New Marxist Journal Communist Fight. Issue #1 out now

Issue #1 of Communist Fight, journal of the Trotskyist Faction of Socialist Fight, out now:

Articles on Coronavirus crisis

Turkey’s incursion in Syria

Our Platform

Zionism and the capitulation of former revolutionaries: why we take on the mantle of the old Socialist Fight

Due to the Covid-19 crisis this is not currently available in hard copy, though it will be ASAP. This issue is downloadable as a PDF from here however.

2 thoughts on “New Marxist Journal Communist Fight. Issue #1 out now

  1. Wht do you think on this?

    If you please, we will like a full, comprensive criticism.

    “Unmasked: the new power of counterfeiters ( Démasqués: le pouvoir des faux-monnayeurs)

    « Daß jede Nation verrecken würde, die, ich will nicht sagen für ein Jahr, sondern für ein paar Wochen die Arbeit einstellte, weiß jedes Kind. Ebenso weiß es, daß die den verschiednen Bedürfnismassen entsprechenden Massen von Produkten verschiedne und quantitativ bestimmte Massen der gesellschaftlichen Gesamtarbeit erheischen. Daß diese Notwendigkeit der Verteilung der gesellschaftlichen Arbeit in bestimmten Proportionen durchaus nicht durch die bestimmte Form der gesellschaftlichen Produktion aufgehoben, sondern nur ihre Erscheinungsweise ändern kann, ist self-evident. Naturgesetze können überhaupt nicht aufgehoben werden. Was sich in historisch verschiednen Zuständen ändern kann, ist nur die Form, worin jene Gesetze sich durchsetzen. Und die Form, worin sich diese proportioneile Verteilung der Arbeit durchsetzt in einem Gesellschaftszustand, worin der Zusammenhang der gesellschaftlichen Arbeit sich als Privataustausch der individuellen Arbeitsprodukte geltend macht, ist eben der Tauschwert dieser Produkte.
    Die Wissenschaft besteht eben darin, zu entwickeln, wie das Wertgesetz sich durchsetzt. »
    Karl Marx, Brief an Ludwig Kugelmann, I I.Juli 1868
    https://marxwirklichstudieren.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/mew_band32.pdf
    Seiten 552-553
    *********************
    “That every nation would die, that every nation would stop working, I don’t mean for a year, but for a few weeks, every child knows it. He also knows that the masses of products corresponding to different masses of needs require different and quantitatively determined masses of global social work. That this need for the distribution of social work in determined proportions cannot be abrogated by the determined form of social production, but can only change its mode of manifestation, is self-evident. The laws of nature cannot in any way be abrogated. What can change in historically different states is only the form in which these laws impose themselves. And the form in which this proportional distribution of labour is imposed in a social state, in which the social labour relationship is asserted as a private exchange of the products of individual labour, is precisely the exchange value.
    The science consists precisely in establishing how the law of value imposes itself. »
    Karl Marx, letter to Ludwig Kugelmann, July 11, 1868
    [Translating TML]

    As Dr. Valérie Bugault, (Dr. in law… https://youtu.be/AKaXg5755lk ) explains it so well, the apparent chaos of the current situation, and apparently due to Covid-19, does not actually owe much to chance, even if its consequences are concretely a fatal fatality for a few tens of thousands of human beings, in the short term, and certainly for an even greater number of companies, in the medium term, which also means, but squarely for millions of workers, social death.
    As a concrete implementation of the theories of “constructive chaos” inspired by Schumpeter and others, this is indeed an accelerated evolution of the processes of global governance of financial capital, and not a chaos beyond the control of coherent political will and control of the “elites” of globalized finance, and particularly of Western finance.

    The question of whether the Covid-19 “trigger” is itself the result of real chance or not is irrelevant, insofar as the financial elites who condition global policies have seized this “opportunity” to give a brutal boost to a development that had already been “in the prepearing” for several years, and particularly since 2008.

    As we have already seen, the short-term solution imposed by the 2008 crisis, by injecting a colossal mass of liquidity into the entire system, only allowed the financial side of the system to be rescued, and not the revival of the productive economy, which was supposed to revive consumption and economic growth. On this side, the effect has been limited, more or less, to freezing the situation, the rare advances hardly compensating for the setbacks.

    The inevitable trap in this process quickly turned out to be the reconstitution of a financial bubble at least equivalent to that which had led to the 2007-2008 crisis.

    With this difference, the “money plate” remedy cannot be renewed without condemning once again, and in the shorter term, any chance of economic development.

    The differential, which has become exponential, between the “real economy” side and the mainly financial side of the system, thus imposes, as a condition for a new “rescue” of capitalism, the simultaneous destruction of a large part of the productive forces, which opens the field of ruins for a “reconstruction” development, as happened after the last world wars, and the destruction of an important part of the financial capital itself, so as to protect the system against the too rapid reconstitution of a new “financial bubble” that would threaten even this “chance of reconstitution”!

    This is therefore partly the difference between the “management” of this crisis by the “financial authorities”, including in particular the central banks, during this current “crisis” and during the “Quantitative Easing solution” of the 2008 crisis.

    But this is not yet the main point.

    If the “QE” solution has failed to “revive the economy”, it is not only or even essentially the result of “bad will” on the part of investors. It is, quite simply, the result, and even the acceleration, of an evolution of the productive forces.

    The still relatively important, if not exponential, growth of the productive forces, until the turn of the 1970s, was based on the still very important valorisation of capital in the production process, which was therefore still the main basis of the process of capital accumulation.

    The so-called “financialisation” process of capitalism, which appeared during the 1980s, was not due to a “badly intended” policy reversal by investors, but simply to an increasingly drastic fall in the profitability of “productive” investments, i.e. investments directly in real economic activity, and not in speculation on securities, including stock markets.

    Paradoxically, but only on the surface, it is indeed the considerable increase in labour productivity that is at the origin of this fall in the profitability of “productive” capital. Indeed, the increase in labour productivity is not due to an exponential multiplication of the physical strength of proletarians, or even of their manual skills, but to the progress of production technologies, and particularly to the increasing automation and the extension of robotization.

    Now, in the world of unbridled competition between capitalists for the conquest of more and more “market shares”, the “victory” and the domination of the markets belongs to the one who holds the lowest prices in the face of competition, reduces his margins, and tends towards the limit of selling almost at “cost price”, if not completely, and even provisionally below, in a situation of “dumping”.

    Insofar as this “cost price” (…or almost) still included a significant part of depreciation of the cost of labour, in the form of wages, an equally significant part of the capital invested thus returned to the economic circuit and thus made it possible to maintain the “production-consumption” cycle at a sufficiently high level to continue economic development, the accumulation of surplus value and its reinvestment in the productive circuit.

    With the extension of automation and robotisation, if the individual productivity of each worker is increased tenfold, the need to use labour, “living labour”, is drastically reduced in order to obtain the same quantity of finished products, supposed to meet a market demand, which is in fact now reduced because of the non-rejection of part of the capital into the consumption circuit, thus destroying the dynamic of “growth” in the “production-consumption” cycle.
    Of course, this is a simplified summary of the general trend, the fundamental and “sustainable” trend, the one that capitalism cannot stop, precisely because, as Marx explains to us, quoted above, it is the way in which the law of value imposes itself with the current development of the productive forces.
    So this is the general meaning of the current of globalized capital flows. Of course, when we look at it more closely, and especially locally, there are different types of counter-currents, which may give the impression, to an observer who sees only a local and/or partial aspect of the problem, just as when faced with the counter-current of a river caused by an obstacle protruding from the bank, that the direction of the current is only what he sees at that place and at that moment, but this does not reverse the direction of the dominant general flow.
    Of course, capital does everything it can to maintain and accentuate these countercurrents, notably through the development of the tertiary sector and a plethoric service economy, and especially through relocation, but in doing so, it only slightly delays the deadline, and in particular the impoverishment of Western markets, which it even accentuates, in fact, both in absolute terms and in terms of development potential.
    At the turn of the 1980s, all the seeds of a major crisis had already been sown, and it was only the Chinese oxygen balloon that enabled the system to be temporarily rescued. But it was only the Chinese oxygen balloon that enabled the system to be temporarily rescued, since it was based precisely on the deindustrialisation of Western countries, without generating a sufficiently endogenous Chinese market, even today (1). Apart from the fact that interdependence is ultimately an Achilles’ heel for the whole as well as for each of the two “partners”, US and Chinese, it has not prevented the accumulation of a new financial pole in China, generating, as a challenger to US imperialism, a new rivalry on a planetary scale, and thus new international tensions (2).
    But the iron law of the development of the capitalist productive forces applies just as much to the new Chinese giant and in its turn it cannot escape the slope of delocalization, automation, robotization, tertiairization, etc….
    Simply put, it turns out that in the US-China conflict, China is the still growing power, the one that continues to accumulate financial capital on the basis of its productive sector, and it therefore had no interest, in this rivalry, in seeing its productive apparatus stopped or even slowed down.
    Nevertheless, in the long run, its development constraints are the same as those of the West, even if it seems to follow a different model, as a state superstructure.
    In fact, because of the particularly bureaucratic and authoritarian structure of the functioning of its state monopoly finance capitalism, it even, and just as paradoxically, but only apparently, has much faster and more efficient possibilities of adaptation and mutation than the West.
    Indeed, in an increasingly robotised industrial society, if the exploitation of “living labour” gradually ceases to be a source of surplus value and capital accumulation, the control of the productive apparatus continues to be the only basis of class domination, and even more so, by the simple and only dependency in which it can maintain the popular classes, for the satisfaction of their most elementary needs.
    In the long run, therefore, the tendency is no longer necessarily to overproduce consumer goods, whether superfluous or not, but to maintain and maintain the dependence of the populations, independently of the “profit” margin that can be achieved on a relatively reduced consumption, or even reduced to the strict necessary for survival that is “culturally” and even “ideologically” acceptable, with the appropriate packaging, under “ecological” or other pretexts.

    Indeed, in a fully robotized and monopolized economy, the income of populations no longer comes essentially from their work, but from the subsidies artificially and monetarily created by the system, in the form of “universal income” or otherwise, the notion of value created by work also disappears and the accumulation of “capital”, at the top of the social ladder, just as “money creation”, which is necessary for the functioning of the whole, is now nothing more than a set of accounting entries where the dominant class inscribes its own power on lines of “credit” which have no real meaning other than the distribution it decides of this power among its co-opted members.
    In reality, this has been clearly seen since 2008, and even more so with the present and pseudo “Covid-19 crisis”, a simple stage in this “evolution”, which is already exactly what is happening, even if this “mutation” must necessarily remain for some time “compatible” with the remnants of more “traditional” capitalism, so as to take place without any real resistance of any kind, and obviously without an uprising of the working classes, who may wish to see the fruit of their past and present work, which the modern industrial apparatus represents, restored to them.
    Of course, as long as the exploitation of “living labour” remains a source of potential surplus value, and even, as long as it is not dried up to the last drop, this source remains a major stake in the internal struggles of capital. But for years already, the most “modernist” fractions of finance capital, those who are also the most cultivated and the most cynical, are those who have already understood the inevitability of this evolution of their productive forces, and who, rather than trying to create a sustainable revival of the growth of the traditional “productive” capitalist system, in reality definitively no longer found, logically enough prefer to work in the background to their own mutation as a dominant class in a new type of economic and social relations, that of a “robotized” industrial society, even if they qualify it as “post-industrial” in an attempt to give it a pseudo “justification” with an “ecological” sounding.
    In this new context, but already in latent gestation for quite a few years, it is thus not surprising that in its ideological discourse, the bourgeoisie is making more and more use of all wood, including and above all, “green” wood!
    The “green” capitalism preached by the bobocracy for several decades now is the “fertile” breeding ground of this “nursery” of apparently “humanist” and even “social”, if not “socialist”, liberal-social-democratic elucubrations.
    Global warming, like Covid-19, is indeed a reality, and a reality fraught with consequences for humanity, and which it must obviously take into account in its supposedly “controlled” evolution, but the current ideological and political instrumentalization of these phenomena, regardless of their “human” origin or not, clearly does not aim to resolve the consequences, in either case.
    For all that, all the fractions of the bourgeoisie currently in power in the different states are not entirely a reflection of the ongoing mutation of its international “up to date” part in the cynicism of these manipulations. For a good part of the bourgeoisie also, and above all, of the petty-bourgeoisie, chaos is indeed a reality beyond its control and it tries, more or less, to cope, but above all, obviously, in the sense of defending its interests.
    Generally speaking, beyond the rhetoric of circumstance, the manifestation of contradictory interests, with the perspective of “deconfinement”, continues to confuse the situation and to conceal as best it can the substance of the manipulation in progress.
    However, what seemed to be still a matter of debate at the beginning of the “crisis” is now somewhat clearer: the overall number of victims has been brought back into proportion and the “exceptional” nature of the “pandemic” is clearly being undermined. This only serves to further highlight the very real “deficiencies” of the supposedly top-level health systems in the West. And the lack of “reactivity” of the States, particularly in France, in the face of the evidence of emergency measures that were not taken, either in time, at the beginning of the crisis, or in the obvious sense of the best possible efficiency: to produce tests, masks, respirators, and above all, to implement an appropriate treatment protocol, whereas following the Chinese experience it was being rapidly established in France, with the work of the IHU-Mediterranean and Prof. Raoult.

    Both the absence of early but clearly useful measures, such as border controls, airport controls, etc., and the systematic smear campaign against Prof. Raoult, all these elements are today evidence of the deliberate “scuttling” of both the economic and health life of the country. In various forms, and to varying degrees, depending on the interests of the local bourgeoisies in this profound “mutation” of financial capital, the same attitude has been observed in the main Western countries.
    The actually complacent and kollabo thesis that the system was “caught off guard” and reacted “belatedly and in a disorderly manner” is absolutely no longer valid, even if it may have initially abused a mass of gogos and continues to do so for those who remain subject to the “official” media discourse.
    It holds all the less if one considers that the thinking heads of the “elites” who really govern us were perfectly and very early aware of the imminence of the “pandemic” which was therefore baptized “Covid-19”, which is indeed the vintage of its real birth. Moreover, the origin of the virus, which is in reality “Western”, and whose lethality was known to the “responsible” authorities as early as November 2019, if not before, according to certain sources (3), attests to a morbid and perverse calculation, and in fact, quite criminal on their part: indeed, from a strictly accounting point of view, if one balances the cost of immediate emergency measures to make up for the delay in the manufacture of tests and masks, and even, in terms of “complementary” hospital structures, against the economic cost of an almost total and prolonged stoppage of the productive apparatus, With the cascade of bankruptcies and unemployment that it causes, it is clear that it would have been the decision to make an “emergency investment” that would have been perfectly justified in terms of the collective interest, both in terms of health and the economy.
    Similarly, from the very beginning of the pandemic in the West, the path of research for a therapeutic protocol opened by the IHU-Mediterranean in France was very quickly internationally known and should logically have received material aid and official support for a generalized development and implementation, and not be subjected to a campaign of slander and systematic denigration. Moreover, here again, the overall investment would have been relatively minimal in comparison with the other avenues allegedly explored, which have, moreover, still not yielded any practical results.

    In the light of all these obvious elements, it is clear that the generalized “scuttling” of the economy is indeed a calculation and not an improbable “aberration” of the real rulers and decision-makers. A calculation that therefore responds to interests that do not seem obvious at first glance, one that trusts too easily in appearances.
    As Marx reminds us, quoted in the foreword:

    “That every nation would die, that every nation would stop working, I don’t mean for a year, but for a few weeks, every child knows. »
    And therefore, even more so, a group of political, economic and health leaders trained in the greatest schools of their respective nations…!

    The “higher” interests that have thus presided over such a political strategy are obviously not those of the nation-states considered as “representative” of the peoples they are supposed to defend and protect.
    In the very short term, on the other hand, they are those of financial capital “threatened”, precisely since November 2019, by the imminent bursting of the new “financial bubble”, which was close to 6,000 points in France and its “equivalent” in other financial markets…”. Deflating “the bubble more or less “under control”, even if this inevitably leads to relative losses, had thus become the immediate priority for financial capital, well before the “national interest” of any nation .
    And the relative nature of the losses deliberately borne by financial capital is all the more evident when compared with the 2008 crisis, which even saw the CAC 40 index flirt with 2500 points in early 2009.

    We can therefore see concretely that from mid-March, after a rather sharp fall, the CAC stabilized around 4000 points, before returning, at the end of March, to a remarkably stable level around 4300 points.

    The Dow Jones (USA), for its part, after a brief incursion below 20,000 points in March, has quickly crossed this bar to stabilize, in the same way, above 23,000 points. Recall that its “low” in early 2009 was at 7,000 points, in line with the CAC at 2,500 points, before beginning, as far as the US index is concerned, therefore, a particularly dizzying ascent, and therefore purely speculative, towards 30,000 points, at the beginning of the current crisis!
    Of course, this comparison must obviously be understood in the other direction, namely that it is actually the “French” index that follows the US index, rather than the other way around… And just as obviously the same “syndrome” can be found in the main financial centres, and in particular in London “Brexit or not Brexit”…:

    The interest of financial capital is therefore quite distinct from that of nations and peoples: a simple observation! …Without a doubt, an observation that is already old, but particularly and cruelly realistic in the present circumstances.

    Of course, appearances can still be misleading, even for many players in economic life, because of the very large number of capitalist companies that are already affected by the crisis, and will no doubt be even more so in the future.
    It may also remain misleading in view of the overall and average fall in the value of financial assets, around 25%. It is even clear that during the first jolts of the crisis, and particularly during the first “spectacular falls” and the panic that they caused among many small savers, entire family assets were destroyed and shares were bought back at low cost in large bundles. Who, if not those who had the means to do so anyway, could have done so, to the point that they did not fear such a widespread fall?
    In the destruction of financial capital, just as in the destruction of productive forces, everything is a matter of scale… The holders of real power are obviously not the peoples or even the holders of average family wealth, but those who hold packets of shares largely sufficient to control the productive apparatus not only of this or that nation, but entire sections of the world productive apparatus. And their real power, therefore, lies not in the “value” of this or that share, which is in reality essentially fictitious in this respect, but in the ability to control capital flows on a globalized scale, regardless of the particularly fleeting “value” of this or that share at a given moment.
    Financial capital is fundamentally, in terms of “value”, “fictitious” capital by definition (4), and if it is appropriate to keep quotation marks around it, it is precisely because of the reality of this power of control that it provides to its holders, but only on a disproportionate scale, compared to the common sense of the “value” of money, and even on a scale so disproportionate that the fluctuations, even brutal, of the stock market prices, have no other importance there than the movements of pawns on a chess game.
    Unfortunately, but it is also a fact that can only be noted, it is therefore also on this scale that is so disproportionate in relation to the common sense of money that the massive destruction of productive forces, and in particular of thousands of VSE-SMEs, can be understood as a “necessary restructuring” of capitalism, and in any case, necessary to safeguard it as a system of class domination.
    As we have seen, it is therefore the morbid “synergy” of these two joint and “synchronised” destructions that will allow the provisional “relaunch” of the system from a level of financial capitalisation that has already been fixed, if not previously pre-established.
    But as we have also seen, in terms of safeguarding the class domination of a determined fraction of the international financial bourgeoisie, this is not yet the essential point.
    Indeed, formally, we see that this “safeguard” and this “revival” are provisionally “financed” by “state aid” … Where does the state suddenly find such subsidies, if not in its own debt?
    It will be remembered that until the eve of this “pandemic crisis”, the general watchword of Western governments, particularly European ones, was to drastically “limit” budget deficits, to the point of sacrificing many investment needs, particularly in the field of public health! (5)

    There is therefore, on the face of it, a complete reversal of policy on this essential point. However, new public debt cannot be built without a lender… A lender, who will therefore be the essential holder and the debt manager of the public debt of the States, whether in France or elsewhere… Now the “lender”, in Europe as in the USA, is, in the end, the central banks, which “release funds”, i.e. open lines of credit from which the banks will be able to “finance” the various States… (6) In the world before Covid-19″ the level of State indebtedness was therefore already considered excessive, and, through taxation, it already absorbed, for the payment to the banks of the interest on the debt, not to mention a repayment, which had become quite fanciful, of the debt itself, a large part of the value created by economic activity, i.e. by the workers, in the end.
    With this new generalised indebtedness of the States, it is their last chance to control their own economic development to some extent that is disappearing, and for good. They are therefore now entirely under monetary infusion, entirely and directly at the mercy of the credit of the central banks, including for the survival of their simple citizens, as shown by the need to finance “partial unemployment” which will most certainly become “definitive” for a very large number (7). Even the “rescue” financing of the VSE-SMEs that will be able to survive this shock will therefore directly place an additional part of the economic fabric in direct dependence on this type of “financing”, and therefore, in a barely indirect way, via their social contributions, the whole of social protection(8) .
    In the United States, the Trump ‘rescue’ plan includes, in a total ‘release’ of USD 2 000 billion, direct ‘aid’ in the form of cheques distributed directly to households, i.e. a ‘budget envelope’ of USD 290 billion, plus additional aid of USD 260 billion for the unemployed (9). Even if it seems to be a “gift” in the first degree, this enormous “drain” therefore also increases the deficit, and thus the government’s financing need, i.e. its debt….
    It is therefore, both financially and economically and socially, a capitulation in the middle of the countryside of all the States to the central power of the “banknote printing press”… That is to say, in fact, a total and definitive capitulation to the power of the oligarchy at the helm of the central banks.
    And since it is therefore “fictitious” money, in the sense that it does not correspond to any new value created by the economic fabric, but simply compensates, both through aid to individuals and companies, for the system’s definitive inability to recreate an endogenous economic dynamic, it is nevertheless, in the short term, through debt interest, the still remaining share of value created by labour that evaporates even further from national economies and even state budgets, in the fumes of an increasingly fictitious financial capital, itself already under monetary infusion since 2008.
    Gradually, slowly in appearance, but more and more rapidly, in fact, through successive “shocks” like the one in 2008 and the one we are currently experiencing, and as living labor inexorably withdraws from the economic fabric, to the “benefit” of the dependence of the majority as well as the survival of businesses on this type of financing, the class domination power of the oligarchy at the helm of the “money boards” can only expand further to the point of supplanting, on a planetary scale, all previous forms of political and economic power.
    It is thus clearly in this sense and in this “discreet” form that the most “modernist” fraction of the bourgeoisie intends to make its class domination evolve, and even to the detriment of a considerable part of the small and medium bourgeoisie, still animated by “creative” desires in the economic field. In a sense, the “Covid-19 crisis” is at the same time the first coup d’état on a planetary scale and the most discreet coup d’état in the world, and still, for the most part, ignored by the subjects who are already its victims, immediately, in their bodies and minds, and durably, in their vital economic interests.
    Behind the apparent and cynical extreme “rescue of bodies and souls” there is in fact a profound change in economic and social relations that is taking place under the leadership of an almost invisible fraction of the financial oligarchy, which by successive “crises” is taking control of the entire system.

    It is therefore no longer even the power of a financial oligarchy in search of speculative profits that are as spectacular in their excessiveness as they are fictitious in terms of their real economic base, but simply the power of permanent monetary infusion, which decides the economic and social life and death of individuals, companies, nations, peoples, ordinary citizens and its political, trade union and administrative kollabos, and does not neglect, by the way, to strengthen, lock up and ensure its prerogatives and privileges.
    But the worst is never certain, it so happens that this oligarchy of counterfeiters is far from being entirely unified on a world scale and a strong tension remains, on this level of monetary power, also between the “Western-US” faction and the “Eastern-Chinese” faction. The “economic war” very officially declared by Trump in 2018 (10) thus continued by other means through the political and ideological instrumentalization of the “Covid-19 crisis”.

    As we have seen in concrete terms, if the Chinese power is the one that did not yet have an immediate interest in the break-up of the productive forces, because of its dependence on exports, it is nevertheless the one that is able to restructure economic and social relations on its territory very quickly with a view to this transformation, in particular through the almost absolute control that it is able to exercise over practically the slightest deeds and gestures of its citizens, who are maintained in an economic and administrative dependence, and above all under a “computer” control that is much more developed than in the West. The “Covid-19 crisis” is therefore now, in addition to the increased centralization of monetary power, an almost “ideal” opportunity for the Western bourgeoisie to catch up in the field of the “Big-Brotherization” of its populations.
    It remains to be seen whether the conscious choice of the proletarians and peoples of the world will be to continue to submit to the implementation of this new form of oligarchic dictatorship.
    Luniterre

    ****************
    NOTES:
    ( 1 _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2015/09/01/de-la-structuration-maoiste-de-la-bulle-chinoise/
    _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2020/03/31/en-relisant-lenine-qui-parlait-deja-de-chine-reedition-2020/ )
    (2 _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2019/06/10/chine-usa-2014-2019-chronique-dune-guerre-economique-annoncee/
    _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2018/07/30/de-la-guerre-commerciale-a-la-guerre-monetaire-lete-en-pente-douce-du-yuan-chinois/ )
    (3 _ https://www.liberation.fr/checknews/2020/03/22/pourquoi-la-chine-accuse-t-elle-les-etats-unis-d-avoir-importe-le-virus_1782638 )
    (4 _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2018/03/10/aux-racines-de-la-crise-le-statut-des-actions-dans-le-capital-fictif/
    _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2018/03/15/aux-racines-de-la-crise-le-statut-des-actions-dans-le-capital-fictif-suite/ )
    (5 _ https://www.touteleurope.eu/actualite/deficit-qu-est-ce-que-la-regle-europeenne-des-3.html )
    (6 _ https://www.touteleurope.eu/actualite/revue-de-presse-covid-19-la-banque-centrale-europeenne-lance-un-programme-de-750-milliards-d-eur.html
    _ https://www.touteleurope.eu/revue-de-presse/revue-de-presse-covid-19-l-eurogroupe-valide-un-plan-de-soutien-de-540-milliards-d-euros.html )
    (7 _ https://www.latribune.fr/opinions/tribunes/l-enjeu-du-financement-des-reprises-a-la-barre-pour-sauver-le-tissu-economique-francais-845651.html )
    (8 _ https://www.vie-publique.fr/discours/274073-bruno-le-maire-02042020-epidemie-covid-19-relance-economie
    _ https://www.vie-publique.fr/loi/274104-2e-loi-de-finances-rectificative-2020-budget-de-crise-covid-19
    _ https://www.usinenouvelle.com/editorial/covid-19-le-detail-des-nouvelles-mesures-de-soutien-aux-entreprises-francaises.N953721
    _ https://www.latribune.fr/economie/france/covid-19-les-inscriptions-a-pole-emploi-bondissent-le-chomage-partiel-explose-845341.html )
    (9 _ https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1689098/coronavirus-covid-chambre-representants-plan-relance-etats-unis )
    (10 _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2019/06/10/chine-usa-2014-2019-chronique-dune-guerre-economique-annoncee/

    _ https://nousnesommesriensoyonstout.wordpress.com/2020/04/16/covid19-le-point-sur-la-guerre-des-gangs-du-capital-financier/ )”

  2. Sorry, but there is a mistake on the text.
    Here is the corrected version

    “Unmasked: the new power of counterfeiters ( Démasqués: le pouvoir des faux-monnayeurs)

    “That every nation would die, that every nation would stop working, I don’t mean for a year, but for a few weeks, every child knows it. He also knows that the masses of products corresponding to different masses of needs require different and quantitatively determined masses of global social work. That this need for the distribution of social work in determined proportions cannot be abrogated by the determined form of social production, but can only change its mode of manifestation, is self-evident. The laws of nature cannot in any way be abrogated. What can change in historically different states is only the form in which these laws impose themselves. And the form in which this proportional distribution of labour is imposed in a social state, in which the social labour relationship is asserted as a private exchange of the products of individual labour, is precisely the exchange value.
    The science consists precisely in establishing how the law of value imposes itself. »
    Karl Marx, letter to Ludwig Kugelmann, July 11, 1868
    [Translating TML]

    As Dr. Valérie Bugault, (Dr. in law… https://youtu.be/AKaXg5755lk ) explains it so well, the apparent chaos of the current situation, and apparently due to Covid-19, does not actually owe much to chance, even if its consequences are concretely a fatal fatality for a few tens of thousands of human beings, in the short term, and certainly for an even greater number of companies, in the medium term, which also means, but squarely for millions of workers, social death.
    As a concrete implementation of the theories of “constructive chaos” inspired by Schumpeter and others, this is indeed an accelerated evolution of the processes of global governance of financial capital, and not a chaos beyond the control of coherent political will and control of the “elites” of globalized finance, and particularly of Western finance.

    The question of whether the Covid-19 “trigger” is itself the result of real chance or not is irrelevant, insofar as the financial elites who condition global policies have seized this “opportunity” to give a brutal boost to a development that had already been “in the prepearing” for several years, and particularly since 2008.

    As we have already seen, the short-term solution imposed by the 2008 crisis, by injecting a colossal mass of liquidity into the entire system, only allowed the financial side of the system to be rescued, and not the revival of the productive economy, which was supposed to revive consumption and economic growth. On this side, the effect has been limited, more or less, to freezing the situation, the rare advances hardly compensating for the setbacks.

    The inevitable trap in this process quickly turned out to be the reconstitution of a financial bubble at least equivalent to that which had led to the 2007-2008 crisis.

    With this difference, the “money plate” remedy cannot be renewed without condemning once again, and in the shorter term, any chance of economic development.

    The differential, which has become exponential, between the “real economy” side and the mainly financial side of the system, thus imposes, as a condition for a new “rescue” of capitalism, the simultaneous destruction of a large part of the productive forces, which opens the field of ruins for a “reconstruction” development, as happened after the last world wars, and the destruction of an important part of the financial capital itself, so as to protect the system against the too rapid reconstitution of a new “financial bubble” that would threaten even this “chance of reconstitution”!

    This is therefore partly the difference between the “management” of this crisis by the “financial authorities”, including in particular the central banks, during this current “crisis” and during the “Quantitative Easing solution” of the 2008 crisis.

    But this is not yet the main point.

    If the “QE” solution has failed to “revive the economy”, it is not only or even essentially the result of “bad will” on the part of investors. It is, quite simply, the result, and even the acceleration, of an evolution of the productive forces.

    The still relatively important, if not exponential, growth of the productive forces, until the turn of the 1970s, was based on the still very important valorisation of capital in the production process, which was therefore still the main basis of the process of capital accumulation.

    The so-called “financialisation” process of capitalism, which appeared during the 1980s, was not due to a “badly intended” policy reversal by investors, but simply to an increasingly drastic fall in the profitability of “productive” investments, i.e. investments directly in real economic activity, and not in speculation on securities, including stock markets.

    Paradoxically, but only on the surface, it is indeed the considerable increase in labour productivity that is at the origin of this fall in the profitability of “productive” capital. Indeed, the increase in labour productivity is not due to an exponential multiplication of the physical strength of proletarians, or even of their manual skills, but to the progress of production technologies, and particularly to the increasing automation and the extension of robotization.

    Now, in the world of unbridled competition between capitalists for the conquest of more and more “market shares”, the “victory” and the domination of the markets belongs to the one who holds the lowest prices in the face of competition, reduces his margins, and tends towards the limit of selling almost at “cost price”, if not completely, and even provisionally below, in a situation of “dumping”.

    Insofar as this “cost price” (…or almost) still included a significant part of depreciation of the cost of labour, in the form of wages, an equally significant part of the capital invested thus returned to the economic circuit and thus made it possible to maintain the “production-consumption” cycle at a sufficiently high level to continue economic development, the accumulation of surplus value and its reinvestment in the productive circuit.

    With the extension of automation and robotisation, if the individual productivity of each worker is increased tenfold, the need to use labour, “living labour”, is drastically reduced in order to obtain the same quantity of finished products, supposed to meet a market demand, which is in fact now reduced because of the non-rejection of part of the capital into the consumption circuit, thus destroying the dynamic of “growth” in the “production-consumption” cycle.
    Of course, this is a simplified summary of the general trend, the fundamental and “sustainable” trend, the one that capitalism cannot stop, precisely because, as Marx explains to us, quoted above, it is the way in which the law of value imposes itself with the current development of the productive forces.
    So this is the general meaning of the current of globalized capital flows. Of course, when we look at it more closely, and especially locally, there are different types of counter-currents, which may give the impression, to an observer who sees only a local and/or partial aspect of the problem, just as when faced with the counter-current of a river caused by an obstacle protruding from the bank, that the direction of the current is only what he sees at that place and at that moment, but this does not reverse the direction of the dominant general flow.
    Of course, capital does everything it can to maintain and accentuate these countercurrents, notably through the development of the tertiary sector and a plethoric service economy, and especially through relocation, but in doing so, it only slightly delays the deadline, and in particular the impoverishment of Western markets, which it even accentuates, in fact, both in absolute terms and in terms of development potential.
    At the turn of the 1980s, all the seeds of a major crisis had already been sown, and it was only the Chinese oxygen balloon that enabled the system to be temporarily rescued. But it was only the Chinese oxygen balloon that enabled the system to be temporarily rescued, since it was based precisely on the deindustrialisation of Western countries, without generating a sufficiently endogenous Chinese market, even today (1). Apart from the fact that interdependence is ultimately an Achilles’ heel for the whole as well as for each of the two “partners”, US and Chinese, it has not prevented the accumulation of a new financial pole in China, generating, as a challenger to US imperialism, a new rivalry on a planetary scale, and thus new international tensions (2).
    But the iron law of the development of the capitalist productive forces applies just as much to the new Chinese giant and in its turn it cannot escape the slope of delocalization, automation, robotization, tertiairization, etc….
    Simply put, it turns out that in the US-China conflict, China is the still growing power, the one that continues to accumulate financial capital on the basis of its productive sector, and it therefore had no interest, in this rivalry, in seeing its productive apparatus stopped or even slowed down.
    Nevertheless, in the long run, its development constraints are the same as those of the West, even if it seems to follow a different model, as a state superstructure.
    In fact, because of the particularly bureaucratic and authoritarian structure of the functioning of its state monopoly finance capitalism, it even, and just as paradoxically, but only apparently, has much faster and more efficient possibilities of adaptation and mutation than the West.
    Indeed, in an increasingly robotised industrial society, if the exploitation of “living labour” gradually ceases to be a source of surplus value and capital accumulation, the control of the productive apparatus continues to be the only basis of class domination, and even more so, by the simple and only dependency in which it can maintain the popular classes, for the satisfaction of their most elementary needs.
    In the long run, therefore, the tendency is no longer necessarily to overproduce consumer goods, whether superfluous or not, but to maintain and maintain the dependence of the populations, independently of the “profit” margin that can be achieved on a relatively reduced consumption, or even reduced to the strict necessary for survival that is “culturally” and even “ideologically” acceptable, with the appropriate packaging, under “ecological” or other pretexts.

    Indeed, in a fully robotized and monopolized economy, the income of populations no longer comes essentially from their work, but from the subsidies artificially and monetarily created by the system, in the form of “universal income” or otherwise, the notion of value created by work also disappears and the accumulation of “capital”, at the top of the social ladder, just as “money creation”, which is necessary for the functioning of the whole, is now nothing more than a set of accounting entries where the dominant class inscribes its own power on lines of “credit” which have no real meaning other than the distribution it decides of this power among its co-opted members.
    In reality, this has been clearly seen since 2008, and even more so with the present and pseudo “Covid-19 crisis”, a simple stage in this “evolution”, which is already exactly what is happening, even if this “mutation” must necessarily remain for some time “compatible” with the remnants of more “traditional” capitalism, so as to take place without any real resistance of any kind, and obviously without an uprising of the working classes, who may wish to see the fruit of their past and present work, which the modern industrial apparatus represents, restored to them.
    Of course, as long as the exploitation of “living labour” remains a source of potential surplus value, and even, as long as it is not dried up to the last drop, this source remains a major stake in the internal struggles of capital. But for years already, the most “modernist” fractions of finance capital, those who are also the most cultivated and the most cynical, are those who have already understood the inevitability of this evolution of their productive forces, and who, rather than trying to create a sustainable revival of the growth of the traditional “productive” capitalist system, in reality definitively no longer found, logically enough prefer to work in the background to their own mutation as a dominant class in a new type of economic and social relations, that of a “robotized” industrial society, even if they qualify it as “post-industrial” in an attempt to give it a pseudo “justification” with an “ecological” sounding.
    In this new context, but already in latent gestation for quite a few years, it is thus not surprising that in its ideological discourse, the bourgeoisie is making more and more use of all wood, including and above all, “green” wood!
    The “green” capitalism preached by the bobocracy for several decades now is the “fertile” breeding ground of this “nursery” of apparently “humanist” and even “social”, if not “socialist”, liberal-social-democratic elucubrations.
    Global warming, like Covid-19, is indeed a reality, and a reality fraught with consequences for humanity, and which it must obviously take into account in its supposedly “controlled” evolution, but the current ideological and political instrumentalization of these phenomena, regardless of their “human” origin or not, clearly does not aim to resolve the consequences, in either case.
    For all that, all the fractions of the bourgeoisie currently in power in the different states are not entirely a reflection of the ongoing mutation of its international “up to date” part in the cynicism of these manipulations. For a good part of the bourgeoisie also, and above all, of the petty-bourgeoisie, chaos is indeed a reality beyond its control and it tries, more or less, to cope, but above all, obviously, in the sense of defending its interests.
    Generally speaking, beyond the rhetoric of circumstance, the manifestation of contradictory interests, with the perspective of “deconfinement”, continues to confuse the situation and to conceal as best it can the substance of the manipulation in progress.
    However, what seemed to be still a matter of debate at the beginning of the “crisis” is now somewhat clearer: the overall number of victims has been brought back into proportion and the “exceptional” nature of the “pandemic” is clearly being undermined. This only serves to further highlight the very real “deficiencies” of the supposedly top-level health systems in the West. And the lack of “reactivity” of the States, particularly in France, in the face of the evidence of emergency measures that were not taken, either in time, at the beginning of the crisis, or in the obvious sense of the best possible efficiency: to produce tests, masks, respirators, and above all, to implement an appropriate treatment protocol, whereas following the Chinese experience it was being rapidly established in France, with the work of the IHU-Mediterranean and Prof. Raoult.

    Both the absence of early but clearly useful measures, such as border controls, airport controls, etc., and the systematic smear campaign against Prof. Raoult, all these elements are today evidence of the deliberate “scuttling” of both the economic and health life of the country. In various forms, and to varying degrees, depending on the interests of the local bourgeoisies in this profound “mutation” of financial capital, the same attitude has been observed in the main Western countries.
    The actually complacent and kollabo thesis that the system was “caught off guard” and reacted “belatedly and in a disorderly manner” is absolutely no longer valid, even if it may have initially abused a mass of gogos and continues to do so for those who remain subject to the “official” media discourse.
    It holds all the less if one considers that the thinking heads of the “elites” who really govern us were perfectly and very early aware of the imminence of the “pandemic” which was therefore baptized “Covid-19”, which is indeed the vintage of its real birth. Moreover, the origin of the virus, which is in reality “Western”, and whose lethality was known to the “responsible” authorities as early as November 2019, if not before, according to certain sources (3), attests to a morbid and perverse calculation, and in fact, quite criminal on their part: indeed, from a strictly accounting point of view, if one balances the cost of immediate emergency measures to make up for the delay in the manufacture of tests and masks, and even, in terms of “complementary” hospital structures, against the economic cost of an almost total and prolonged stoppage of the productive apparatus, With the cascade of bankruptcies and unemployment that it causes, it is clear that it would have been the decision to make an “emergency investment” that would have been perfectly justified in terms of the collective interest, both in terms of health and the economy.
    Similarly, from the very beginning of the pandemic in the West, the path of research for a therapeutic protocol opened by the IHU-Mediterranean in France was very quickly internationally known and should logically have received material aid and official support for a generalized development and implementation, and not be subjected to a campaign of slander and systematic denigration. Moreover, here again, the overall investment would have been relatively minimal in comparison with the other avenues allegedly explored, which have, moreover, still not yielded any practical results.

    In the light of all these obvious elements, it is clear that the generalized “scuttling” of the economy is indeed a calculation and not an improbable “aberration” of the real rulers and decision-makers. A calculation that therefore responds to interests that do not seem obvious at first glance, one that trusts too easily in appearances.
    As Marx reminds us, quoted in the foreword:

    “That every nation would die, that every nation would stop working, I don’t mean for a year, but for a few weeks, every child knows. »
    And therefore, even more so, a group of political, economic and health leaders trained in the greatest schools of their respective nations…!

    The “higher” interests that have thus presided over such a political strategy are obviously not those of the nation-states considered as “representative” of the peoples they are supposed to defend and protect.
    In the very short term, on the other hand, they are those of financial capital “threatened”, precisely since November 2019, by the imminent bursting of the new “financial bubble”, which was close to 6,000 points in France and its “equivalent” in other financial markets…”. Deflating “the bubble more or less “under control”, even if this inevitably leads to relative losses, had thus become the immediate priority for financial capital, well before the “national interest” of any nation .
    And the relative nature of the losses deliberately borne by financial capital is all the more evident when compared with the 2008 crisis, which even saw the CAC 40 index flirt with 2500 points in early 2009.

    We can therefore see concretely that from mid-March, after a rather sharp fall, the CAC stabilized around 4000 points, before returning, at the end of March, to a remarkably stable level around 4300 points.

    The Dow Jones (USA), for its part, after a brief incursion below 20,000 points in March, has quickly crossed this bar to stabilize, in the same way, above 23,000 points. Recall that its “low” in early 2009 was at 7,000 points, in line with the CAC at 2,500 points, before beginning, as far as the US index is concerned, therefore, a particularly dizzying ascent, and therefore purely speculative, towards 30,000 points, at the beginning of the current crisis!
    Of course, this comparison must obviously be understood in the other direction, namely that it is actually the “French” index that follows the US index, rather than the other way around… And just as obviously the same “syndrome” can be found in the main financial centres, and in particular in London “Brexit or not Brexit”…:

    The interest of financial capital is therefore quite distinct from that of nations and peoples: a simple observation! …Without a doubt, an observation that is already old, but particularly and cruelly realistic in the present circumstances.

    Of course, appearances can still be misleading, even for many players in economic life, because of the very large number of capitalist companies that are already affected by the crisis, and will no doubt be even more so in the future.
    It may also remain misleading in view of the overall and average fall in the value of financial assets, around 25%. It is even clear that during the first jolts of the crisis, and particularly during the first “spectacular falls” and the panic that they caused among many small savers, entire family assets were destroyed and shares were bought back at low cost in large bundles. Who, if not those who had the means to do so anyway, could have done so, to the point that they did not fear such a widespread fall?
    In the destruction of financial capital, just as in the destruction of productive forces, everything is a matter of scale… The holders of real power are obviously not the peoples or even the holders of average family wealth, but those who hold packets of shares largely sufficient to control the productive apparatus not only of this or that nation, but entire sections of the world productive apparatus. And their real power, therefore, lies not in the “value” of this or that share, which is in reality essentially fictitious in this respect, but in the ability to control capital flows on a globalized scale, regardless of the particularly fleeting “value” of this or that share at a given moment.
    Financial capital is fundamentally, in terms of “value”, “fictitious” capital by definition (4), and if it is appropriate to keep quotation marks around it, it is precisely because of the reality of this power of control that it provides to its holders, but only on a disproportionate scale, compared to the common sense of the “value” of money, and even on a scale so disproportionate that the fluctuations, even brutal, of the stock market prices, have no other importance there than the movements of pawns on a chess game.
    Unfortunately, but it is also a fact that can only be noted, it is therefore also on this scale that is so disproportionate in relation to the common sense of money that the massive destruction of productive forces, and in particular of thousands of VSE-SMEs, can be understood as a “necessary restructuring” of capitalism, and in any case, necessary to safeguard it as a system of class domination.
    As we have seen, it is therefore the morbid “synergy” of these two joint and “synchronised” destructions that will allow the provisional “relaunch” of the system from a level of financial capitalisation that has already been fixed, if not previously pre-established.
    But as we have also seen, in terms of safeguarding the class domination of a determined fraction of the international financial bourgeoisie, this is not yet the essential point.
    Indeed, formally, we see that this “safeguard” and this “revival” are provisionally “financed” by “state aid” … Where does the state suddenly find such subsidies, if not in its own debt?
    It will be remembered that until the eve of this “pandemic crisis”, the general watchword of Western governments, particularly European ones, was to drastically “limit” budget deficits, to the point of sacrificing many investment needs, particularly in the field of public health! (5)

    There is therefore, on the face of it, a complete reversal of policy on this essential point. However, new public debt cannot be built without a lender… A lender, who will therefore be the essential holder and the debt manager of the public debt of the States, whether in France or elsewhere… Now the “lender”, in Europe as in the USA, is, in the end, the central banks, which “release funds”, i.e. open lines of credit from which the banks will be able to “finance” the various States… (6) In the world before Covid-19″ the level of State indebtedness was therefore already considered excessive, and, through taxation, it already absorbed, for the payment to the banks of the interest on the debt, not to mention a repayment, which had become quite fanciful, of the debt itself, a large part of the value created by economic activity, i.e. by the workers, in the end.
    With this new generalised indebtedness of the States, it is their last chance to control their own economic development to some extent that is disappearing, and for good. They are therefore now entirely under monetary infusion, entirely and directly at the mercy of the credit of the central banks, including for the survival of their simple citizens, as shown by the need to finance “partial unemployment” which will most certainly become “definitive” for a very large number (7). Even the “rescue” financing of the VSE-SMEs that will be able to survive this shock will therefore directly place an additional part of the economic fabric in direct dependence on this type of “financing”, and therefore, in a barely indirect way, via their social contributions, the whole of social protection(8) .
    In the United States, the Trump ‘rescue’ plan includes, in a total ‘release’ of USD 2 000 billion, direct ‘aid’ in the form of cheques distributed directly to households, i.e. a ‘budget envelope’ of USD 290 billion, plus additional aid of USD 260 billion for the unemployed (9). Even if it seems to be a “gift” in the first degree, this enormous “drain” therefore also increases the deficit, and thus the government’s financing need, i.e. its debt….
    It is therefore, both financially and economically and socially, a capitulation in the middle of the countryside of all the States to the central power of the “banknote printing press”… That is to say, in fact, a total and definitive capitulation to the power of the oligarchy at the helm of the central banks.
    And since it is therefore “fictitious” money, in the sense that it does not correspond to any new value created by the economic fabric, but simply compensates, both through aid to individuals and companies, for the system’s definitive inability to recreate an endogenous economic dynamic, it is nevertheless, in the short term, through debt interest, the still remaining share of value created by labour that evaporates even further from national economies and even state budgets, in the fumes of an increasingly fictitious financial capital, itself already under monetary infusion since 2008.
    Gradually, slowly in appearance, but more and more rapidly, in fact, through successive “shocks” like the one in 2008 and the one we are currently experiencing, and as living labor inexorably withdraws from the economic fabric, to the “benefit” of the dependence of the majority as well as the survival of businesses on this type of financing, the class domination power of the oligarchy at the helm of the “money boards” can only expand further to the point of supplanting, on a planetary scale, all previous forms of political and economic power.
    It is thus clearly in this sense and in this “discreet” form that the most “modernist” fraction of the bourgeoisie intends to make its class domination evolve, and even to the detriment of a considerable part of the small and medium bourgeoisie, still animated by “creative” desires in the economic field. In a sense, the “Covid-19 crisis” is at the same time the first coup d’état on a planetary scale and the most discreet coup d’état in the world, and still, for the most part, ignored by the subjects who are already its victims, immediately, in their bodies and minds, and durably, in their vital economic interests.
    Behind the apparent and cynical extreme “rescue of bodies and souls” there is in fact a profound change in economic and social relations that is taking place under the leadership of an almost invisible fraction of the financial oligarchy, which by successive “crises” is taking control of the entire system.

    It is therefore no longer even the power of a financial oligarchy in search of speculative profits that are as spectacular in their excessiveness as they are fictitious in terms of their real economic base, but simply the power of permanent monetary infusion, which decides the economic and social life and death of individuals, companies, nations, peoples, ordinary citizens and its political, trade union and administrative kollabos, and does not neglect, by the way, to strengthen, lock up and ensure its prerogatives and privileges.
    But the worst is never certain, it so happens that this oligarchy of counterfeiters is far from being entirely unified on a world scale and a strong tension remains, on this level of monetary power, also between the “Western-US” faction and the “Eastern-Chinese” faction. The “economic war” very officially declared by Trump in 2018 (10) thus continued by other means through the political and ideological instrumentalization of the “Covid-19 crisis”.

    As we have seen in concrete terms, if the Chinese power is the one that did not yet have an immediate interest in the break-up of the productive forces, because of its dependence on exports, it is nevertheless the one that is able to restructure economic and social relations on its territory very quickly with a view to this transformation, in particular through the almost absolute control that it is able to exercise over practically the slightest deeds and gestures of its citizens, who are maintained in an economic and administrative dependence, and above all under a “computer” control that is much more developed than in the West. The “Covid-19 crisis” is therefore now, in addition to the increased centralization of monetary power, an almost “ideal” opportunity for the Western bourgeoisie to catch up in the field of the “Big-Brotherization” of its populations.
    It remains to be seen whether the conscious choice of the proletarians and peoples of the world will be to continue to submit to the implementation of this new form of oligarchic dictatorship.
    Luniterre

    ****************
    NOTES:
    ( 1 _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2015/09/01/de-la-structuration-maoiste-de-la-bulle-chinoise/
    _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2020/03/31/en-relisant-lenine-qui-parlait-deja-de-chine-reedition-2020/ )
    (2 _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2019/06/10/chine-usa-2014-2019-chronique-dune-guerre-economique-annoncee/
    _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2018/07/30/de-la-guerre-commerciale-a-la-guerre-monetaire-lete-en-pente-douce-du-yuan-chinois/ )
    (3 _ https://www.liberation.fr/checknews/2020/03/22/pourquoi-la-chine-accuse-t-elle-les-etats-unis-d-avoir-importe-le-virus_1782638 )
    (4 _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2018/03/10/aux-racines-de-la-crise-le-statut-des-actions-dans-le-capital-fictif/
    _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2018/03/15/aux-racines-de-la-crise-le-statut-des-actions-dans-le-capital-fictif-suite/ )
    (5 _ https://www.touteleurope.eu/actualite/deficit-qu-est-ce-que-la-regle-europeenne-des-3.html )
    (6 _ https://www.touteleurope.eu/actualite/revue-de-presse-covid-19-la-banque-centrale-europeenne-lance-un-programme-de-750-milliards-d-eur.html
    _ https://www.touteleurope.eu/revue-de-presse/revue-de-presse-covid-19-l-eurogroupe-valide-un-plan-de-soutien-de-540-milliards-d-euros.html )
    (7 _ https://www.latribune.fr/opinions/tribunes/l-enjeu-du-financement-des-reprises-a-la-barre-pour-sauver-le-tissu-economique-francais-845651.html )
    (8 _ https://www.vie-publique.fr/discours/274073-bruno-le-maire-02042020-epidemie-covid-19-relance-economie
    _ https://www.vie-publique.fr/loi/274104-2e-loi-de-finances-rectificative-2020-budget-de-crise-covid-19
    _ https://www.usinenouvelle.com/editorial/covid-19-le-detail-des-nouvelles-mesures-de-soutien-aux-entreprises-francaises.N953721
    _ https://www.latribune.fr/economie/france/covid-19-les-inscriptions-a-pole-emploi-bondissent-le-chomage-partiel-explose-845341.html )
    (9 _ https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1689098/coronavirus-covid-chambre-representants-plan-relance-etats-unis )
    (10 _ https://tribunemlreypa.wordpress.com/2019/06/10/chine-usa-2014-2019-chronique-dune-guerre-economique-annoncee/

    _ https://nousnesommesriensoyonstout.wordpress.com/2020/04/16/covid19-le-point-sur-la-guerre-des-gangs-du-capital-financier/ )”

Leave a Reply to alonso quijano Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *