As we know from Lenin a state only exists to enforce a dictatorship of one class over the rest. I’ve been thinking about the idea of national bourgeois vs international bourgeois in this context.
When the United States does regime change in a nation they are essentially reordering it to serve the interests of the international bourgeois. This does not always seem to align with the interests of national bourgeois. So we’ll see examples like Russia, and Iran where they engage in anti-imperialist activity while being a state run by the bourgeois class.
Now I am not asking if those states are valuable allies, as they clearly are, but more broadly how we should view the national bourgeois.
If the international bourgeois can be seen to be harming the interests of national bourgeois in a certain country is it valuable as a tactic to try and ally with those national bourgeois? There is always the risk of the being co-opted into the international bourgeois class. An example being the Cubans, Iranians, etc who fled to and live in the US.
But this might not be something to concern ourselves with either. The more the United States and the west in general try to co-opt another nations bourgeois the more it seems to destabilize their internal politics. You can see this in the United States in particular. And in none of these cases has it ever led to a significant victory for the United States. Even its most successfull attempt at this, Venezuela, seems to be a mess. Not giving it much benefit so far.
So it seems to me that perhaps supporting national bouregois movements in countries currently dominated by the international bourgeois may be an effective strategy to weaken the international bourgeois and fragment the global bourgeois class in general. Allowing for the international poletarian movements to gain more power and influence over all. Sort of a divide and conquer strategy.
I’m curious to hear other comrades thoughts on this. Is it a viable strategy? Is it too great a risk due to the potential for these national bourgeois to then support national fascist movements?
In the context of the oppressed country, the national bourgeoisie and proletariat / peasantry (as far as they still exist) can be allied. However, this allyship is not to be confused as a permanent allyship. Both the national bourgeoisie and the proletariat / peasantry cooperate against imperialism while fighting each other for ultimate control over the direction of the liberated nation. As the proletariat, we should use them precisely as far as they oppose the imperialist bourgeoisie, and undermine them as far as they work against the dictatorship of the proletariat, either before or after its establishment.
They cannot be allowed to form a dictatorship of the national bourgeoisie. If they do, it becomes far more difficult for the proletariat and peasantry, who need to somehow overthrow the dictatorship of the national bourgeoisie without resulting in a replacement with a dictatorship of the comprador bourgeoisie. This is the complex struggle of the proletariat and peasantry in Iran, Russia, etc, and why for now they balance opposition to the nationalist bourgeoisie with allyship against imperialism.
As a Statesian, my role is simpler: oppose the US empire by any and all means, undermine anything that serves to further imperialism and work to end it entirely.
Yes I agree with this for the most part. I do think maybe it leaves a few open questions about the issue in place for me. For example, China still has a national bourgeois class that it has control over. People like Jack Ma for example. A lot of these people seem to be useful to them internationally. And domestically they prevent them from gaining political power. I’m not quite sure how they managed this, or how it could be replicated elsewhere. To have a socialist state where the national bourgeois is weaponized in its favor. Then there’s the question of states where there is no real non-bourgeois force at all. Not that is organized. It would seem to me in this case it might be best to keep the international and national bouregois in a state of stalemate while we attempt to develop a vanguard in that state. Since allowing either to dominate may lead to a much more hostile political environmnt and security situation.
I also think there’s a bit of a phenomenon where say the national bourgeois are in power; They will feel threatened by the rising proletarian forces and will turn to the international bourgeois for their security. Leading to them handing over national resources as payment for this support. So how should we handle these situations? It seems the only answer would be to weaken the international bouregois enough they aren’t a viable way to remain in power any longer? It’s all seemingly quite complicated.
