Abstract: the world is forming four major power sectors in Western industrial capital, transnational financial capital, the Islamic world and the rise of China. the three major conflicts will dominate the international pattern of the next five to ten years: between the Western internal industrial capital and the transnational financial capital, between the Islamic world and the non-Islamic world, and between China and the West; which conflict will be Dominance is a key judgement for the development of the future situation. As for the Sino-US contest , China and the United States will be caught in a fierce conflict within five to ten years, but we do not know this kind of conflict. Whether it happens in the “Chinese model” or in the “American model.” The so-called “American model” is war. The so-called “Chinese model” is a long-term, all-round contest, except for the means of war, a silent, but equally fierce contest. From trade to geopolitics, from culture to soft power conflicts.
Must understand the pros and cons of the internal division of the United States
For the United States-Western whether there are two different kinds of capital: industrial capital and transnational financial capital, how the interests of the two move from unanimity to division, and thus the contradiction between the two becomes more and more acute, our academic circles There is no consensus so far; even in a sense, without real understanding of this, we seem to have a blank point in the research perspective.
Our understanding of China itself is very complete, complete, objective and fair; whether it is strengths or weaknesses, we are clear about our country. This is the advantage of our “confidence”. However, in the “knowing oneself” and in the West, what kind of earth-shattering “nuclear fission” is happening, we are not well researched, and even in a semi-understood state. Therefore, we have been controversial about whether there are two different power sectors in the United States and the West.
In fact, the existence of the two major power sectors and the phenomenon of the division of interests have long been emerging. The reason why the United States broke out in the previous years was the “Wall Street Movement”, and “99% of workers opposed 1% of financial capitalists.” In fact, the most fundamental reason lies in the division of industrial capital and financial capital interests. The weakening of industrial capital has led to a large number of American middle class and lower working class who have sold their labor to make a living and lose their employment opportunities. At this time, industrial capital is consistent with the interests of the labor class it employs (ie, its “exploitation target”). Thus, within the West, two major power sectors, the industrial capital plus the middle and lower working class for them, and the transnational financial capital were formed. This is not to deny the Marxist theory of class struggle. But at a certain historical stage, industrial capital and most of the middle class and the lower working class employed for it do have common interests, especially in an era when economic activities are increasingly globalized.
If we say that the interests of these two power sectors are basically the same in the early days of globalization, in today’s special historical stage, we can observe the main contradictions of these two power sectors in the following aspects:
First, financial capital needs to move outside the enterprise to reduce production costs in order to obtain greater profits; while industrial capital requires enterprises to return to their home countries to increase the employment of the middle and lower working class. The return of the enterprise, this is exactly what Trump did.
Second, financial capital requires the influx of immigrants, even at the expense of introducing illegal immigrants, in order to reduce the cost of production (lower illegal immigration costs) and seek maximum profits; while industrial capital should block foreign immigrants and retain job opportunities to the lower middle class. Working class. Blocking immigrants is exactly what Trump did.
Third, financial capital requires the complete free circulation of global commodities. Only when the commodities are completely freely circulated, the investment of transnational financial capital is meaningful; while industrial capital needs to substantially increase the tariffs imposed on foreign goods to improve the domestic products. Competitiveness. This is exactly what Trump did.
Fourth, financial capital needs various cross-border agreements to strengthen its legal protection in various countries; Trump’s frequent “retreat” happens to be the opposite; because industrial capital should minimize the binding of international rules to it. To enhance the convenience of exporting its products to countries. And Trump-led America also needs to use US domestic laws to bind foreign competitors. The case of Huawei and Meng Zhouzhou shows that Trump is doing this.
Fifth, transnational financial capital needs countries all over the world, especially big ones, to gradually evolve into a model of “election democracy plus free economy”; because only then can transnational financial capital influence and lead through direct control over finance and money. The election of regimes around the world has led to the inclusion of areas within which transnational financial capital can be controlled. The US industrial capital represented by Trump does not have this demand, so Trump will weaken this expenditure after he takes office.
I have already covered in detail in many articles. In Western electoral democracies, how do capital control politicians, political parties, and the media at the same time to dominate the election results of democratic countries. I have worked in the West for more than two decades, witnessing how the one-person, one-vote elections are gradually influenced, controlled, and ultimately dominated by political parties, pre-party elections, media and advertising. This is the historical decline of Western-style democracy…
Money and the media are the secrets of capital-controlled elections. And Trump is precisely through his own money (as a monopoly, Trump has money to support his campaign, not as inseparable from other politicians) and Twitter (reported by Trump) There are tens of millions of fans on social networks such as Twitter, so Trump has far more influence on them than the US media. In addition, the system of “winners take all” in the US election system is backed by industrial capital. The middle class and the lower working class, which are on the same line as the industrial capital and whose living standards are declining in the process of globalization, broke through the capital’s dominance and control over the election and were elected president of the United States. Therefore, in a sense, Trump’s victory is not the victory of the Republican Party, but the victory of the American populist revolution.
And all that happened in the United States is also gestating in Europe.
Therefore, today’s West and the United States have actually split into two major forces: multinational financial capital and industrial capital that support and oppose globalization. Recognizing this is crucial to our strategic engagement with the United States and the West.
Of course, these two power sectors are reaching a consensus on the issue of dealing with China, that is, we must curb the rise of China. This is mainly because transnational financial capital originally thought that China’s investment in China would prompt China to gradually move toward electoral democracy in the process of opening up. But it has failed. Therefore, transnational financial capital quickly changed its tone through the so-called “strategists” and “experts on China issues” that they raised, and sang China… The industrial capital represented by Trump is not interested in the Chinese system itself. The focus is on comprehensively suppressing China in the fields of science and technology, military, finance and culture. This is also why Trump is against the idioms of other US presidents. He can call the Chinese leader “my friend” and can honestly declare that he “likes” the North Korean leader…
Therefore, industrial capital and transnational financial capital have different strategies for China. The former seeks to always lead China, while the latter seeks to change China’s political system one day… We have thus observed that Trump and US financial capital are in sharp opposition to almost all other fields, only to China’s strategy. (Starting a trade war) was applauded by American political, capital, and media (and quite a few Americans)!
Will the West also set foot on the threshold of political change?
We can already see very clearly that it is because of the division between the internal industrial capital of the West and the interests of transnational financial capital. Today, in the field of international relations, relations among countries, power comparison, focus of contradictions, and vertical and horizontal links are all changing. Some; some are still very intense. As mentioned earlier, Italy and France, as allies in the same ideological ideology camp, have appeared to support the movement by Italian politicians who ran to France to support the “Yellow Horse Movement”, which was intended to overthrow the Mark Long government. This incredible phenomenon! The fundamental reason is that France is currently the home base of transnational financial capital, while Italy has completely turned to its domestic industrial capital and become a far-right populist regime…
At the same time, the struggle between industrial capital and transnational financial capital also caused the Western democratic system itself to explode the most serious internal crisis since the end of World War II. The French “Horse vest movement” is very illustrative at this point. It is precisely because the French political circles have chosen the right-wing president Sarkozy, the left-wing president Hollande, and the left-wing president Mark Long to take power, but they have not solved the general trend of the French recession after the end of the “Glorious 30 Years”. As a result, the standard of living of most French people has continued to decline in recent years. The French “Horse Armor Movement” has begun to direct its direct focus on the three core powers that rule the West: capital, political power and media.
Therefore, in a sense, the “Yellow vest movement” is a far-right revolution. Its essence is consistent with the US “Occupy Wall Street” movement. The “Occupy Wall Street” movement was severely suppressed, and the “Yellow vest movement” seems to be unable to escape this fate. The supporters and participants of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement actually turned to Trump. In a sense, Trump’s election marked the “Occupy Wall Street” movement and changed back; the “Yellow vest” was also the same. .
On March 23, in the case of the French army, the “Yellow vest movement” began to quiet down, but it will surely make a comeback. Because the “Yellow vest movement” just proves that the current political system and political parties in France can no longer solve the process of the continuous decline of the French economy, which proves that there are obvious defects in the system of Western democratic countries, and it seems that it is forcing Western democracies to carry out their political system as well. reform. The reason why President Mark Long proposed the National People’s Congress debate was because he also saw this. But it is impossible for Macron to propose any reforms that are truly effective. This makes people have to ask whether the political system of France and even the West itself has reached a point where it cannot be changed.
In fact, the French theoretical community has already proposed that the “Yellow vest movement” should carry out “necessary reforms” in the field of political systems so that “democracy can continue.” Dominique Rousseau, a professor of political science at the Sorbonne University in Paris, published an article on the French left-wing “Liberation” forum, arguing that France accepts some political ideas put forward by the “Yellow Horse Movement” and establishes a “citizen-sponsored referendum” mechanism. Or at least partially accept the “draw-up democracy” and elect a new “third council that directly supervises the executive and the National Assembly by citizens”…
This shows that the contradiction between Western internal industrial capital and transnational financial capital has begun to be reflected in the political system level, which has already attracted close attention from the theoretical staff: Western democratic institutions have also faced the situation that “no reform will have no way out”…because Therefore, today’s Western theoretical circles no longer rumor: China has become a “comprehensive rival” in the West in the field of governance.
Four major power plates and three major conflicts
If we take the Brexit, the US election of Trump and the Sino-US trade war as three major events that we have not predicted, plus the “New Zealand shootings” that shocked the world, we can roughly sum up Three major characteristics of the world today:
First, the world is forming four major power sectors in Western industrial capital, transnational financial capital, the Islamic world and the rise of China. The four major power sector games will determine the future direction of human society. From the current point of view, the representative of the Western industrial capital strength sector is the Trump of the United States; and the transnational financial capital has always been hidden behind the scenes. We can only see roughly today that the EU is now representing this invisible but ubiquitous The invisible power. From this perspective, we can predict that there will be more and more intense frictions and conflicts between the United States and Europe in the coming years; of course, unless Trump’s reelection fails… that would mean industrial capital. The rout. If this scene occurs, the overall weakness of the West will quickly become a historical reality.
Second, both China and the West are faced with the adjustment, improvement, and sorting out of their own systems. Who can take the lead in getting out of the predicament of their own reforms, eliminate political crises, eliminate social crises, and find new economic development drivers, who will be in the future. In the international all-round competition, we have taken the lead. The West needs to rethink the essence of democracy, while China may need to further improve the form of democracy itself… From this perspective, China, which has been in continuous reform and opening up for 40 years, has an unparalleled advantage.
Third, the three major conflicts will dominate the international pattern of the next five to ten years: between the Western internal industrial capital and the transnational financial capital, between the Islamic world and the non-Islamic world, and between China and the West; which conflict will be Dominance is a key judgement for the development of the future situation.
Judging from the current situation, it seems that the conflict between China and the West, especially with the United States, dominates. However, from a longer-term perspective, the conflict between the two major power sectors within the West will inevitably become the most important contradiction in the world tomorrow. Because the two can’t coexist together…
As for the Sino-US contest, as early as last year before the Sino-US trade war broke out, I wrote in the “New People’s Weekly” that China and the United States will be caught in a fierce conflict within five to ten years, but we do not know this kind of conflict. Whether it happens in the “Chinese model” or in the “American model.” The so-called “American model” is war. However, when the world entered the nuclear age, the United States never actually waged war against any other major power, especially the nuclear power that might be able to rebel against the United States in the military. The United States has always only started with small countries: North Korea, Vietnam, Iraq…
The so-called “Chinese model” is a long-term, all-round contest, except for the means of war, a silent, but equally fierce contest. From trade to geopolitics, from culture to soft power conflicts… The so-called all-round is a contest with no blank spots. We must know that although the United States has never launched a war against the Soviet Union, it has succeeded in dissolving this superpower from ideological, spiritual and cultural terms.
Today, the United States is actually launching a spiritual colonization of China and an invisible ideological war! In this invisible war, we seem to be on the defensive… I don’t see you. Today, the winds of beauty, beauty, and beauty are always in the land of China. The question is whether the result of this invisible conflict will be the “ZTE” model or the “Huawei” model, which will determine the nature of the future relationship between China and the United States; it will also determine China’s position in the future world…