1975 - Resolution of the Strategic Direction

From MLM Library
Jump to: navigation, search


"The United States has chosen to be the mortal enemy of all the people's governments, of all the mobilizations of the socialist scientific conscience everywhere in the world, of all the anti-imperialist movements of the earth. Their history over the past 50 years and more, the intrinsic characteristics of their fundamental structures, their political, economic and military dynamics make the United States the prototype of the international fascist counterrevolution ".-George L. Jackson

We begin this relationship with a quote from the great African-American fighter assassinated by the imperialist gorillas in the San Quentin prison because in its essentiality it captures the heart of a fundamental issue for us: the question of imperialism. The general terms of the problem can be summarized as follows. Imperialism is a world domination system at the center of which the United States stands, at the center of which are the large multinational companies and their interests. This system has been structured and stratified over the years for functional areas of production and consumption that are at the same time political and military areas. The countries of the "Old Continent" make up an important economic, political and military area of ​​imperialism. This area, from a substantially homogeneous capitalist point of view, in strategic terms is called the "Western democratic system". In recent times, after the victorious liberation struggle in Vietnam and Cambodia, after the crisis in Cyprus and the Middle East, this "system", together with Japan, has become the test-bed of the entire imperialist system. This means that it is mainly in Europe that the permanence and disruption of the world equilibria enshrined in the Second World War will be increasingly played out. The economic, political and military unity under the Atlantic sign of this area is in other words decisive for the United States. And it is so far that it is not at all hazardous to argue that from the "Amerikan" point of view (which is not only that of the USA but also that of its Atlantic allies), the "Western democratic system" constitutes in this conjuncture a strategic totality (political, economic, military) that does not allow mutilations and does not tolerate changes in substance.

Italy, as an organic component of this system and therefore of the imperialist world system headed by the USA, is in an extremely important position because:

  • with the crisis of the regime that tormented it, constitutes a crisis factor of the whole imperialist line;
  • due to the great influence of the PCI is a strong point of the social-imperialist alignment and, after the recent Portuguese events, this should not be overlooked;
  • by the not inconsiderable force of the revolutionary movement it can be transformed into a disruptive revolutionary area of ​​Europe.

This situation is extremely excellent for the revolutionary forces of our country because worldwide imperialism is shaken by violent convulsions and everything suggests that the worst has not yet come. The crisis that passes through it, undoubtedly the most serious after the Second World War, is at the same time economic, political and military. Economic because it is a cyclical crisis of overproduction in the presence of a galloping inflation and a financial and monetary disorder never registered. Politics because it triggers the instability factors of some subaltern regimes and activates the workers, proletarian and revolutionary struggle of the oppressed classes both in the USA and in Europe. Military because it causes a growing separation from NATO and the defection of some important countries.

The force of the crisis was the struggles of the peoples and classes that with revolutionary determination opposed an ideological, political and armed resistance to its planetary hegemonic claims. More precisely, the contradictions that have forced imperialism to the "crisis", to the defensive and therefore to enter the historical phase of its dissolution are three:

  • the countries struggling for their liberation and for communism;
  • Soviet social-imperialism also concerned with the control of strategic areas, the raking of raw materials, new markets and outlets for its investments;
  • workers' struggles and the taking off of proletarian guerrillas in its industrial and metropolitan centers.

It is the complex dialectic between these contradictions that irreversibly pushes towards a redefinition of the relations of force between imperialism, social-imperialism and revolutionary forces, and which therefore feeds, in the Western capitalist world in general, and in Italy in particular, conditions that are objectively favorable to growth. of the openly revolutionary initiative. It is up to the revolutionary classes and their political and military avant-gardes to seize the opportunity.

On the European theater imperialism reacts to its crisis by pursuing three fundamental objectives:

  • it favors a process of global and open counter-revolution against every antagonist force;
  • reduce the strength of the working class within each country and re-establish favorable relations with the "atlantic" local ruling classes;
  • discourage the autonomic ambitions that have made their way in some countries to bring them back under the "American wing".

Economic maneuvers and secret services are working diligently in this perspective. The use of the "oil crisis" is only the last example, even if the evidence of the facts has proved a double-edged sword. Because if on one hand the wild inflation, the productive recession and the danger of a real depression have allowed the political blackmail ("if you want to fill the deficit of the oil deficit and restore, at least in part, the balance of payments with our loans you have to liquidate without hesitation the "communist" pressures that erode the stability of political regimes "); on the other they have sharpened class tensions and thus favored the revolutionary drives. It is clear, however, that the "crisis of imperialism" does not immediately mean "collapse", but an imperialist global counter-revolution, namely:

a) restructuring of basic economic models;

b) restructuring of economic functions within a strictly planned international division of labor and markets;

c) re-adaptation of the institutional, state and military structures of the less stable and more threatened regimes within the framework of the imperialist order.

To affirm that Italy is the weak link in the "Western democratic system" therefore also wants to say that it is the country in which the counterrevolution will grow stronger and the whole imperialist system will take responsibility for this process. This means that the Italian proletariat, to the extent that the class war in the country intensifies, will not be able to "deal" only with its internal enemy, but with the entire economic, political and military organization of imperialism. More generally, it means that the revolutionary class war in the European metropolises is immediately also an anti-imperialist war of liberation, because the emancipation of a people in an imperialist context must come to terms with imperialist repression. There are no "national routes" to communism, because in our time there is no possibility of withdrawing individually from the system of imperialist domination. Faced with the request for power that underlies the movements of communist forces operating on the European continent, the imperialist counter revolution takes on a different specificity only in terms of form and intensity: not by quality. What is the difference between the CDU and the DC? Strauss is certainly not different from Fanfani! For this reason, proletarian internationalism is our first banner of struggle; the continental area is the overall scenario within which "the laws of the conduct of war that affect the overall situation of war" must be studied; the national territory is the operative theater of our guerrilla; the industrial and metropolitan class poles, the strengths and the irradiation of the revolutionary civil war.


Given that the crisis is the result of the contradiction that has opposed the productive forces to the relations of capitalist production, that is, of the antagonism expressed with continuity by the workers' struggles of the last six years, let us see its economic specificity. The current economic crisis has three main characteristics: - it is a crisis of overproduction or rather of underconsumption: after the strong expansion of the years 1950-1960 (economic miracle) we entered a phase characterized by a strong imbalance between quantity of produced or producible goods and market absorption. This is the historical aspect of the current crisis; - it is a crisis in the presence of a sharp rise in raw material costs, including oil. This has the effect that, to the extent that the price of machinery increases, as a result of the price increase of both the raw materials that compose it, and the auxiliary materials to its operation, the average rate of profit decreases proportionally. The increase in the cost of raw materials also produces the reduction or arrest of the entire process of capital reproduction, both because the proceeds from the sale of goods are insufficient to reproduce all the constituent elements of the goods, and because it is made impossible the continuation of the reproductive process on a scale corresponding to the technical enlargement of it; - it is a crisis in the presence of a sharp fall in the average rate of profit. This is the specific aspect of the current economic crisis. It is important to analyze the consequences that this strong fall in average profit rate has produced and will produce on the economic and political structure of the system. If the tendential fall of the average rate of profit is a fundamental characteristic of the capitalist process (in that it tends increasingly to increase the constant capital in relation to variable capital) in Italy in the last decade (1966-1974) this tendential fall has undergone a notable acceleration process mainly due to the overwhelming rise of the chemical industry, as a multinational imperialist industry (Montedison). In fact, the chemical industry is characterized by a rate of high surplus value (ie high productivity values ​​for each individual worker), but by an average rate of very low profit. This leads to the fact that it is increasingly difficult for the chemical capitalist to find the capital necessary for technological restructuring within the production process and therefore must resort to debt. But given the large amount of finance capital, it becomes increasingly difficult to round up these funds within the private financial market (private finance and shareholding) for which it has to resort to state loans. In this way the necessity of establishing good relations with the state apparatus for obtaining these loans at the most advantageous conditions is born for the chemical capitalist. From here to transforming the state apparatus into a structure strictly functional to its development needs, the step is short and indeed absolutely necessary. The state therefore assumes, in the economic field, the functions of a large bank at the service of large multinational imperialist groups. From the way in which the bank-state raises "socially" these necessary capitals (which are nothing but total surplus-value "assigned" to multinationals), the strong inflationary process characteristic of current capitalist development arises in the phase dominated by large multinational imperialist groups. It is clear that the process exemplified here for the chemical sector is valid for any other sector in which the multinational capitalist structure dominates (ie it is valid for Montedison, as for FIAT, as for Pirelli) and applies to every function of the State (economic , politics, military). The state becomes a direct expression of the great multinational imperialist groups, with a national center. That is, the state becomes a specific function of capitalist development in the phase of the imperialism of multinational corporations; becomes: Imperialist State of the Multinationals. Italian capitalism therefore tries to use the current crisis to build the imperialist state of multinational corporations. That is, in Italy, too, we try to follow the American-German model.


We see the consequences that the fall of the average rate of profit produces on the class structure. In sectors where the rate of profit has extremely low values, there is an absolute decrease in labor-power used. For example for Montedison, in the period 1966-71, in the chemical sector, there are investments in fixed plants for 600 billion, with a significant increase compared to previous years and a decrease in workforce from 70,761 to 70,661 units. This trend is more than confirmed even in the last four years. On the other hand, the capitalist system as a producer of labor-force goods produces a large increase in the total population. Suffice it to say that at the beginning of the 1800s the population of the earth was calculated around one billion units; with the advent of the capitalist system in 150 years there is a quadrupling of the world population (currently we are around 4 billion). From all this we can draw a generalization: the tendential fall of the average rate of profit produces a decrease in the labor force used in relation to the total population: that is, in the face of a constant increase in the total population there is not proportionally an increase in work used. We have previously said that the specific aspect of the current economic crisis is the sharp fall of the average rate of profit. Therefore it can be argued that the current crisis will produce a significant decrease in the labor force used in relation to the overall population. This phenomenon will happen more and more accelerated and will be a stable feature of our economic development. All this produces and will produce on the class fabric stable modifications that can be schematized. With respect to the overall population, there will be: a) a continuous decrease of wage earners with stable employment; b) an increase in the "reserve army" (reservoir in which to draw in moments of expansion), that is, of salaried workers with unstable employment (see currently the use of the layoff fund); c) an increase in that part of the population that will be definitively expelled from the capitalist process (the marginalized). The latter phenomenon has so far not been manifested in acute terms thanks to emigration which has meant for a certain period the outlet for the overproduction of labor power. Currently, given the strong fall at the international level of the average profit rate, this vent valve can no longer function. The emigrants return home to repopulate the ranks of the unemployed and underemployed, that is, ultimately, the marginalized. With respect to class behaviors, we can hypothesize: - salaried workers with stable employment A part of these reflects the level of immediate awareness that is the defense of their condition of wage earners (fair wages). They form the material basis of reformism. Another part, and it is the most productive stratum, the one in which exploitation is increasingly accentuated (the worker of the chain), develops a revolutionary conscience, that is, the abolition of wage labor and the destruction of capitalist society. - marginalized The marginalized are a product of capitalist society in its current phase of development and their number is constantly increasing. They are used by capitalist society, as a consumer society, as consumers. However, they are consumers without wages. From this contradiction comes "crime". The "economic" use of crime by capitalism lies in the fact that it contributes to the destruction of the goods necessary to continue the cycle. To be clear, one could very well build thief-proof automobiles, but this goes against the interests of FIAT. A part of the marginalized reflects at an immediate level the bourgeois consciousness: extreme individualism, aspiration to an increasing "consumption". Another part reflects the revolutionary consciousness of the abolition of their condition as marginalized, hence the abolition of society based on wage labor. - reserve army As regards the reserve army, the levels of consciousness are given by the interweaving of the levels of conscience found within salaried workers with stable employment and the marginalized.


If the years 1970-1974 were characterized by strong contradictions within the bourgeoisie (to exemplify the clash Montedison-FIAT), contradictions that have vertically split the structure of the state, the parties, the union forces, the current period seems characterized by a reached the stage of "armistice" between the various Italian capitalist groups: that is, faced with the sharpening of the crisis, the various capitalist groups have tightened their ranks. Armistice does not mean, however, the end of the contradictions within the bourgeois front, it simply means a momentary freezing of these contradictions, which is manifested through a reached agreement (also of a temporary nature) on the division of power between the strongest bourgeois groups. It would be a mistake, however, to think that the contradictions that divide the bourgeois front are contradictions of an antagonistic nature. They are simply tactical variants of the same project: the construction of the Imperialist State of the Multinationals. The essence of the inter-capitalist conflict lies simply in this: what will be the multinational imperialist group that, by guiding the construction project of the Imperialist State, will secure the largest share of power. The political project of the DC, which at this moment finds its most authoritative interpreter in Fanfani, aims to make DC itself the backbone of this project of the Imperialist State. Putting itself at all times as the manager of the "armistice" reached, the DC tries to be the element of continuous dialectical mediation between the interests of the various capitalist groups. In the intentions of the DC it will be necessary to realize, in a process characterized by contradictions in the bourgeois line and a strong clash between bourgeoisie and proletariat, the construction "piece by piece" of the Imperialist State and at the end of this process a complete integration between DC and the Imperialist State. It is clear that this process, however, will certainly not be peaceful, but will increasingly assume the characteristics of the "civil war". This also, and above all, for the profound crisis of hegemony which forces the bourgeoisie, its political representatives and the institutions of the State to resolve class contradictions more and more by means of force, using the whole apparatus of coercion and only that. More specifically, the Christian Democratic political project, openly supported also by Tanassi, da Sogno and Almirante, proposes to build around the fundamentalist bloc of the DC a broader and more articulate "historical block" openly reactionary and counter-revolutionary, functional to the construction of the Imperialist State. . The administrative elections in June and even more the upcoming political elections are played out in this long-term perspective. And so too the dominant "themes" of political propaganda in these sinister electoral campaigns do not have a contingent nature as the revisionists believe, but they are also a stage in the "piece by piece" construction of the Imperialist state. In this regard, the question of "public order" and of the war on "political crime" is more emblematic than to gain votes, it aims at the preventive militarization of the territory and the class struggle or is directly instrumental to the need to reconstruct a framework. of mass values ​​that allow the restructuring and concentration of all the powers of the State in the perspective of the counter-revolutionary civil war. Because this is the road, the only road, which the Christian Democrats indicate and travel to cope with the crisis of the regime. Beyond the "conciliar" appearances, what the DC wants is an open confrontation between the revolutionary and progressive forces and the counter-revolutionary historical bloc. It seeks a vertical rift that marginalizes and annihilates the forces hostile to the imperialist restructuring of the State of the Regime. It aims to guarantee the owners of the imperialist multinationals: 1) - the strengthening of the military structures and staff in the two directions of a functionalisation to NATO projects and of the anti-guerrilla specialization against internal subversion 2) - the creation of a "regime magistracy" and the stiffening of the penal provisions on those chapters particularly relevant to the class war, from the rules on the possession of weapons, to those on preventive detention, to police detention, to the border, to the exemplary penalties for revolutionary militants; 3) - the adoption of "preventive" measures such as the militarization of the big cities, of the institutions of the most exposed men of the regime. And more generally, precisely to achieve these goals with the least number of contradictions, it aims at a precise constitutional reform, the direct election of the President of the Republic and a decisive increase in the power of the Executive: in short the so-called "Presidential Republic" . Restructuring the state to beat the labor movement on the ground of civil war: this is the essence of the Christian Democratic political project.


The attempt to build corporate ties between the regime's business class and workers' union organizations is more functional than one believes in the formation of the Imperialist state. Agnelli, as a spokesman for the in-house, had anticipated him in his first speech as President of Confindustria, when he supported the need to "come to a social pact that, 30 years from April '45, redefine the national goals of the people Italian in view of the 80s and 90s. But this is not a pact between unions - entrepreneurs - the government ". He reiterated this year too: "The harshness of the economic crisis, its social complications and the need for a prompt return to development, envisage general objectives for the industrial organization, which are in large part common to the organizations of the workers. I believe that unions and entrepreneurial representation face the same problem: the construction of a general framework made of choices and guidelines that do not favor passive consumption, income and parasitic accumulation, but rather initiative and capacity ". According to Agnelli, therefore, the major industrial-multinational forces of the country should assume a more direct responsibility in the management of power by setting a series of political principles and technical solutions to achieve an "agreed" management of the crisis today, and the recovery tomorrow with the trade union Confederations and with the Government. What interests us is that the "social pact" is justified not as an "anti-conjugal" function, therefore as a tactical agreement, but as an advanced requirement and therefore as a stabilization project for the 1980s! The caging operation that it presupposes can be defined: the organic incorporation of the working class into capital and into the state. It follows the logic that the working class to save itself must save the master; to save the master he must save the state; to save the State, it must assume the economic costs of productive reconversion and the sacrifices of imperialist restructuring. It is a miserable logic and it is worth taking it into account only because it is endorsed by the union leaders and those of the Communist Party.

The falsity of the arguments brought to justify the "corporate pact" lies in this:

  • the worker interest is identified with the interest of the development of the great multinational capital and the interest of the multinationals with the national interest;
  • the need for productive conversion of large capital is contraband by reformist disposition;

The "corporate pact" referred to the factory wants to hide a reality that for years the workers' avant-gardes call "factory fascism", that is a restructuring of the cycle and organization of work with its implications:

a) breaking the rigidity of the force- work (mobility: systematic destruction of the avant-garde nuclei, increased use of the facilities, intensification of exploitation);

b) militarization of the dominion apparatus (corporatization of the managers, of the managers' cadres, yellow syndicalism, use of the fascists for "dirty work", espionage).

With respect to the workers' struggle, a decisive consequence of the "pact" is therefore a more modern conception of repression: trade unionist and policeman, master spying and union control merge into a single design of annihilation of autonomy and antagonism. An example is the tendency, already demonstrated in many factories where the autonomous struggle is particularly incisive, that sees the union executives and the personnel directions committed to collaborate for the identification of the "provocateurs" with the specific objective of their elimination by dismissal. o complaint to the judiciary. In essence, this corporate proposal is decidedly reactionary. It prefigures a ferocious dictatorship against the revolutionary class forces; and to the extent that it is established in the factory, it tends to project itself onto the general political terrain, closing every space for the revolutionary class war.


In the official left there is no understanding of the profound structural and political transformations that are being carried out by the DC and the Confindustria within the global imperialist counter-revolution. Above all, the PCI demonstrates its inability to indicate an alternative class strategy. The line reiterated at the XIVth Congress is a definitive demonstration. The "strategy" of the Historical Compromise sinks its presuppositions into two decisive misunderstandings: the warmongering character of imperialism, and the reactionary and imperialist character of the DC. Berlinguer, this Kautsky in sixteenth indicates the tendency at world level and even sees confirmation from the behavior of the US, the politics of "coexistence" and "cooperation" coming to prophesy "a system of cooperation and integration so vast as to progressively overcome the logic imperialism and capitalism and to understand the most varied aspects of the economic and civil development of all humanity ". There is no antagonism for Berlinguer between imperialism, social-imperialism and revolution, but contradictions in the way of a "peaceful" and "civil" solution. Reality denies it. The general tendency in the world today is that which indicates the Chinese comrades: it is the revolution. Imperialism and social-imperialism are increasingly found in open contradiction and the liberation wars of the peoples know new victories. So it is in Vietnam, Cambodia or on the other hand in Portugal. Even for what concerns Italy, the philocapitalistic idyll of Berlinguer has no limits of modesty. With a theoretical operation far removed from historical and dialectical materialism, he proposes the "compromise with the Catholic popular masses", that is, out of the way, with the Christian Democracy of which he neglects or even denies the imperialist, anti-national and anti-people character that years ago of this party the soul and the brain of all the most reactionary and fascist thrusts that are recorded with ever increasing intensity in the country. To such an extent it is deserted by Marxism and Leninism, it is defeated by the class analysis that the main contradiction is now presented as a contradiction between "democratic" and "anti-democratic", where the former are all those who act in the constitutional area, and second all the others, it does not matter if the fascists, revolutionaries or workers who pursue "particularistic" or "corporate" objectives of struggle. The function that the PCI assigns therefore, is to recover within the "democratic system" all the antagonistic thrusts of the proletariat, distorting them in reformist terms. The "historical compromise" in fact does not presuppose a strategic antagonism to the program of realization of the imperialist state (in the "Christian Democratic" imperialist state there will be a little more policemen, in the PCI a little less, but only because everyone must be a policeman of himself), but presents itself simply as a different formula for the management of power: of that power. The "historical compromise" does not correspond to a political need of class, but more reductively to an opportunistic advantage of a class stratum which, by strengthening the imperialist system, realizes some miserable advantages. This is why the PCI is now violently opposed to the revolutionary movement and the class forces from which the latter draws strength and food. This is why the revisionist drawings will certainly be defeated. However, we must not underestimate the ambivalent function that in the short term the line of the "historic compromise" takes place within the regime crisis:

  • on the one hand it constitutes a powerful factor in the regime's political crisis; it incites terror and accelerates contradictions in the most conservative and reactionary sectors:
  • on the other it prevents the country from becoming ungovernable, that is, it hinders the development of the class war.

Because this means that while the conservative or reactionary sectors, preoccupied by the turn of events, design and nurture openly counterrevolutionary survival designs, large sections of the labor and popular movement remain caught in the paralyzing trap of the "compromise" line. And this line, freezing the class forces, delays and hinders the mass-level awareness of the necessity of war, and this at the very moment when the situation is very favorable for the revolutionary forces. When one forgets that the exploited must want war, one has chosen for the peace of the master !!


Our line, within this general framework of projects and contradictions, remains that of unifying and overturning every partial manifestation of proletarian antagonism in a convergent attack on the "heart of the State". It begins with the very clear consideration that the imperialist state is in its making, to guarantee and impose the overall restructuring plan and therefore also the particular projects, and that therefore outside the working class-state relationship, it is not gives, as indeed it is never given, revolutionary struggle. The intermediate objective is the collapse and the definitive crisis of the Christian Democratic regime, a necessary premise for a "historic turning point" for communism. The main task of revolutionary action at this stage is therefore the maximum possible political disarticulation of both the regime and the state. And that is the maximum possible development of contradictions between the institutions and, within each of them, between the different tactical projects for solving the crisis and within each of them. The transition to a more advanced phase of military disarticulation of the State and of the Regime is premature and therefore wrong for two reasons:

1) the political crisis of the regime is very advanced, but we are not yet close to the "collapse point";

2) the accumulation of revolutionary forces on the terrain of the armed struggle, even if it has seen a great acceleration in the last two years, is not yet such for expansion on the territory and for political and military maturity to allow the passage to a new phase of the war.

The destruction of the enemy and the political and military mobilization of popular forces can only go hand in hand. In other words, the strengthening of proletarian power is the condition and premise of the transition to the most advanced phase of the military disarticulation of the regime and of the enemy state.


Urban guerrilla plays a decisive role in the action of political disarticulation of the regime and the state. It directly affects the enemy and paves the way for the resistance movement. It is around the guerrilla that the resistance movement and the autonomy area are constructed and articulated and not vice versa. Widening this area means first of all developing the organization of the guerrilla, its political and fire capacity. All those positions that see the growth of the guerrilla as a consequence of the development of the legal or semi-legal area of ​​the so-called "autonomy" are wrong. It is good to clarify this point. Within what is called the "autonomy area", very different positions are piled up and stratified. Some, who define their place within the class struggle by "subjective", recognize part of this area more to impose within it needs and problems to it, namely to "recover it on the terrain of politics", which to favor its progressive revolutionary, strategic, tactical and organizational definition. In our opinion, the whole question must be dealt with starting from the class stratum which, more than any other, undergoes the intensification of exploitation, resulting from capitalist and imperialist restructuring projects. Revolutionary theory is the theory of politico-military needs for the "liberation" of this layer of class. Indeed, it alone expresses the universality of class interests in power, if not yet in conscience (which means organization). Only around its needs can the needs of the social strata marginalized by the restructuring process be organized and assumed, and the revisionist, reformist or corporate purposes of that part of the working class can be beaten, which finds self-interest, even if miserable, in strengthening the system of imperialist domination. The "autonomous assemblies" are not the vanguard of this layer of class because they express, today, a very partial and especially sectorial interpretation of its needs. When they arose, they constituted a decisive factor in the process of overcoming "group", but today they risk ending up themselves in the ass of a lot of that approach. What predisposes to this danger is the "fetish of legality" and that is the inability to get out of the false contraposition between "legality" and "illegality". In other words, the autonomous assemblies fail to pose the question of organization starting from real political needs and thus end up delimiting the latter within the type of legal organization they have set themselves. Cutting the foot to get it into the shoe! Some, more aware of the contradiction in which they are debating, come to admit a dualism of organization and thus to propose again the unattainable theory of the "armed arm" in the ancient bankruptcy logic of the Third Internationalist. But, on pain of the extinction of their revolutionary function, they in this new situation must make a dialectical leap if they want to remain adherent to the fundamental assumption of organizing, on the terrain of the class war, the antagonism of the "objectively" revolutionary layer. Out of this perspective there is nothing but minoritarianism or subordination to revisionism. The urban guerrilla organizes the "strategic core" of the class movement, not the armed wing. In urban guerrilla there are no contradictions between thinking and acting militarily and giving the first place to politics. It carries out its revolutionary initiative according to a political-military mass line. Mass line for the guerrilla does not mean, as someone misunderstands, "to organize the mass movement on the ground of the armed struggle", or at least does not mean this moment. In the immediate term, the fundamental aspect of the question remains the construction of the Combatant Party as a real interpreter of the political and military needs of the "objectively" revolutionary class stratum and the articulation of class-level combat organizations on the various fronts of the war. revolutionary. The difference is not cheap and it is worth explaining it because it hides a divergence on the question of the organization that is not secondary. The substance of divergence lies in the fact that the first thesis flattens to dissolve, the organization in the "movement", which at the same time is inflated to reach mythical dimensions; the second conceives of organization and movement as clearly distinct and perennially dialectical realities between them. The Combatant Party is party of fighting cadres. It is therefore an advanced and armed part of the working class and therefore at the same time distinct and organic part of it. Movement is a complex and inhomogeneous reality in which multiple levels of consciousness coexist and fight. It is unthinkable, and above all impossible, to "organize" this multiplicity of levels of consciousness "on the terrain of armed struggle". Do you want because this terrain, although strategic, is not yet the main one; do you want because the nucleus that builds the fighting Party, namely the BR, has certainly not matured the political, military and organizational skills necessary for the purpose. It is not a matter of "organizing the mass movement on the ground of armed struggle", but of grounding the organization of the armed struggle and the political consciousness of its historical necessity in the class movement. This remains the main objective of the fighting Party under construction at this stage. For all the reasons we have discussed the level of conflict appropriate to this phase remains that of armed propaganda. The main objectives of the armed propaganda action are three:

  • to create as many political contradictions as possible within the enemy line, ie to dis-articulate it, to dysfunctionalize it;
  • to beat the track to the resistance movement by practicing battlefields that are often unknown but nevertheless less essential;
  • organize the advanced class stratum in the Party and in class-level combat organizations on the various fronts of the war.

The armed propaganda carried out through the guerrilla action indicates a phase of the class war and not as someone considers a "form of struggle". At this stage follows that of the "war civil war", in which the main task of the armed vanguard, will be to disarticulate, even militarily, the bureaucratic and military machine of the state and break it. The assault on Casale's prison for the liberation of a comrade clarifies the concept in the sense that this action of armed propaganda:

  • has produced a profound dis-articulation of the state: reversal of the propaganda campaign with which it tried to give us for "passed off"; the depletion of Christian Democratic projects of an "exemplary process" under the elections; accentuation of the contradictions between the judiciary and the CC, between the magistrate of Milan and Turin, between high and low degrees of the magistracy; between DC and other political forces and by listing;
  • has beaten the resistance movement in both directions to have achieved a word of the revolutionary program (release of political prisoners) and therefore have created a climate of confidence in the mass of political prisoners as well as between the revolutionary avant-gardes; have explored a new battleground and have drawn indications and experience that will be decisive in the next few days;
  • created the real premises for organizing the revolutionary vanguard locked up in the regime's prisons on a revolutionary program of attack on the state.

Now obviously it is up to the fighting Party inside and outside the prisons to transform the premises into structures, the revolutionary potentials liberated in armed proletarian power. On what terrain should our tactical initiative develop? They are defined in three fundamental passwords:





On the field of the workers' struggle the knot to be dissolved, and therefore also the central point of the struggle program, is the "corporate pact": the Confindustria-Confederazioni-Governo relationship as the backbone of capitalist restructuring and as a fundamental element of the imperialist corporate state of multinationals. It is very important, but it is not enough in this perspective, to intensify the autonomous movements to combat every aspect of restructuring as it appears to us "immediately" with the Cassa Integrazione, labor mobility, layoffs and the frantic intensification of exploitation. These levels of confrontation go in the right direction and take on an offensive character in the measure in which they manage to break the union "cage" and to put in check, that is to say to undermine, the control capacity of the Confederations. But the attack must be extended above all to the political-military structure of the command; because the reformed Confindustria is the main center of the master initiative; because it uses the "trade union" organizations of managers, cadres, heads and workers with the head of the master as transmission belts of the new ideology and as centers of corporate organization. Deeply disjointing this "belt" by explaining its structure, manner, operations and links with the centers of political power and with the general plan, it is an immediate requirement of the revolutionary struggle. So far we have conducted the purification at the production level. From now on, it is necessary to invest even more administrative, managerial or directly employer levels. Disarticular this plot means to skip the political and military function. In fact, the corporate tendency in its making, brings with it the need and the organization of the violent repression of class antagonism, that is, of those who do not accept revisionist suicide. As a consequence, the function of the command is increasingly specialized also in this direction. The gathering of information on avant-garde workers' nucleuses, political espionage, infiltration, provocation and any other kind of counter-revolutionary work are brought to new levels of efficiency. It is a matter of not allowing them to function, to anticipate them, neutralize them and punish with the appropriate hardness anyone who takes responsibility for their functioning.


On the political ground is the DC that must be fought and beaten because it is the main vector of the project of imperialist restructuring of the state and the point of unification of the reactionary and counter-revolutionary forces that unites Fanfani to Tanassi, to Sogno, to Pacciardi, to Almirante, to terrorist groups. DC is the main enemy. It is the organic party of the bourgeoisie, of the ruling class and of imperialism. It is the political and organizational center of reaction and terrorism. It is the engine of the global counter-revolution and the supporting form of modern fascism: imperialist fascism. We must not be deceived by the "democratic and anti-fascist" professions of faith that sometimes come from certain leaders of this party, because they respond to the tactical need to keep open the false dialectic between "fascism" and "anti-fascism" that allows the DC to rake votes making believe that against "fascist" danger is better "reformed democracy", ie the imperialist state. The problem of revolutionary avant-gardes is to clarify the whole game by hitting links, connivance and projects. The DC is not just a party but the black soul of a regime that has oppressed the working masses of the country for 30 years. It is not common sense to declare the need to beat the regime and to propose in fact a "historic compromise" with the DC. He has even less talk about how to "reform" it. The Christian Democrats must be liquidated, beaten and dispersed. The defeat of the regime must also take with it this immense party and all its leaders. As happened in 1945 for the fascist regime and for Mussolini's party. Liquidating the DC and its regime is the essential prerequisite for achieving an effective "historical turning point" in our country. This is the main task of the moment!


The question of the state is the one that most differentiates us from the revisionist and pararevisionist forces who work tirelessly to perfect this anti-proletarian machine. With Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao we also say that "breaking the bureaucratic and military machine of the state is the preliminary condition of any real proletarian revolution". The struggle against corporatism, fascism and the regime can not be separated from direct action against the institutions of the state and, at this stage, revolt against their maximum political disarticulation. "Political disarticulation" and not "propaganda erosion of democratic credibility" because this state undergoing restructuring is already the state of civil war. For this reason it is necessary to achieve results on the ground of the liberation of fellow political prisoners; of retaliation against the military structure of prisons; against the antiguier in all its joints; against the regime magistracy; against those sectors of journalism that stand out in the "psychological war". The relevance of this perspective is more than demonstrated by the levels reached by the counter-revolutionary action against us and against all those forces that have mobilized on the terrain of the class war; and from the excellent political results that followed the Sossi operation (which is not yet completed) and the assault on Casale Monferrato prison.

Along these lines will our presence in the revolutionary movement and our guerrilla initiative and the construction of proletarian power be uniform. But one last thing is important to add: it is necessary to overcome every particularistic tension and every spirit of the sect. We believe in the need to "join the people to unite the people" in the class war for communism. And in this perspective we fight and fight for the unity of the revolutionary movement.

From "Armed struggle for communism"


Some comrades have realized this political-economic deepening on the first part of the "Resolution of Strategic Direction" of April. We present it to the entire organization for discussion and study.

To address the analysis of the current economic crisis some references to the problem of accumulation are needed. This problem has been among the most debated because according to the solution that it gives, it derives a different interpretation of the crisis and the causes that determine it. For the reformists the crises of capital are pure accidents, eliminable through a "right planning" of capitalism. For them, the transition to Socialism is planned through a balanced development of capitalism. But for the revolutionaries: "Criticism is not a passion of the brain, but it is the brain of passion. It is not an anatomical knife, but a weapon. Its object is its enemy, and it does not want to refute it, but to annihilate it, because the spirit of those conditions of life is already disproved " (K. Marx). So for the revolutionaries who use Marxist analysis, crises are part of the very nature of Capital and are necessary for its development. It is in the crisis that the possibility of the conquest of power is concretely posed. For revolutionaries, so that capitalist relations of production can be destroyed, the intervention of obstetric surgery of the Revolution is necessary.


If we analyze the process of reproduction, and therefore the accumulation of the Social Capital, that is the total capital of society, we are immediately confronted with a contradiction: how can social surplus-value, which is in the form of commodities, turn into money and then reconvert to new means of production (additional means of production) and new labor, given the capitalist market relations, and then how can there be an enlarged reproduction, which is the basis and the end of the capitalist system? Consider the Share Capital C = c + v + pv in its reproduction process; we can distinguish it in two sections, section I, to which belong all the capitals that produce means of production (machines, etc. ..) and section II to which belong the capitals that produce consumer goods, that enter into individual consumption of the worker and the capitalist. From the market point of view we will have a demand for means of production equal to (c) and consumer goods equal to (v + pv / x), where with (pv / x) we indicate the part of surplus value consumed in the form of goods of consumption by the capitalists. It therefore always remains a part of surplus value (ie pv - pv / x) that at first sight can not be achieved within the market, ie through the sale converted into money and then transformed into additional means of production. In this way, every accumulation, as well as every process of expanded reproduction, appear impossible in an exclusively capitalist environment. The bourgeois economists (from Ricardo, to the German reformist school of Otto Bauer, up to the present day) give this problem an apparently very simple answer: the capitalists exchange the means of production and the excess consumption goods among themselves, thus expanding production to infinity, quietly and without shaking (thus confusing capitalist production that is the production of commodities-exchange values ​​- in production of use values). According to them then the crises of overproduction, which periodically upset the capitalist system, are disproportionate crises, due to the fact that one of the two sections of social capital has produced too much compared to the needs of the other, so with good planning (if it is " democratic "all the better" the capitalist system could satisfy progressively without crisis, all the needs of "society". Hence the German Social Democrats of the early twentieth century (Bernstein & Company) drew the conclusion that the revolution is not necessary, because gradually entering into bourgeois state structures and introducing the "genius" idea of ​​programming you can safely arrive at Socialism. (The various Italian Berlinguer appear to us more hateful than the reformists of the time simply because they want to bring us the same crap, without having their theoretical dignity). There is no need to waste too much time to demonstrate the profound errors inherent in this position. Already Marx has done several times, demonstrating the theoretical inconsistency of those bourgeois economists (Ricardo, Say, etc.) he called "apologists of capitalism" (as seen on the front of reformism nothing new since 150 years at least) . We limit ourselves to reporting some passages of Marx.

"The idea (properly belonging to J. Muli) of that insipidance of Say, adopted by Ricardo, that no overproduction or at least no general saturation of the market is possible, rests on the thesis that products are exchanged against products (" Theories of the surplus value "vol 11, page 534, Ed. Meetings).

"It must never be forgotten that in capitalist production we are not dealing directly with the value in use, but with the value of exchange and precisely with the increase in surplus-value. This is the motor motive of capitalist production and it is a beautiful conception that, to abolish the contradictions of capitalist production, makes abstraction from its base and makes it a production directed to the immediate consumption of producers) "(Ibidem, page 536).

"In Ricardo, in the first place, a commodity in which there exists the antithesis between exchange value and use value, is transformed into a simple trade in the exchange of products, simple values ​​of use. It retreats not only behind capitalist production, but also behind the simple production of goods, and the most complicated phenomenon of capitalist production - the crisis of the world market - is denied, denying the condition before capitalist production, that is, the product is a commodity, therefore it must be represented as money and pass through the process of metamorphosis, that is, the process of buying and selling ... even money is then consequently conceived as a simple intermediary of the exchange of products,

"First of all, possession of other goods" is not the aim of capitalist production, but "appropriation of value, of money, of abstract wealth" (ibidem, page 545).

By contrasting the reformist theses of his time (which said that capitalism thanks to the monopolistic structure would have developed without crisis and would have "naturally" arrived at socialism, thus rendering the revolution useless), Luxemburg makes a critique of it and demonstrates that the capitalist accumulation can not proceed without crisis. But the problem of accumulation is equally a wrong answer, stating that "accumulation in an exclusively capitalist environment is impossible" ("An antiquity" in "The accumulation of capital", p. 583) and therefore that accumulation it is possible only as long as there are non-capitalist economic areas outside the capitalist system, with which to exchange surplus surplus value. From its analysis, Luxemburg draws the conclusion that capitalism, having now occupied almost the entire world area, was very close to the point where accumulation would no longer be possible and therefore would have automatically collapsed (indeed defines imperialism "political expression of the process of capital accumulation in its struggle for competition around the residues of non-capitalist environments not yet seized "in" The accumulation of capital ", p.47). The main error committed by Luxemburg is that of considering the social capital as the sole capital and the general rate of profit as the sole wage of profit. With these premises it is clear that accumulation in an exclusively capitalist environment can not take place. Marx affirms in fact in the Grundrisse:

"A universal capital that does not have other capital with which to exchange - and from the current point of view he has nothing in front of himself but wage labor and himself - is therefore an absurdity. Mutual repulsion of capital is already implicit in capital as the exchange value achieved "(Gnindrisse vol.1, 28, Ed. La Nuova Italia).

Accumulation in a capitalist environment occurs precisely because social capital is a multiplicity of capitals and the general rate of profit is the average of various particular rates of profit. In this way, through the struggle for competition between the various capitals (capital with a higher organic composition produces, to the detriment of lower-level capitals, the value contained in their goods and also an overprofit), the accumulation of social capital as a whole. Always from the Grundrisse:

"Conceptually competition is nothing other than the internal nature of capital, its essential determination that presents itself and is realized as action and reaction of a multiplicity of capitals on each other, the internal tendency does not need external. Capital exists and can exist only as a multiplicity of capitals and therefore its self-determination presents itself as action and reciprocal reaction "(Ibidem, p.17). And even more clearly later:

"As far as his worker is concerned, the capitalist is well aware that he is not confronting him as a producer and consumer and therefore wants to restrict his consumption as much as possible, that is to say his capacity for exchange, his salary. He naturally hopes that the workers of the other capitalists will be as large as possible consumers of his goods. But the relationship of each capitalist to his workers is the general relationship between capital and labor, which is the essential relationship. But the illusion - true for the individual capitalist distinct from all the others, so that out of his workers all the rest of the working class faces him as a consumer and a subject of exchange, that is, a spendthrift of money, not as a worker - this illusion we said was born from this. That is, one forgets that, as Malthus said, "the existence of a profit on a commodity presupposes a demand external to that of the worker who produced it", and therefore the demand of this same worker can never be adequate. Since a production sets in motion another and therefore procures consumers in the workers of the capital of others, here is that for every single capital the demand of the working class, which is created through production itself, appears as an adequate question "(ibidem, p 26).

Not only does accumulation continue to occur in the phase of the "general-absolute domination of capital", but at this stage accumulation takes place on a more extensive productive basis and between growing contradictions. Precisely from the concentration of these contradictions and from the fact that they can no longer be contained within the existing economic relationships, not only are crises born, but now they are always bigger and more destructive.

The crises of the world market must be conceived as the real concentration and violent equalization of all the contradictions of bourgeois economy "(theories on surplus value", p.555).

Of all the contradictions, that between production and consumption on the basis of capitalist relations is certainly very important. It is in fact that it constitutes the condition of overproduction and therefore already contains the possibility of the crisis (the possibility, but not the necessity that must be sought in the production of surplus value and not in its realization).

"Overproduction in a special way has as a condition the general law of production of capital, to produce in the measure of productive forces, that is the possibility of exploiting, as a given mass of capital, the largest possible mass of labor without regard to existing market limits or for solvent needs, and to achieve this by means of a continuous expansion of reproduction and accumulation, while on the other hand the mass of producers remains limited to the average needs and must remain limited according to the organization of capitalist production "(Ibidem, p 577).

However, Luxemburg has sensed (even if it has given a wrong theoretical solution) that from the moment in which capitalism completes the occupation of the world area and therefore has "the general and exclusive domination of capitalism" its contradictions explode in all its violence. However, this does not mean that capitalism, arrived at this point, must automatically destroy itself; it only means that by developing further it produces contradictions that are ever more favorable to the proletarian revolution, that the revolution is more and more necessary.


We have seen previously how in the process of expanded reproduction, and therefore in accumulation, there are already a whole series of contradictions that determine the possibility of crises, ie it is possible that at a certain moment of development all these contradictions will violently result in a process of crisis. Now what we want to show is that the crisis is not only possible, but within capitalist relations it is necessary, that capitalist development, its accumulation can occur only through successive moments of crisis. The general possibility of the crisis is the formal metamorphosis of capital itself (ie the fact that the commodity must be transformed into money), the temporal and spatial separation of buying and selling. But this is never the cause of the crisis. Because it is nothing but the most general form of the crisis, hence the crisis itself in its most general expression. We look for its cause, we just want to know why its most abstract form, the form of its possibility, from the possibility becomes reality. (ibidem, p. 587). Before addressing this problem directly, some clarifications. When we speak of overproduction of capital, we do not simply mean overproduction of individual goods (although capital overproduction always causes overproduction of goods), but over capital accumulation, that is, overproduction of means of production and subsistence, as these can operate as capital.

"Too many means of labor and subsistence are periodically produced, so that they can be used as means of exploitation of the workers at a given rate of profit. Too many commodities are produced, because the value and surplus-value they contain can be realized and converted into new capital, and in the distribution and consumption ratios inherent in capitalist production, that is, because this process can be carried out without continual explosions. There is not too much wealth produced. But periodically too much wealth is produced in its capitalist forms, which have an antithetic character "(Capital III (I) p.315).

There is relative overproduction when overproduction embraces a productive sector or only some sectors, absolute overproduction when it invests the entire capitalist area; moreover, relative overproduction always prepares absolute overproduction, so our analysis refers to absolute overproduction.

"There would be an absolute overproduction of capital if the additional capital delta C destined for capitalist production was equal to zero. But the purpose of capitalist production is the self-valorization of capital, that is, the appropriation of surplus-value, the production of surplus-value, of profit. As soon as capital had thus increased in proportion to the working population, neither the absolute labor time provided by this working-class population could be prolonged, nor the time of relative surplus-value could be extended (the latter eventuality would not be other possible side if the demand for labor was so strong as to determine a trend of rising wages), when, therefore, the increased capital produced a mass of surplus-value only equivalent or even lower than that produced before its growth, then there would be an absolute overproduction of capital; that is, the increased capital C plus delta C would not produce a greater profit or produce a profit lower than that given by capital C, before its increase in delta C "(Capital vol. III (I) p307-308).

The capitalist accumulation process is carried out with a continuous increase in the organic composition of capital, and then with a trend towards a decrease in the rate of profit (The surplus always grows less than anticipated capital (c + v). Therefore we necessarily reach a certain moment of the process in which, assuming that absolute surplus value and relative surplus value can no longer be extended, the mass of social surplus value has become too small compared to accumulated total capital, and therefore this mass of surplus value is no longer able to value the entire productive base, so that accumulation, the process of enlarged reproduction, must be interrupted. It is therefore the fundamental law of capitalist development that the fall in the rate of profit determines the necessity of the crisis.

"The development of the productive power of labor, by determining the fall of the rate of profit, generates a law which, at a given moment, is irreconcilably opposed to its development and therefore to be overcome through crisis" (ibidem 315).

Within the area invested by absolute overproduction, there is a general crisis in the productive and credit structure. Only a part of the existing capital, namely the one with the highest organic composition, therefore the most competitive - can continue to value itself by concentrating at the expense of the other capitals, while another part is exported outside the area, in areas where the rate of profit is higher and can be invested more productively (economic basis of the birth of imperialism).

"When capital C is sent abroad, this does not happen because it is absolutely impossible to use it in the country, but because abroad it can be used for a higher rate of profit. But this capital is actually superfluous compared to the occupied working population and to that particular country in general, as such it subsists alongside a relative excess of population and provides an example of how these two phenomena coexist and are dependent on each other "(ibidem, p.3 13).

In this way capital overcomes the crisis by increasing its degree of concentration, that is, by a greater organic concentration, and expanding its productive and market base by enlarging the area itself.

"And from this moment on the same vicious circle would be repeated with more considerable means of production, with a wider market and with a higher productive force" (Ibidem, p.32).

It is therefore through successive moments of crisis that capitalism increasingly extends its dominion and this tendency towards expansion is a necessity that derives from its production node itself. Capitalism can not exist without expansion. It is evident then that from the moment in which the capitalist system destroying all the previous modes of production (feudalism, etc.) has spread over the whole world area ("Beginning of the general and exclusive domain of capitalism" 2 period immediately preceding the World War I) all its contradictions are further exacerbated. In fact, now every commodity is produced within a capitalist production relationship, each market is a capitalist market, so that every capitalist realizes the value of his goods more and more at the expense of another capitalist: then the monopolies become necessary and indispensable to establish control of the market and "free competition" becomes an increasingly fierce competition between monopolies; the organic composition of capital rises faster and faster, to increase the added value and reduce the prices of its goods; the fall in the rate of profit is increasingly rapid and crises are increasingly destructive and catastrophic, the enlargement of the productive base of an area in crisis can only happen by occupying another capitalist area and therefore the inter-imperialist wars for a new partition of the world become indispensable for any further development.


The current economic crisis that involves the capitalist system as a whole is a crisis of absolute overproduction of capital with respect to the entire Western capitalist area. Some considerations are essential to fully understand the specificity and therefore the unavoidable outlets that must be taken.

Multinational monopoly capital

The outcome of the Second World War determined the division of the world into two large areas: the western one, under the dominion of US imperialism, and the eastern one, under the dominion of USSR socialimperialism. If the fundamental constitutive element of imperialism has been the monopolistic capital since its beginning, it is only with World War II that it has the definitive affirmation on the whole occ occ area. of the multinational monopoly capital: the great monopolistic groups definitively overcome their national borders to freely spread over the whole area; indeed, the multinational structure becomes now a necessary and indispensable factor for any further possibility of accumulation3. The various national areas now survive as a hinterland for multinational corporations. That is, for each multinational the national area, in which it was born and developed, becomes its strong point, the area in which it enjoys a position of almost unopposed monopoly. When we talk about multinationals we therefore always imply multinationals with a national pole and to exemplify we use the American, German, etc. multinational terms; so also when we speak of the domination of US imperialism on the occ occ area. we intend to dominate the American multinationals (confirming this dominance is enough for a given: in 1974 among the 100 strongest multinationals 80 were American)! In this phase then in the occ area. the main inter-capitalist contradiction is no longer between national areas (as it was until World War II) but between large multinational groups. With this we do not want to deny the existence of contradictions among the various capitalist "nations", but we think that these contradictions are always the reflection of much deeper contradictions among multinational groups. The transition to the multinational structure as a stable and necessary factor, has also determined a considerable development of the productive forces on a world scale. The average organic composition was elevated and, as a consequence, the rate of fall of the general rate of profit accelerated. All this has further aggravated the capitalist contradictions and would have led even more rapidly to violent crises and explosions of the economic fabric, had there not been a series of counter-tendencies to slow down its development. Mind you: we mean a series of phenomena that, trying to oppose the explosion of contradictions, can at most restrain its development, but not deny it. They can, that is, delay the crisis, but do not avoid it (all this is confirmed by the fact that in spite of all the efforts of the various bourgeois "experts" the system has also fallen into a very violent crisis). Among these counter-tendencies we analyze two: the "consumer society" and the "bank-state", because bourgeois makes a great talk about it as a "panacea" that should resolve all the contradictions of capitalism and from the reformist part try even to smuggle them as great innovations that can lead, "if well guided", to socialism.


Already Marx identifies as one of the causes that opposes the fall of the rate of profit, the development of production of what defines luxury goods.

"On the other hand, however, new industries arise, especially for the production of luxury goods, which are based precisely on that relative overpopulation that is often unemployed as a result of the preponderance of constant capital in other branches of production, rest in turn on the preponderance of those elements of living labor that only gradually follow the same evolution of the other branches of production. In both cases the variable capital assumes a considerable importance with respect to the total capital and the salary remains below the average, so much so that the rate when the mass of surplus-value are exceptionally high in these branches of production.

The enormous development of the productive forces in the current phase of multinational monopolies has made the contradiction between the increase in capitalist concentration and the narrow size of its productive base more and more acute, which has led to very high overpopulation rates. Developing in the advanced capitalist countries the production of luxury goods ("consumer society"), using to this end the enormous overprofits achieved through the multinational structure, we tried to increase the production base as much as possible, and it reduced (even if only partially) excess overpopulation. But the same accelerated development of the productive forces has caused the rate of profit to fall very rapidly in these branches too. Its counter-trend effect has therefore increasingly lost strength and in the moment of crisis it has turned into a factor of aggravation of the crisis itself (in fact, the production of "luxury goods" has been hit by the crisis first: just think to the car industry crisis). So the "consumer society" is not the product of a reformed capitalism that tends to socialism and for this "raises the standard of life of the workers", but the extreme attempt of an increasingly agonizing capitalism that desperately tries to escape the grip of its contradictions.


Furthermore, the accelerated fall in the rate of profit makes it increasingly difficult for large imperialist groups to find the capital necessary for technological restructuring within their own production process. They are therefore forced to resort increasingly to borrowing (in 68 for the 700 largest Italian companies, debts amounted to 46% of their total budget, in 74 they went to 55%). But given the large amount of financial capital needed, it becomes even more difficult to round up these funds within the financial market (the "stock market crisis" is indeed an endemic and structural element of the most developed capitalist countries)! State loans must therefore be used. Thus the State assumes in the economic field the function of a large bank at the service of multinational imperialist groups. The permanent inflationary process, characteristic of current capitalist development, arises from the way in which the bank-state raises at the social level these necessary capitals (which are nothing but social surplus "assigned" to multinationals). The bourgeois economists themselves are willing to recognize that inflation is today inseparable from capitalist development. But when it comes to defining the causes or resort to smoky theories incomprehensible to themselves, or refer to the classic theory of Ricardo. According to it, the increase in prices (ie inflation) would be determined by a surplus of banknotes with respect to the quantity of goods. Thus, the inflationary wage of the workers would have been the cause of inflation, which would have increased the amount of banknotes in an inconsiderable way compared to the quantity of goods. The political thesis hidden behind such a theory is all too evident: either the workers work harder, increasing the production and therefore the quantity of the goods produced, or they must necessarily increase the price of the goods themselves, to rebalance their quantity with the quantity of the banknotes. Marx in "For the critique of political economy" and in "Capital III (II)" amply demonstrates the scientific inconsistency of these arguments. Suffice it to recall: a) that the amount of banknotes in circulation is always lower than the quantity of goods (in fact, a banknote, as a means of circulation, always circulates a quantity of products whose total value is always higher than that of the banknote itself ). b) that the value of money is determined by the ratio between the quantity of banknotes and the gold reserve and not between the quantity of banknotes and the quantity of goods. So there may be an inflationary process due to a decrease in the value of money (which necessarily determines an increase in the price of goods). This decrease in the value of money is however due to a decrease in the gold reserve (eg a certain amount of gold has been sent abroad to pay international debts, and this fact appears constantly in times of crisis) or to an increase in amount of banknotes circulating with respect to the gold reserve which has remained unchanged. Now, together with this "classic" inflationary phenomenon, there is also a "specific" inflationary process due to the monopolistic structure of the economy and the relative intervention of the State. The mechanism is as follows: the monopolistic groups to counteract the fall of their rate of profit, raise the prices of their goods (they can do so thanks to the monopolistic structure that allows them to establish control over the markets) and given the centrality of the monopolies in the overall economic fabric an increase of price of their goods determines a general inflationary process; the State with the "income policy" disguised behind screens that are called from time to time "compatibility", "safeguarding the national interest", etc., and implemented with the more or less explicit consent of the unions and the "workers" parties ", Attempts to set a maximum limit on workers' wages. At the same time, through the increase in direct and indirect taxation, which always translates into an increase in consumer prices, Thus a "controlled" inflationary process is created that "erodes" the income of small and middle-bourgeois strata (the so-called parasitic classes) and that above all leads to a progressive reduction of the real wage of workers (which is equivalent to the extraction of surplus value from this vault of the capitalist state). That this inflationary process is inevitable, even bourgeois ones admit it, even if tight-lipped: "It is inevitable that the American economy will grow more slowly than in the past. Cities and states, the mortgage market, small businesses and consumers will all receive less than they would like, because the health of the US depends essentially on the health of big businesses and banks: big creditors and big debtors. Yet it will be a bitter pill to swallow for many Americans the idea of ​​having less for large companies to have more. And this especially because it is quite clear that if the big banks and big companies are the most conspicuous victims of the evils of inflation, they are also to a large extent the cause "(from" Business Week "of 12/10/74) . The intervention of the State in the economy therefore, far from presenting itself as "the bearer of the instances of progress and renewal of the whole of society", makes its role of guarantor of capitalist development, its specific nature, ever more clearly emerge. of a class instrument. In the current crisis, "inflationary instruments" are used to the maximum degree (in fact, inflation has reached 20% increase rates); increasingly monopolistic groups raise, with the prior authorization of the state, the price of their goods (see the latest "touch-ups" Fiat-Montedison-Pirelli), direct and indirect taxation is every day heavier ("tax reform ", Increases in telephones, transport, etc.!), Subsidized credit is increasingly selective (in 1974 in Italy, 9 large companies alone were awarded 55% of long and medium-term loans and the average rate on debts burdensome, that is, the interests to be paid on short-term loans, was for the thousands of small businesses of 19%, while for the 700 large companies of 11.4%; moreover, compared to 73 for small businesses, it rose by 8%, from 11% to 19%, while for large companies it was only 3.7%, from 7.7% to 11.4%). (From the Mediobanca annual report). The bourgeois economists rely heavily on the intervention of the state to resolve the current crisis. Felix G. Rohatyn, of the managerial staff of many large multinationals including ITT, writes in the "New York Times" of 1.12.74: "The RFC (like our IRI) must become an integral part of our economic structure, not just a credit provider but a rescue and stimulation tool. It should not invest permanently in a single individual company. Should it remain an investment institution or a partnership or a creditor, as long as it can, in the public interest, The RFC should therefore in fact become a circulating fund that intervenes where no other alternatives exist and which withdraws when the public interest has been served and can again operate the normal market forces ". As always, the bourgeois see the crisis as a "financial crisis" determined by the "disproportionality" of investments and therefore they delude themselves that with additional investments implemented by the State (the social capitalist) it is possible to "reproportion" the system. But the financial aspect is only the immediate form in which the crisis presents itself, it is an effect of it, so intervening at this level influences a secondary aspect not on the cause of the crisis (which is the overproduction of capital with respect to the low profit rate). The intervention of the State has in fact avoided the great financial collapse type '29, but has produced in return the result: a) that the financial crisis, instead of being immediately concentrated in all its explosiveness, runs strictly following the unfolding of the crisis; b) that the capitalist concentration takes place in a "planned" way but no less violent and chaotic than if left to normal market mechanisms (they are under the eyes of all the millions of unemployed, the increasingly frequent failures of small and big, etc.); This is why we firmly believe that these measures will have the opposite effect to the hoped-for: trying to dilute the contradictions without being able to solve them, in reality they concentrate them more and more, making them increasingly explosive. The first signs of the crisis occurred in the late 1960s with the strong contrasts between the Western capitalist powers in the financial field (the convertibility of the dollar, the revaluation of gold, the redefinition of the Bretton-Woods treaties, etc.). The situation then progressively worsened until it plunged into '73, the year in which the simultaneous collapse of industrial production began in all the western capitalist countries; from 73 to half of '75 there was the following decline in production: United States - 16% West Germany - 15% France - 12% Japan - 31% Great Britain - 8% Italy - 17%

(These facts alone show in the most evident way that the current crisis is a crisis of absolute overproduction of capital with respect to the entire western area and they cancel with a single blow all the "financial idiocies" of the bourgeois experts). Therefore, the recurring drama of capitalist production arises from Western imperialism: expanding its area in order to broaden its productive base. In fact, to remain still locked up in the western area, means for capitalism to accumulate increasingly tearing contradictions: the concentration would grow very rapidly, the rate of profit would reach very low values, the productive base would be increasingly restricted, unemployment would increase significantly. Soon and apparently, moments of recovery would therefore follow increasingly serious recessive phases. There would be a permanent and increasingly destructive process of crisis. The bourgeois economists hoping for a revival of production in the USA, Japan, West Germany, which leads to a resumption of production throughout the western area "for sympathy", do not understand that the recovery of the strongest capitalist countries can only come at the expense of of the weaker ones. This "revival" would therefore aggravate the contradictions further. Therefore, the imperative need to enlarge its area is posed to Western imperialism. This enlargement can only take place at the expense of the social-imperialist area and will therefore inevitably lead to the direct US-USSR clash (the central pole of this clash will be Europe). The partial clashes we are witnessing (Middle East, Portugal, etc.) are nothing but the symptoms of the imminent clash. This is the historical perspective that monopolistic capital poses in the short term to itself and to the revolutionary movement. Within this perspective the position of the proletariat can only present itself as a general and decisive impact with capitalist domination and its tactical directive can only be fixed by this historical perspective: O CLASS WAR IN THE IMPERIALIST METROPOLIS OR THIRD WORLD IMPERIALIST WAR .


"The accumulation of capital is realized in a constant qualitative change of its composition, in a constant increase of its constituent constituent ... this relative decrease of the variable constitutive part, accelerated with the increase of the total and faster capital of its own growth On the other hand, it appears on the other hand as an absolute growth of the working population that is ever more rapid than that of variable capital, ie the means that give it work. Capitalist accumulation rather produces continuously, and exactly in relation to its own energy and its own entity (... a relative working population), or rather (a relative worker overpopulation), ie exceeding the average requirements of capital appreciation, therefore superfluous or supplementary "(Capital I, pages 456-6 Ed. Newton-Compton).

This is the law of the specific population of the capitalist mode of production. The high level of organic composition of the current phase of multinational monopolies determines extremely high rates of overpopulation and in the more developed capitalist countries we are even in the presence of a tendency towards the absolute decrease of the active population and, within it, to the decrease of the workers. Some data.


1901-1921: the active population while increasing in absolute value fell from 48% to 46.5% of the total population with a percentage decrease of 1.5% 1921-1938: from 46.5% to 42.8%, with a percentage decrease of 3.7% (continues however to increase in absolute value) from 1951 to 1971: from 41.7% to 35.5% with a percentage decrease of 6.2%

As can be seen, the rate of active population has been decreasing with increasing speed (so the rate of relative overpopulation has increased faster and faster), reaching the highest peak of 6.2% in the last twenty years. In the period 1951-71 we have for the first time an absolute decrease of the active population that goes from 19.800.000 in 51, to 19.600.000 in 61, to 19.500.000 in 71.

The number of workers (industry, construction, agriculture) in the period 1961-71 (and in this phase the first large multinational monopolies, eg Montedison, etc.) are formed and developed in Italy, decreases for the first time in absolute value, going from 8,400,000 to 7,200,000. Furthermore, for the first time the number of industrial workers remains constant in a decade of economic expansion (1961: 4,300,000 - 1971: 4,300,000) and this in itself means a tendency to decrease. In fact, if we analyze more specifically the data, we see that in Lombardy, the pilot region of the national economy, in the period 63-68 (phase of considerable economic expansion) we have an absolute decrease of the workers of the industry (-80.


Economic expansion phase. The working class of the textile industry decreases by 33%; in the metallurgical, wood, distilleries and footwear sectors there has been a fall in employment ranging from 10 to 25%. (from "Jobs and Employment in the US" by Harry Bravermann, Monthley Rewiew, July 1975).

In order to try to keep the active population high we are assisting the more developed capitalist countries to expand "unproductive" jobs (services, trade, etc.) and this can be done thanks to overprofits, but despite these expedients it tends to decrease in value constantly. absolute. Therefore, compared to the population, the capitalist development in the phase of multinational monopolies is characterized by the tendency to absolute decrease of the active population, and in particular the number of workers and the progressive increase of that part of the population definitively excluded from the production process (the marginalized) . This implies tendentially stable changes of the class fabric.

Working class

If for the working class there is a tendency towards absolute diminution, it must however be borne in mind that this decrease is accompanied by an ever increasing concentration and leveling of the working class itself, hence by a growth of strength and combativeness.

Reserve army

"The amount of labor force that provides the natural increase in population is not absolutely sufficient for capitalist production. In order to enjoy free play, it is essential for the absolute decrease, but it must be kept in mind that this decrease is an industrial reserve army independent of this natural limit "(Capital I, 469, ed. NC).

The reserve army acquires the function of a regulator reservoir of labor power with respect to the needs of capital development (in times of crisis it expands, in times of boom it is reabsorbed by the development of production). In its "classical" form it appears as a fluctuating, latent, stagnant overpopulation. Stagnant overpopulation is formed by workers with "irregular" employment, employed in small industries, in home work, etc. The latent overpopulation is formed by those agricultural workers who, being expelled from the capitalist development of agriculture (characteristic of capitalist agriculture is in fact the absolute decrease of the workers employed in the process of accumulation), wait to pass into the industrial proletariat. The fluctuating overpopulation is formed by those workers who, dismissed by large industries due to the high organic composition reached there, are waiting to be summarized by other expanding industries. In its "classical" form, the reserve army thus presents itself as a temporary location of the worker expelled from production, waiting to be reinserted to the next expansive phase. Now instead the expulsion of the worker from the production takes on a stable character, the "technological unemployment" has become a stable element of multinational monopoly development (in USA the 6% unemployment rate which characterized the years of recession 1949-50 is became the stable unemployment rate in the prosperity period of the late 1960s). All this changed the form of the reserve army. Even the "mass school" today performs the function of a regulator reservoir of labor power with respect to the needs of capital development. Thanks to its "fractional" structure (lower - upper average, university), it can at times of economic expansion throw on the labor market the required quantity of skilled labor force and in the phases of recession, absorb it internally. (In times of economic crisis we have in fact considerable increases in the schooling rate). According to this hypothesis students are also part of the central nucleus of the reserve army in the phase of multinational monopolies. This hypothesis also provides a structural basis for explaining the student struggles of these years.


They are a product of capitalist society in its current phase of development and their number is constantly increasing. They are used by capitalist society, as a consumer society, as consumers. However, they are consumers without wages. From this contradiction comes the strong increase in "crime", which currently characterizes the advanced capitalist countries. A part of the marginalized reflects at an immediate level the bourgeois (consumerist) consciousness: extreme individualism, aspiration to an increasing "consumption". Another part reflects the revolutionary conscience, that is the abolition of their condition of marginalized, from which the abolition of society based on wage labor. In this context the function of the "prison" should be seen. Prison has above all the general function of a terrorist instrument towards the proletarians to keep them tied to production, as well as with hunger, even with fear. Compared to the marginalized, it has the function of a collection tank. In prison, the revolutionary awareness of a part of the marginalized has historically occurred. This for the following reasons: 1. forced to live in community, one can overcome the individualistic mentality; 2. clashing with the most brutal repression (beatings, isolation cells, transfers to more punitive prisons, mental hospitals) we begin to become aware of their condition and therefore of the need to organize themselves to fight. From here the awareness of the whole society can arise. Already Marx has identified in the absolute decrease of the workers one of the most lacerating contradictions of capitalism, reached a high degree of development.

"A development of the productive forces that had as a result to decrease the absolute number of the workers, which would essentially allow the whole nation to make the total production in a shorter period of time, would provoke a revolution because it would reduce the majority of the population to poverty. "(Capital III (I) p. 321 Ed. Meetings).

It is therefore the high development of the productive forces in the phase of multinational monopolies that puts the students and the marginalized alongside the working class in the struggle for communism. This means that the working class remains the central and leading nucleus in the communist revolution and it would be a very serious mistake to think that the students and the marginalized can replace it with their own theory outside the communist program (for this reason every theory of the "revolution" of the students "or of the" revolution of the marginalized "appears as counter-revolutionary farce).

To the comrades who face the Marxist economic-political theory for the first time, we recommend as a preliminary reading the following text: "GUIDE TO READING THE CAPITAL", Collective of historians C. Marx, West Berlin, MUSOLINI Publisher. Necklace: Class theory and history. Lire 1,500.

  • * * *


1. The hypothesis that absolute and relative surplus value at some point in the process can no longer extend is very valid. For the prolongation of absolute surplus value there are certainly physical limits (the fact that the working day can not exceed a certain number of hours without destroying the workforce) and on the other hand the introduction of three eight-hour shifts makes it practically impossible to further extension of the time of absolute surplus value (3 x 8 = 24 hours). For the prolongation of relative surplus value we know that it depends on the growth of the organic composition of capital, but we have seen that in the moment of crisis the organic composition can not increase, so that relative surplus value can not be extended. Moreover, times of crisis are always preceded by phases of strong economic growth, which determine an upward trend in wages (see the wage increases obtained by the Italian working class in the years 1960-68) for which this fact further prevents the possibility of increasing relative surplus value.

2. The phase of general and exclusive domination is that in which capitalism has extended its mode of production throughout the world. Now there is practically no more autonomous economic areas than the capitalist system. This does not mean that pre-capitalist social forms and strata no longer survive, but now these forms and these layers are all internal to capitalist development itself and therefore regulated by its economic laws ("underdevelopment" is functional to "development").

3. A historical periodization of capitalist development is useful for understanding the economic basis and function of imperialism.

1860-1873: Apogee of free competition.

In this period there is the dominion of English capital over the world area. It is the golden age of capitalism in which the system works "spontaneously", thanks to normal market forces. The export of capital is essentially export of commodity capital. The first colonial conquests begin. Capitalism is spreading in Europe and in North America.

1873-1900: Colonialism phase.

Maximum development of colonial wars: the strongest capitalist countries are dividing the world. Colonial possessions of European capitalist powers.

Year 1876 1900 in Africa 10.8% 90.4% in Polinesia 56.8% 98.9% in Asia 51.5% 56.6% In Europe there is a general appeal to protectionism, which allows the various capitalist countries to consolidate and develop their respective national capitals. In the more advanced capitalist countries the first cartels are established (agreements between various industries for the partition of the internal market and price fixing, but the industries maintain their reciprocal autonomy), which however still represent the exception. "On the domestic market, competition recedes in front of the cartels while on foreign markets it finds a barrier in the protectionist duties of which all the major industrial countries are surrounded, with the exception of England. But these tariffs represent in reality only armaments for the definitive universal industrial campaign that will have to decide of the supremacy on the world market ". (from a note by Engels to Capital III (II) page 112).

1900-1914: The imperialist phase begins.

The cartels are now the basis of all economic life. Monopolies are starting to form (no longer mere agreements between industries if they are parades, but large unified industries that control the internal market and set prices). The first multinational Trust also appear. "The famous AEG dominates from 175 to 200 companies (with the system of investments)". Only abroad it has 34 representations including 12 joint-stock companies in over 10 states. It is understood that AEG represents a large combined enterprise, including no less than 16 companies producing the most modern finished products, starting from cables and insulators to cars and airplanes ". (from Lenin's "Imperialism"). "A feature of imperialism at this stage is the export of capital in the form of financial capital, that is, the money capital which the strongest capitalist countries lend at high interest rates to the weaker capitalist countries, to be transformed into industrial capital. The strongest capitalist countries store gigantic over-profits with the "coupon cut" and bank capital takes on a preponderant weight. The division of the entire land surface between the capitalist countries is completed and the division of the world among the multinational Trust begins. The interimperialist war necessarily takes over from the colonial wars for a new division of the world (first world war 1915-18). 1918-1940: The outcome of the First World War did not solve the problem of domination over the world area. Germany emerges from the weakened but not destroyed war. The victorious proletarian revolution in Russia and ever more pressing in the other capitalist countries poses new and more serious problems to the various bourgeoisies for some nations there is a return to variously disguised protectionist forces (eg the "Autarchic theories" in Italy), to allow a rapid reconstruction after the destruction of the war. The Monopoly is now the basis of the various "reconstructed" economies. 1945-19 75: World War II establishes the dominance of US imperialism over the western capitalist area, the multi-national monopoly monopoly (ie large trusts, with companies in various countries, investments in various productive sectors, which share the world market) it is now the dominant element. The division of the Western capitalist area is no longer between nations but between multinationals.