deviation, but rather a coherent development of the relationship between state and capital. Colonial conquests, militarily and politically supported by states, are part of a logic of expansion of capitalist relations on a global scale.
This dynamic is particularly evident in the nineteenth century, with phenomena such as the scramble for Africa, during which European powers divided up entire territories among themselves. The ideology of the "civilizing mission," the appeal to national prestige and state greatness, not only masks economic interests but actively contributes to their legitimacy, playing a material role in building consensus and organizing domination.
In the contemporary context, the role of the state is not diminished, but is being reorganized on a larger scale. The emergence of powers such as China, the United States, India, and Russia signals the consolidation of continental-scale state formations, characterized by a strong integration of political apparatus, productive capacity, and geopolitical projection. Nation-states are not disappearing, but are being progressively hierarchized within an increasingly polarized international system, in which territorial, demographic, and economic dimensions assume a decisive role.
In this framework, competition between powers cannot be reduced either to a pure economic logic or to a mere "will to power": both dimensions are intertwined within complex strategies for the reproduction of power. Contemporary forms of inter-imperialist conflict tend to favor indirect methods, where the goal is not so much the immediate acquisition of resources as the modification of the systemic conditions within which rival actors operate. This establishes a logic of relative competition, in which the strengthening of one actor depends on the structural weakening of the other.
From this perspective, tensions involving strategic areas such as Iran or Venezuela can also be interpreted in relation to the control of global energy flows. China's growing centrality as the world's leading oil importer makes these flows a crucial arena of geoeconomic competition: Beijing imports approximately 10-11 million barrels per day, equal to over 70% of its needs, with a significant share coming from the Middle East. Rather than establishing direct and stable control of resources, the strategies implemented tend to produce conditions of instability and uncertainty that impact costs, access, and the security of supplies.
Strategic junctions such as the Strait of Hormuz play a crucial role, carrying approximately 20% of the world's oil and between 17 and 20 million barrels per day, as well as a significant share of liquefied natural gas. Controlling or destabilizing these passages is not only of regional significance, but also a tool for exerting systemic pressure capable of affecting the balance of power among major powers, particularly those most dependent on energy imports.
These dynamics are intertwined with internal transformations within advanced capitalist economies. From a materialist perspective, deindustrialization and financialization should be understood as moments in a broader restructuring of capital. Faced with difficulties in valorizing production, capital reorganizes production on a global scale and, at the same time, intensifies its use of financial instruments not as an alternative but as a complement to it.
Financialization does not replace production, but redefines its conditions, accentuating the dependence of production processes on speculative dynamics and short-term logic.
With the end of the "social democratic" compromise between capital and labor, which had ensured a partial redistribution of wealth, these transformations are also reflected on the political and institutional level. Rather than automatically determining authoritarian outcomes, they redefine the scope within which states operate, narrowing the space for mediation and intensifying the use of instruments of control. In this context, we can observe tendencies toward the weakening of formal guarantees and the growing management of social conflict in terms of public order, dynamics also observed in Italy under the government led by Giorgia Meloni.
Overall, a situation emerges in which competition between powers, the restructuring of capital, and the transformation of state structures are increasingly intertwined. The contradictions of contemporary capitalism are manifested not only on the economic level, but also affect the entire political and social structure, shaping a system characterized by growing instability and conflicts that tend to unfold simultaneously on a global and internal scale.
The escalation of the conflict between imperialist powers, which brings the concrete possibility of global conflict back to the horizon, marks a historical transition in which the contradictions of capitalism are manifesting themselves in increasingly violent forms. In this scenario, the emergence of a direct role for the exploited multitude can no longer be postponed: a role capable of breaking with dominant mediations, reclaiming the language of class struggle, and openly addressing the issue of radically transforming the existing order.
The competition between different fractions of capital though riddled with internal contradictions continues to be unloaded on the exploited, fueling divisions, conflicts, and hierarchies that weaken their capacity to respond. The oppressed are thus mobilized, pitted against each other, and sacrificed within dynamics that respond to logics of power and accumulation that exclude them.
This fragmentation must be countered by a clear break: the reconstruction of an internationalist solidarity among the exploited, not as an abstract principle, but as a material practice of struggle. Only through concrete processes of organization, conflict, and cooperation can a force emerge capable of countering the intensification of domination, exploitation, and war, opening up the real possibility of overcoming the social relations that produce them.
https://alternativalibertaria.fdca.it/wpAL/
_________________________________________
Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten