Statement on World Perspectives by ISA’s International Political Committee
The famous observation of Vladimir Lenin, that “there are decades when nothing happens and there are weeks when decades happen” could have been easily written with our epoch in mind. Although Lenin used it to describe revolutionary events, it is an equally good description of today’s storm of change and capitalist crisis. Such is the pace of historic change in the 2020s that earth-shattering “before/after” moments arrive in quick succession.
Of course, this presents challenges for the efforts of Marxists to elaborate World Perspectives. Primarily, however, it underlines the fundamental importance of these efforts. Only a Marxist understanding can knit the manifold threads of chaos and instability which dominate world relations into a coherent framework of understanding. Drawing such a framework is not an abstract exercise — it is necessary to orient a dynamic, fighting revolutionary organization in its intervention in the mighty class battles that will determine the outcome of this period.
ISA’s World Perspectives do not start from scratch, and have been developed as a major priority of our organization, amid the twists and turns of the past few years. This work is ongoing and must continue. Marxist perspectives are not forged in a single day or document, but built upon what Trotsky called “successive approximations” — an accumulation of experiences and attempts to understand events which lead to a clarifying synthesis.
The World Perspectives document approved by our 14th World Congress (November 2024), which was discussed widely at all levels of the organization, was a very useful part of this process. However, it was drafted, discussed and adopted in a world which had yet to be rocked by what has been the biggest “before/after” moment of the 2020s — the re-election of Donald Trump to the helm of the world’s biggest superpower. This earthquake — more akin to a regime change than a normal change of government — demands a thorough updating of all fields of World Perspectives. This text aims to assist in this task.
The utter dominance of Trump 2.0 as a factor in world events is demonstrated by the fact that 100 days into his term in office, discussing any field of world relations, and even domestic politics in individual countries, now begins by discussing Trump and his impact. How can the world economy be discussed without beginning with Trump’s trade war? Or the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, or the overarching, dominant US/China imperialist power struggle? The same could be said of the climate crisis, as capitalism bulldozes past 1.5 degrees warming, with no slowdown in sight. Global politics in turn is also defined by Trump himself and Trumpism internationally, which is propelling the political pendulum further to the right and simultaneously preparing the way for new seismic shifts to the left.
The first weeks of Trump’s second administration hit the world with a bang and for a time, the sensation that his juggernaut was simply unstoppable was widespread among demoralized establishment media and political commentators. However, such a view represents historical myopia.
While slow to take off and starting from a low level, organized resistance to Trump’s agenda has begun to take shape. It is already clear that this epoch will not only be one of Trumpism but also of anti-Trumpism, of revolution as well as counter-revolution. Trump is extremely dangerous, but his momentum is already stalling.
A regime of this nature — which we have described as parliamentary Bonapartist — is characterized, among other things, by an extreme hubris. This hubris, pursued by a man with few, if anyone, holding him back, leads to many miscalculations and ultimately, will backfire on Trump and the interests of US imperialism which he aims to assert. This can be capitalized upon by the working class in its struggle against the class enemy.
At the time of writing, such hubris-filled miscalculations are more than evident in relation to what has perhaps been the most important Trump-induced earthquake so far — the declaration of economic war on “Liberation day”.
Trump’s Trade War Hammers World Economy
“The growth that the world economy is settling into is much lower than what we saw in the 2000s. It’s even lower than what we saw in the 2010s, which was lower than the beginning of this millennium”, the Chief Economist of the World Bank, Indermit Gill, commented last September. The 2010s were marked by the accumulation of extreme debts alongside increasing parasitic financial speculation, the beginning of the end of globalization and interrupted supply chains. Then came the 2020s with the economic hammer blows of Covid and extended wars which led to, among other things, the return of inflation, a threat which the world economy has yet to banish.
With Trump’s White House declaration of trade war on 2 April, all previous processes have been turbo-charged, catapulting the world economy into a deeper crisis. Every capitalist commentator and politician, apart from Trump’s parrots, is shaken by fear and uncertainty. As of the beginning of May 2025, average effective US import tariffs were at 25% compared to 2% three months ago. This is the highest rate in 100 years, even higher than after the infamous Smoot-Hawley Act introduced by the US in 1930.
In addition to the 10% universal tariff on almost the entire world, much higher “reciprocal” tariffs were also declared by Trump on “Liberation Day”, supposedly to “equalise trade” between the US and the rest of the world. A week later Trump was forced to make a humiliating retreat when these tariffs were put on hold for 90 days for all countries except China. This retreat came after a financial meltdown began, with sharp falls on stock markets, US state bonds and the dollar — an unprecedented combination.
This has been followed by supposed negotiations with every government, starting with Japan, and so far yielding no results. According to reports, the Trump administration has not even made its negotiating position clear to those it is seeking deals with. The Japanese government so far seems determined to bow down before Washington even if its demands to scrap tariffs on cars — the US is a key market for the Japanese auto industry — are unlikely to be met.
The main target of Trump’s attacks is China. Tariffs on Beijing were drastically increased while tariffs on others were put on hold. However, within days Trump was also forced to make exceptions to tariffs on China, exempting mobile phones, computers and other electronics. Still, even following these exemptions the overall tariff rate against China is at 115%, effectively acting as a brake on trade in all unexempted goods.
All economic prognoses have been cut, and more is to be expected with the world economy mired in a significant slowdown, if not worse. In a report titled “The Global Economy Enters a New Era”, the IMF in April predicted US growth of 1.8% in 2025, down from 2.7% in its January outlook, with a recession risk of 40%. In fact, following a reported GDP contraction of 0.3% announced at the end of April, the US is probably already in recession. Inflation and unemployment will increase in the US and elsewhere, putting the burden on workers and the poor. The tariffs will hit export-dependent countries most severely. Five of the ten countries threatened with the highest “reciprocal” tariffs are “emerging economies”. The IMF predicts global growth of 2.8% for 2025. Only five of the last 30 years have experienced lower growth.
For Marxists, this is not about a “mistaken policy” or the individual politicians involved. It is a result of the crisis of the system and sharpening imperialist contradictions. ISA has for several years identified and discussed the turn of the capitalist system away from neoliberal globalisation to decoupling, nationalism and protectionism. This fundamental shift in capitalism’s tectonic plates, which others on the left have failed to understand, has been both dramatically confirmed and qualitatively deepened by Trump 2.0.
As Leon Trotsky explained at the beginning of the Depression of the 1930s, “The characteristic of our epoch is the especially sharp changes of different periods, the extraordinary abrupt turns in the situation” with economic and political developments based on “the contradictions between the development of the productive forces on the one hand and the bourgeois characteristic of national boundaries on the other carried to their climax”. In relation to protectionism, he explained that tariffs arise “because they are profitable and indispensable to one national bourgeoisie to the detriment of another, regardless of the fact that they act to retard the development of the economy as a whole”.
Exposing fundamental problems
The “Great Recession” of 2007–09 exposed the weaknesses of capitalist globalization and its financial system in particular. The entire capitalist system was put on life support. However, the supposed “saviours” of capitalism at the time instead laid the basis for today’s crisis.
With “unorthodox” methods, central banks bought up debt and cut interest rates, even below zero in the EU and Japan. The US Federal Reserve increased its balance sheet from $865 billion in 2007 to $7.139 trillion in August 2024, including a huge increase during Covid. Bailout operations during the economic crisis mainly served to satisfy the growing parasitic financial sector. In 2019, the financial markets were four times larger than global GDP. In 2023, a third of the market value of the S&P 500 was covered by only seven companies: Apple, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla.
One of the key features of the neoliberal era was the explosive growth of the already dominant parasitic finance capital. It also saw the emergence of the tech monopolies as an extremely powerful group of capitalists, a shift which has been enhanced in recent years, exemplified by the lineup of billionaire tech CEOs which flanked Trump during his inauguration. This sector is also central to the dynamics of the conflict between the US and China. However, elevating their role to a “new phase of capitalism”, as some commentators do (some of which have coined the misleading phrase “techno feudalism”), is to exaggerate the changes to the capitalist system’s inherent process of centralization and monopolies.
Concentration and monopolization in the US attracted capital from all over the world. The US economy seemed to have a stronger recovery and overall economy than the EU, the UK, Japan and other “Western” countries, a process some called “US exceptionalism”. “The US economy matters the most because it matters for world economic output…It’s the most dynamic among the advanced economies”, commented Indermit Gill, the World Bank economist, in the same interview quoted above, some six months ago. The Economist praised the US economy in two headlines in October-November 2024: “America’s economy is bigger and better than ever” and “America’s economy enters 2025 in great shape”.
That superficial strength and stability is now replaced with huge uncertainty, which is even starting to spread to the true believers in Trump. With increased inflation caused by the tariffs, consumption and investment will drop, slowing economic growth further. The falling price of Treasuries, the renowned “safe haven”, and the dollar show how Trump’s actions have undermined confidence in the US economy, a process that will further impede economic growth.
This is the reason for Trump’s campaign against the Fed chairman Powell to force a cut in interest rates. The White House wants stimulus to avoid continued falls on the stock markets and to avert a sharp drop in consumption. On the other hand, lower interest rates can make US Treasuries even less attractive and also increase inflation.
China’s stimulus package and economic growth was the other key factor behind the global recovery following 2007–09. However, this was based on an explosion of financial speculation in property by various agencies of the CCP state (companies, banks and local governments) and a huge increase of debt. The inevitable collapse of this Ponzi-like speculative bubble now weighs on the whole economy, with an economic crisis in local governments leading to cuts, increased unemployment and falling consumption.
The result is overcapacity, overproduction, deflation and slowing economic growth. CCP targets for annual growth of “around 5%” — much lower than annual growth in previous decades — have not been met, with manipulated figures presented instead. ISA has identified this crisis as Japanification, named after Japan’s long period (since the 1990s) of stagnation and deflation. The fallout from these crises also puts strong limits on future larger stimulus packages or a significant growth of the domestic market. The CCP regime is especially hostile to creating the “welfarism” — higher pensions, medical and unemployment insurance — which would be needed to shift the economic balance towards greater consumption.
Part of the global power struggle
Trump’s tariff agenda is not mainly about the economy, but a key part in the global power struggle. “National security” is the given reason for the trade war. Trump may make nostalgic appeals — aimed at his supporters — to a bygone era in which stable, sometimes well-paid work in manufacturing was widely available. But it is the international balance of power and US imperialism’s declining position which is the fundamental consideration.
This leaves the way open for further twists from his administration, in the face of negative economic consequences. While Trump ending his “pause” with the restoration of all the original “reciprocal” tariffs is very unlikely, so too is a return to the level of tariffs which existed before “Liberation day”. Another round of tariffs, on semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, are still to be announced. We are witnessing a new, and qualitative, increase in economic protectionism, not just a blip brought about by a clever negotiating tactic.
The Chinese regime had no choice but to respond much more sharply than others to the tariffs. Its trade war with the US was originally launched by Trump in 2018, although at a much lower level. However, Beijing has since strived to reduce its dependence on the US economy. In 2023, China’s exports to the US represented 13.6% of its total exports compared to 17.9% in 2010. The Chinese regime has also used the escalation of the trade war to flex its muscles and underline its relative advantages with respect to its US adversary. It has leveraged its near monopoly over rare earths needed for “green” and arms production — close to 70% of production and 90% of processing — in its counter-measures, restricting exports to the US. China also holds $759bn in US Treasuries, second only to Japan, which can also become a powerful weapon in the trade war.
However, China’s high export dependence makes it vulnerable, especially if the EU and other countries/blocs implement measures to counter the US tariffs. Tens of millions of jobs in industry are dependent on exports in its already crisis-ridden economy.
As of the beginning of May, there have yet been no official talks between Washington and Beijing. Both Trump and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent have swung back and forth from one day to the next, between indicating the high tariffs are temporary, to making further threats of escalation.
This new highly aggressive phase of the US-China trade war has potentially devastating ramifications for both sides, with global spillover effects. At current sky-high tariff rates, an effective trade embargo has been put in place between the two biggest economies, which comprise 44% of global GDP. The World Trade Organization has predicted that the cost of total decoupling between the two imperialist giants, as a result of continued tariffs of 100%+, would be 7% of global GDP.
Trump’s regime has blundered its way into this conflict, misjudging and underestimating Beijing’s reaction, believing the US holds much stronger “cards” by virtue of its huge trade deficit with China ($300bn last year). The Chinese regime’s forceful retaliation, to project an image of confidence and defiance against “US bullying”, is in part meant for global audiences, to try to extract geopolitical advantage and strike new economic deals with other countries. In reality, the strategies of both the US and Chinese regimes involve a significant amount of “bluff” and exaggeration of their own position.
The most likely scenario, unless some form of de-escalation can be brokered, is that both US and Chinese imperialism will suffer heavy economic losses and growing mass unrest. As we have explained previously, temporary deals and even a shaky détente between Beijing and Washington are not excluded. The most likely outcome of any preliminary deal would not stop all trade between the superpowers, but neither will it stop the process of continued decoupling in trade, economies and technology, which has been qualitatively deepened.
The economic effects of the trade war are already being felt, and underline the escalation of inter-imperialist conflict. That includes heightened conflict over access to raw materials, including rare earths. The new scramble for Africa, especially regarding mining, will unfold at the same time as the economies of these countries come under further strain. Low income countries at present spend more on debts than ever before and several have defaulted in recent years, for example Zambia and Ghana. This is exacerbated by the impact of ever-worsening climate disasters, which both adds to unsustainable debt burdens and increases the likelihood of battered economies in the so-called Global South being pushed into default.
The decaying capitalist and imperialist powers of the European Union, which Trump has railed against repeatedly alleging it was “formed to screw the United States” are also being shaken to their core. Trump’s trade missiles are striking European economies whose model of “success” (especially in the case of Germany) has already been deeply undermined by the Ukraine war. Neither will Britain, where the neo-Blairite Labour government is embracing the original Blairite doctrine of vying to be Europe’s lapdog in chief to US imperialism, escape the headwinds of a slowing world economy.
The ultimate outcome of the trade war is far from clear. The Trump administration overestimates American supremacy and underestimates how dependent the US economy is on the rest of the world, needing both goods and loans of all kinds to finance its deficits. This has been shown most clearly in its treatment of Mexico and Canada, with trade in North America predicted to suffer most from the trade war. So far, however, no economic arguments have had any meaningful impact in dissuading Trump from doubling down on protectionism.
Trump’s trade war has also raised the prospect of the decline of the dollar. In the three months up to April, it lost 9% compared to a basket of currencies globally. For some Trump acolytes, a dollar devaluation has been seen as a welcome assistance to US export industries. However, it also causes big problems, making the large federal budget deficit more expensive to finance. This could speed up if the big foreign investors — including large pension funds and central banks — increase their sales of government bonds. How far that goes depends on how deep the loss of trust in the economic policies of Washington will become.
Most capitalist economists foresee the dollar losing a degree of the dominating role globally which it has occupied since the second world war. Still, the dollar is involved in 88% of all forex (foreign exchange) transactions. As a global reserve currency, it has declined since 2001 from 78% of reserves to 58% today. But the decline of the dollar does not mean it will be replaced by the euro or the Chinese renminbi. Instead, competing devaluations and a currency war will become an additional factor in increased instability and crisis in the world economy.
Our perspectives for the world economy have to be very conditional. The IMF correctly refers to chronic instability and the first months of Trump 2.0 has underlined the unpredictability of a Bonapartist regime. Marxists can learn from the method of how Trotsky analysed the processes around the stock market crash in 1929, giving different possible variations of coming perspectives. Developments have to be followed very closely, with openness to possible new unprecedented events and turns.
At the end of April, Martin Wolf in Financial Times summarized the consequences of “Liberation day” as follows: “severe loss of confidence in US trustworthiness and good sense and so flight from the dollar; fiscal and financial crises; financial and economic disruption in emerging and developing countries in a world with rapidly shrinking official assistance; profound economic and humanitarian crises; exacerbated social and political instability; and even major wars”.
Again, the choice is not between “good” and “bad” capitalism, as liberal commentators pretend. The results of the “free trade” of capitalist globalization and neoliberalism on humanity and the environment were catastrophic. The “centrist” political defenders of this period will not be able to bring back yesterday’s trade, but are in reality, as Biden proved, on the same track towards nationalism and protectionism driven by the inter-imperialist conflict. The capitalist system’s built-in crises can not be solved by its economists or politicians.
War, militarism, neo-colonialism and the imperialist power struggle
The shift from one epoch to another is a process, most often stretching over years of crises, revolts, sharp divisions in the ruling class and several attempts to restore an equilibrium. In contrast to others, International Socialist Alternative recognized at an early stage the contradiction and conflict between US and Chinese imperialism as a decisive driver of global developments in this new era.
The 2008–9 crisis was critical in the overall destabilization of the existing economic paradigm. Only four years later, Obama’s pivot to Asia and Xi Jinping coming to power, both in 2012, marked the beginning of the end of their relatively close partnership during the era of neoliberal capitalist globalization. The door then opened to nationalist reaction and fierce imperialist rivalry that was already brewing. Since then, the conflict has continued and been escalated by each major before/after moment and crisis.
The main conflict
Coming hot on the heels of the Covid pandemic, another before/after moment, the Ukraine war deepened the conflict between the two main imperialist powers. US imperialism organised the Ukraine Defense Contact Group gathering around 50 governments. Military support from Washington to Kyiv was instrumental. In addition, US intelligence and training was decisive for the Ukrainian army. Governments in Europe, including Meloni in Italy, alongside other politicians who had developed links with Putin like Le Pen in France, largely followed the lead of the US. NATO got two new member states, Finland and Sweden, enlarging its border with Russia. The Western bloc was strengthened and US leadership within it consolidated.
For US imperialism at that stage, blocking a Russian victory or even securing a partial victory for Kyiv, was an important part of the inter-imperialist conflict with China. The war made clear and strengthened Moscow-Beijing links, with rapidly increased trade and new partnership agreements, but most crucially as a strategic counterweight to US global hegemony. This scenario also deepened China’s unquestioned dominance in the relationship. Their bloc also includes Iran, with almost a third of its export income coming from oil exports to China. In the Ukraine war, Russia has used thousands of Iranian attack drones. With reports of up to 14,000 North Korean soldiers sent to fight in the war against Ukraine — a reality now openly acknowledged by the Putin and Kim regimes — and increased military cooperation, Moscow has also let Pyongyang out of its isolation.
While Trump has continued and escalated the imperialist power struggle with China, he has dramatically changed its dynamic. Most importantly, he has dynamited the Western bloc. He does not want allies, he wants vassals. His ripping up of the sacred “western alliance” is a tipping point in a long term process of decline of Europe’s once-mighty imperialist powers and has brutally exposed what was always a deeply unequal character of the Transatlantic relationship. Of course, in the end the US will need to renew or reforge alliances as part of the inter imperialist conflict, but this could take years.
Vice president JD Vance’s speech at the annual security conference in Munich in February was a shock and a cold shower for European ruling classes and their politicians. Migration and “censorship” of racist forces and extreme right-wingers was a bigger threat than Russia and China, he told the conference. On the same day, Trump made the same audience’s worst nightmares come true when he announced the opening of direct negotiations with his friend Putin, with no seat at the table for Europe, or even for Kyiv, who he instead has bullied into surrendering its natural resources. This aggressive nationalistic imperialism followed Trump’s declared designs on Greenland, the Panama canal and even Canada. Soon, he added Gaza to the list of prospective new US colonies.
The main target of Trump’s expansionist imperialist aggression is China and its bloc. Greenland (and Canada) for its strategic place in the Arctic and natural resources, Panama for strategy and trade — to strike a blow against China’s growing influence in Latin America, Gaza for power in the Middle East. In the cases of Greenland and Panama, Trump does not exclude using force. Making these claims reality, however, is different from fiery rhetoric in the Oval Office and far from realistic in the short term. The aim is to shake and intimidate, project power, and to force through concessions by shifting the goalposts further towards maximalist Trump positions.
This is a completely new political course for US imperialism. Capitalists, Republican politicians and Trump’s electoral base were all attracted by promises to make “America” great again. The narrative of the US being “looted and raped” economically by other countries was also directed at close allies, in Europe, Asia and elsewhere.
European governments and ruling classes were dumbfounded. The White House was pushing through its power, threatening everything from trade to NATO. The response from most, including Macron and Starmer, has been timid, while Trump favourites such as Orban in Hungary have been jubilant, naming the EU powers as “losers”. However, despite the increased strains on the EU, they have all agreed on one important response: an historic new arms race. The EU itself will spend an additional 800 billion euro on arms.
The EU has also followed the example of Sweden and other countries, distributing a brochure to every household on how to prepare for war. In addition to nationalist propaganda, there is a pro-Europe regionalism spreading, about defending “democracy” and “European values”. With the war in Ukraine and constant warnings of an imminent threat to other European states from Russia, this can initially have some effect. However, the new arms race will also generate massive political and social battles as a reaction develops against the austerity implemented to pay for it, potentially alongside recession. This will set the scene for mass resistance and struggle, which will also have a political expression.
While the Western bloc has been deserted by the US under Trump, this does not mean that the EU will become a “third pole” in the inter-imperialist conflict. While it is being driven to take real steps to become less dependent on the US, Europe will still be a junior partner, and also continue to be shaken by internal tensions and possible splits.
Also in Asia, questions are raised about just how reliable an ally US imperialism is. More powers have started to consider developing their own nuclear arms in Europe, Asia and in the Middle East.
The geopolitical confrontation that ISA has analyzed and discussed in the 2020s continues to sharpen and dominate world events. With neither of the competing crisis-ridden imperialist superpowers close to delivering a “knockout blow” to the other, this prolonged conflict will pass through different phases with the initiative sporadically switching sides. In recent years, the US gained from the dynamic surrounding the Ukraine war and from the deepening economic crisis in China. Now, Trump’s hubris and miscalculation is tending to hand Beijing new openings. Many Western commentators have denied or obfuscated the deep underlying problems facing US imperialism which are now coming to the surface in such a chaotic way.
Even prior to Trump 2.0, Chinese imperialism’s strategy of establishing itself as the reference point for the “global south” had benefited from Biden’s blood-soaked backing of the genocidal war on Gaza. Trump’s actions in declaring economic war on the world and dynamiting Western bloc cohesion, while simultaneously taking a wrecking ball to US “soft power” (with the abolition of USAID being the clearest example), all highlight the risk of his imperialist aggression backfiring further.
The basic traits of the US/China imperialist confrontation are struggle over power, the economy, technology, territory and resources. This is all bound up with preparations for military conflict. In this sense, the world has entered a pre-war period. This includes ongoing wars in Ukraine, the Middle East, Sudan and Congo. Warnings of new wars and armed conflicts are also sounding, from the Western Pacific and the Horn of Africa.
On 6 May, several days of constant cross-border fire between Indian and Pakistani troops following the terrorist attack against Hindu tourists in Kashmir escalated, with Indian air strikes and the Pakistani military’s immediate response leaving dozens dead.. All of these wars will be influenced by the main imperialist conflict, but also involve more minor and regional imperialist powers, searching for room to maneuver to their own advantage. The war in Sudan includes arms and forces from the UAE on the side of RSF with Egypt and Turkey supporting the official Sudanese army.
The prolonged war in Ukraine and the Israeli state’s genocidal war underline the new period, as does the trade war with Trump’s bellicose rhetoric asking for sacrifices to protect the nation. These factors, and the ongoing military build up increase the risk of more wars. Both Washington and China are preparing their military forces and societies for a major conflict, which the Pentagon calls “Great Power War”. However, as it stands, neither power is ready to unleash such a conflagration.
In addition, military build up is not the only deciding factor. The war in Ukraine in particular has shown ruling elites the demands and costs of a major war, as well as its military challenges and difficulties. Even more, a major war demands political propaganda and the preemptive strangling of potential working class opposition. It demands a very strong military preparation and an opportune political and social environment.
Propaganda campaigns aimed at rallying patriotism are in full swing, which include an increasingly crude promotion of militarism, seeking to rehabilitate the prestige of armed forces. This is sometimes combined with elements of military conscription, which is back on the political agenda in many countries. However, these campaigns have a long way to go before a widespread mood of real willingness to risk life and limb for the flag is generated, especially in Western countries.
For all these reasons, even the most fanatic warmongering propaganda in China and the US today does not herald an imminent third world war, although military incidents will take place which can spiral out of control, with more minor players like Israel, Russia or Ukraine capable of playing deeply destabilizing roles. There is no room for complacency, or for an underestimation of what this depraved and decadent system is capable of. Building a strong anti-war and anti-imperialist movement is a key task for socialists today and in the coming period.
At the same time as understanding the building up of confrontations, ISA has also stressed that both main imperialist states are in deep crisis. The centralization of power in one individual is in itself a sign of a crisis regime. The overreach, hubris and repression of such isolated regimes will create mass resistance.
The Middle East
The Middle East has seen the most dramatic events and changes in the balance of power of all global regions in the last 18 months, since Hamas’ reactionary attack on 7 October 2023 and the ensuing genocidal war by the Israeli state. Israel’s regional position has been strengthened by its “seven-front war” and further by Trump’s full support for Netanyahu’s war machine. Iran’s feared regional “axis of resistance” has suffered serious defeats, with Hezbollah severely weakened and the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria.
One of Trump’s first boastful initiatives was the ceasefire in Gaza in January but only weeks later, the terror against Gaza is now worse than ever, with the starvation of the population, massive bombings, occupation of more areas and new massacres. Hundreds of thousands have again been ordered to flee their temporary settlements. On March 23, 15 ambulance drivers and healthcare workers were murdered when their convoy of ambulances and a fire truck was attacked. A week later, their bodies were found in a mass grave.
Israel’s far-right government is continuing the war, with the stated goal of “crushing Hamas”. Finance Minister Smotrich now openly says that freeing the remaining hostages is no longer the most important thing. Netanyahu was the first head of government to visit Trump at the White House. He was then rewarded with Trump’s proposal to ethnically cleanse Gaza, a new Nakba) the expulsion of the Palestinians in 1948). In mid-April, Trump again spoke out about Gaza’s “real estate value.” Then, at the beginning of May, the Israeli government announced a new plan to fully occupy the strip and forcibly displace much of its population.
What is underway is a campaign of forced hunger and war to try to break the Palestinians and snuff out any hope of liberation or even statehood. For over two months, Israel has stopped all aid into Gaza, while further restricting access to electricity and water. Under these inhumane conditions, leaflets are being dropped urging Palestinians to leave Gaza. Governments in East Africa have been courted with the aim of getting them to accept displaced Palestinians. Trump is also putting strong pressure on the regimes in Egypt and Jordan.
But the regimes in the region are also feeling the pressure from the masses. King Abdullah of Jordan, a country where the majority of the population is Palestinian, has faced large demonstrations in solidarity with Gaza. Egypt’s dictator, General al-Sisi, has used police and military force to suppress demonstrations, fearing a revolt from below. Both regimes are heavily dependent on US economic support, but so far they are more worried about the consequences of being exposed as traitors by cosying up to the Israeli government. The strength of the masses and potential mass resistance stand in the way of Trump’s plans.
The alternative plan for Gaza by the Egyptian regime and the Arab League exists only on paper. Trump and Netanyahu refuse to agree to the plan, which advocates a “technocratic” government in Gaza that would later be replaced by the Palestinian Authority, which holds formal power in the West Bank. Even though it is currently mostly a subcontractor for Israel, with weak support among the Palestinian population, Netanyahu’s goal is to crush the Palestinian Authority as well. Israel’s military attacks on the West Bank are the worst in over 20 years.
Despite the relative strengthening of the Israeli regime’s position, Netanyahu’s grandiose stated aim of completely crushing Hamas is unrealizable. During the ceasefire, Hamas showed it is still intact, openly acting as the sole authority in Gaza, and Israeli intelligence says that Hamas’s armed wing has 40,000 militants in arms again.
Netanyahu is also acting to strengthen his power in Israel, where a majority of the population wants a different government. He wants to purge senior civil servants — the head of the country’s secret police and the attorney general, both of whom are investigating Netanyahu for corruption — and push through his “legal coup” that gives him power over the country’s judges. He got the budget through when the right-wing extremist Ben-Gvir re-entered the government because Gaza was bombed again. What is needed in Israel is a real opposition from workers and youth, independent of the lame official opposition parties. With demands for an end to the war and occupation, against capitalism and imperialism, and for democratic socialism.
Netanyahu has declared that his goal is to “change the face of the Middle East”. The big, looming question is the threat of a military attack on Iran and what it could lead to.
Israel has established new military bases in Lebanon and Syria. In both countries, Israeli bombers carry out regular attacks, despite the fact that there is officially a ceasefire in Lebanon and that the border with Syria is supposed to be a demilitarized zone. In Syria, bombing raids have also targeted areas in Damascus and the Israeli government has plans to advance another 50 kilometers. In both cases, Iran is the declared main enemy. The Iranian regime’s allies have been overthrown in Syria and greatly weakened in the region. The new regime in Syria, under the Islamist al-Sharaa, is shaken by a deep economic crisis and lacks control over most areas of the country.
Is Netanyahu now planning new major airstrikes against Iran? There are intelligence reports in the US that say such an attack could happen within six months. Trump’s preference in talks with Tehran in April seems to be to pressure the Iranian regime into concessions. Threats of warfare have been underlined with US attacks on the Houthi rebels in Yemen, who are allied with Iran. The dictatorship in Tehran, despite defiant statements, is shaken by the economic crisis and continued protests and strikes, in addition to the crisis in the region. Previous agreements with leading European governments and Obama aimed to limit Iran’s ability to acquire nuclear weapons. These were torn up by Trump, who imposed “maximum pressure,” which meant tough sanctions and military threats.
Trump’s desire to, if possible, avoid a new war is both about the economic costs and concerns about the instability it would create. But Trump is surrounded by “Iran hawks” and if Netanyahu were to carry out a major attack, Trump would support it. Iran’s response would then have to be harsher than during the exchange of attacks between Israel and Iran last year.
In 2019, Iranian missiles knocked out half of Saudi Arabia’s oil industry. This is another reason why Trump has not yet given the go-ahead for an attack — he sees the Saudi regime as key to supporting Israel and his own plan for Gaza. A larger war would also weaken the already shaken role of US imperialism in the region and globally.
The Middle East continues to be in turmoil. The collapse of the Assad regime and the wave of mass protests in Turkey is scaring the regimes in the region. Netanyahu and Trump’s combined hubris will backfire on them and their regional power. The working masses in the region hold the key to coming major events.
Ukraine
Three years of war in Ukraine have seen many twists and turns, even if most of the front line has not moved much for the last two years. In May 2025, US imperialism is still pushing for a “peace deal” to be accomplished within the first 100 days of Trump’s presidency. The basis for such a push is not only personal prestige. It’s about the costs of the war, the need to focus on the confrontation with China, and to put pressure on the European powers to beef up their military forces. In addition, Trump wants access to mining and natural resources in Ukraine.
The partial “ceasefires” proclaimed so far — on infrastructure, the Black Sea and over Easter — have stayed on paper. Fighting from both sides has continued, with missiles and drones directed at civilians and energy facilities alongside the ongoing meat grinder on frontline battle fields. There is no official count of how many have been killed and wounded, but some suggest over one million. There are 6.9 million Ukrainian refugees abroad and 3.7 million inside the country.
In Ukraine, the mood and hope of the days prior to the expected “spring offensive” in 2023 has completely vanished. It was based on the success of surprise attacks in the Autumn of 2022 and promises of more advanced weaponry support from Western powers. Instead, Russian forces have been able to advance, although very slowly and at high costs. Russia has mobilised hundreds of thousands of new recruits and turned its industry towards the war effort. The Ukrainian army’s incursion into Kursk, seen as a card to use in negotiations, ended in defeat with troops forced out.
The changed mood in Ukraine, and with it also in Europe, driven by the worsening and unsustainable military position, offered an opening for the Trumpist agenda to withdraw US military support to Kyiv. This would be done under the cover of a “peace deal”, with Trump claiming that Russia otherwise could conquer the whole country.
Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian regime were given ultimatums, through a pause in military aid and intelligence support and strong-armed into a resources deal giving the US access to rare earths, fossil fuels and metals as well as profits from exports. With these moves, Trump underlined the decisive role of US imperialism in the Ukraine war, with the Ukrainian army acting as proxy for Western imperialism. There are countless other examples of US imperialism abandoning former proxies when its own interests have shifted.
At the beginning of May, both deal and no-deal are possible. Putin tries to prolong the process, to achieve more conquered territory and to put pressure on Trump, who despite sporadic expressions of frustration with Putin, desperately wants a deal. What has been revealed so far, is that a deal would — unsurprisingly — largely freeze the current frontlines. The most controversial element of the leaked plan for Ukraine and its European allies is that Washington would recognize Crimea as part of Russia.
The pressure on Zelenskyy to accept a deal is massive. The EU and the UK can wring their hands and declare support, but have little real influence on the process. It is also the case that with the exception of recognizing Crimea, the core elements of Trump’s peace plan — a frozen frontline and no NATO membership for Ukraine — have long been acknowledged as inevitable in European capitals, including Kyiv.
Among some beleaguered European leaders, there will be relief behind a facade of continued support for Ukraine. They will send token peace-keeping troops after a deal — if Moscow agrees to it. At the same time the endless propaganda about the threat of new Russian war offensives will continue. Governments in the Baltic states, Denmark, Poland and other countries constantly warn that a new war could go beyond Ukraine.
For Putin, a “peace deal” also comes with the benefit of promises from Trump about lifted sanctions and economic deals. He has already gained prestige from these negotiations. Despite surviving the sanctions so far, largely through the lifeline provided by China, the full-scale war economy is not sustainable and neither is the present lull in struggles and protests. For Ukraine, a deal would open a new period, in which suffering will be linked to its neo-colonial treatment by the US and not directly the war effort. This should open the path for workers’ struggle but also for the danger of the far right gaining further ground, in a heavily militarized state.
Political crisis and capitalism’s reactionary turn
A trend emphasized by our last World Perspectives document which has been brutally borne out by Trump 2.0 is the reactionary turn of the ruling class in this epoch. The document’s introduction stated that capitalism today “…is a system of zero hope for the future, unable to offer optimism to any significant layer of the population, including within the ruling class itself. Its only response to crisis after crisis is to move in an even more parasitic and miserable direction. 2020s capitalism is driving a reactionary juggernaut which only working class struggle, ultimately working-class power, can halt and reverse.”
This is the only framework in which to understand the political direction of capitalist governments and parties today. Already in the latter half of the 2010s, Trump’s rise to prominence reflected an international trend, as right populist and far right forces grew — and transformed traditional right-wing parties in their image — in one of the clearest expressions of the political crisis and polarization brought about by the 2007–9 economic crisis. But as we enter the second half of the 2020s, the dominance of Trumpism in world politics has reached a whole new level.
This is in part a result of the failures and decline of the other main expression of the 2010s phase of political crisis — the rise of new Left reformist formations and leaders — which has fuelled the right’s further growth. It is more fundamentally, however, a reflection of a more decisive turn to the right by the ruling class internationally. In the 2010s, sections of the bourgeois establishment flirted with Trumpism but the ruling class as a whole still preferred to cling to their tried and tested political tools. Today, the general agenda of Trumpism — nationalism, militarism, and a broad package of anti-working class reaction — has been embraced by the bourgeoisie in defence of its interests amid deepening crises.
Growing authoritarianism is also an integral part of this reactionary turn. Neoliberal capitalist globalisation was a means to increase profits through increased exploitation, a super-exploitative international division of labour, and attacks on welfare and working class conditions. The end result, however, was the Great Recession and a chain of crises which fatally discredited and undermined the parties, policies and institutions of the neoliberal era. In an almost desperate move, the capitalists now increasingly turn to “strong man” rule in defence of their conjunctural needs. These needs are bound up with the sharpening of imperialist conflict and national tensions, but also with the threat of social turmoil and instability at home, in the aftermath of waves of struggle and revolt which shook regimes around the world in recent years.
We have characterized Trump 2.0 as a Parliamentary Bonapartist regime. This refers not only to its authoritarian nature, but to the degree of personal rule it is seeking to exercise, both over society as a whole and over the ruling class which it represents. Trump attempts to further the interests of the billionaire class, not as its timid servant (in the mold of Bill Clinton or Obama) but rather as its master (more in the mold of Putin).
Trump is now taking reactionary authoritarian steps, including the deportation of immigrants, one of whom was cleared by courts to stay in the US, to the torture dungeons of the Bukele regime in El Salvador. Part of the purpose of this and other moves — including threats to deport US citizens and deporting foreign students who have shown sympathy with Palestinians — is to sow widespread terror. It is also triggering a constitutional crisis, including in the form of a confrontation with the judicial branch.
However, while Trump’s agenda of concentrating an unprecedented degree of executive power in his hands is clear, it remains to be seen how far he will succeed in travelling down this road. The key factor which rules out the establishment of an outright dictatorship in the US today is not the robust nature of its once-proud institutions and republican “checks and balances”, but the class balance of forces. Ultimately, it is the class struggle which will be decisive in determining the outcome of the crisis of US bourgeois democracy: defeats for the working class (whose movement, despite steps forward, is still in a historically weak state) in the mighty battles which are now beginning can allow Trump to advance further in his authoritarian power-grab, with victories pointing in the opposite direction.
Overall it remains the case that the political pendulum is swinging to the right, for now. Even where the right wing is not in power, they are generally the force with the greatest momentum. Trumpists lead the polls in Europe’s three most important powers (Germany, Britain and France), and are in a strong position in the most important elections taking place in Latin America in the next two years (Chile, Colombia and Brazil).
However, while Trump’s victory bolstered such forces around the globe, his actions in power have also made him a liability for many. This was expressed most dramatically in the case of Canada, where the Trumpified Tories who seemed to be marching unstoppably to a landslide win, were thrown into crisis by Trump’s treatment of what he derides as the “51st state”. This led the Liberals to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, in a campaign dominated by a strong nationalist response to Trump’s aggression. Australia saw a similar pattern, with the Labour party making a comeback and winning reelection.
In most cases though, Trump’s chaos and crises will not decisively cut across the rise of the international right in itself: the real basis for the rise of Farage, Bolsonaro, Le Pen etc, is not Donald Trump but the deep crises which dominate all spheres of life and politics. Liberal and “centrist” governments may temporarily gain from anti-Trump sentiment across the world, but this will be short-lived. In general, Trump’s economic nationalism will beget more political nationalism, as it did in the 1930s. While today none of the main forces of the rising right internationally can correctly be described as fascist, they do in some cases harbour fascistic wings (as with the AfD in Germany) and in all cases embolden the forces of fascistic or “street fighting” reaction.
Indeed, the same “centrist”, liberal and Social Democratic forces are increasingly singing to Trump’s political tune. The response of these forces to the rise of the right has been, almost without exception, to mimic it. This is not only the case in relation to toxic “culture wars” reactionary attacks on migrants, LGBTQ+ people and the embrace of “anti-woke” talking points, but also regarding the “drill baby drill” climate-killing policies which governments are beefing up the world over, ripping up years of cynical rhetoric about reducing emissions.
Trans people in particular, are facing a horrific avalanche of attacks by the capitalist class internationally. Within two days in April, they suffered cruel blows in both Hungary and the UK, when Orban’s reactionary regime banned all pro-LGBTQ+ gatherings just before the UK Supreme Court ruled that trans women were not women, a position welcomed by the “Labour” Prime Minister.
Even Trump and Musk’s DOGE “chainsaw” is being picked up by centrist governments, with Starmer’s Labour abolishing NHS England (the umbrella body of the health system) and its tens of thousands of jobs in the UK and Macron’s government pushing for 6% reductions in public spending by 2029 in France.
Working class independence is key
For socialists, this must underline the fundamental basis for a program to fight the Trumps of this world: the independence of the working class in opposition to both the rising right and the discredited remnants of the neoliberal (and ex-social democratic) establishment. Hopes, which have been omnipresent among reformists and liberals alike throughout history, that this or that section of the capitalist establishment, or even the state through laws and sacred rules, will stop reaction will be disappointed. This includes those currently hoping that the “lawfare” directed at Le Pen, Bolsonaro and Georgescu in Romania will successfully cut across the movements they represent.
Decisive opposition and inevitable mass resistance to reaction will not emanate from the ruling classes. When major cracks appear within the ruling class — which they will — these will be driven by tectonic movements of struggle from below. Then, if the working class is organized independently, including on the political plain, such divisions can be taken advantage of in the interests of revolutionary change. Marxists must point to the role of the working class in stymying several of Trump’s reactionary plans in his first term, and the mass action, including mass strikes, by workers in South Korea which stopped Yoon’s coup attempt in its tracks in December 2024. Moreover, in Turkey and Serbia today, historic mass movements have thrown Bonapartist regimes into their deepest crisis in many years.
Political independence in this context is key. In line with this, the demand for new working-class parties of the Left has become even more important around the world and is prominently featured by ISA. Indeed, this element of our program will be increasingly confronted with reality, with the beginning of a new wave of Left political struggle underway. This was reflected in the German elections with the historic growth of Die Linke — its explosion in membership more significant than its votes. In Britain, it appears that a major new Left party/formation will soon be launched, in a context of Labour’s new age of austerity and the rise of British Trumpism in the guise of Reform UK. Melenchon remains a crucial reference point amid an explosive situation in France, etc.
However, our program must go far beyond demanding the mere existence of such parties, but also crucially outline a strategy for their successful development. This is bound up intrinsically with the need to resolve the crisis of leadership of the working class movement. In the last decades, this enduring crisis was expressed in large measure by 21st century reformism, which was roundly defeated when put to the test by deep capitalist crisis.
Today however, it must be acknowledged that given the low starting point for working class political reorganization in this century following the defeats of the post-Stalinist era, and the related extreme weakness of the revolutionary Left, reformism has not by any means been overcome as we enter a new cycle of class battles. Indeed, in the absence of new political movements based on the lessons of the defeats of Corbynism and the Bernie Sanders insurgency of the 2010s, it is these same figures who are reemerging into leading roles. Corbyn will be at the helm of the developing Left alternative to Labour, while Sanders and AOC’s “Fighting Oligarchy” tour is drawing crowds which in some cases exceed those of the Bernie 2016 and 2020 campaign tours.
The task of Marxists in this situation is not to direct sectarian criticism from the sidelines, but to outline, in an even sharper manner now given the burning defeats of the recent past, a program which shows a way forward. The main pillars of this program are: an orientation to struggle on the streets and in workplaces, not institutionalism or electoralism; in place of lesser-evilism, militant opposition to the entire political establishment — both the rising right and the discredited forces responsible for its rise; mass, democratic structures to build parties by, of and for the working class; and a socialist, anti-imperialist program which targets the root of the reactionary juggernaut of 2020s capitalism.
Major class battles being prepared
While the political consequences of Trump’s trade war will be more nationalism and deeper polarization with a growing expression on the Left, its consequences regarding the class struggle will be even more decisive for Marxists.
In 2022–23, an inflationary wave struck the global economy, with underlying trends unleashed by the lifting of Covid lockdowns, disruption to supply chains and profit gouging and propelled further by the war in Ukraine. In response, workers demonstrated the classic (though not universal) impact of inflation on class struggle, with major strike waves internationally. This propelled workers’ struggles to historic levels in several key countries. Crucially, it was also a wave of industrial struggle which ended not generally in defeat for the working class, but in a relative strengthening of its confidence and fighting capacity.
Today, the inflationary impact of the changes wrought by Trump 2.0 will arrive in a new context, this time combined with an austerity offensive as governments prepare an avalanche of cuts. This combination could prove even more explosive. The colossal general strike of 10 April in Argentina in the face of precisely such a cocktail of anti-working class attacks is illustrative. In Europe, both Belgium and Greece have been rocked by multiple general strikes already this year against austerity. In the neocolonial world, the crippling economic impact of Trump’s trade wars could trigger the toppling of already-weak regimes, following in the wake of overthrown governments in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka in recent years.
Resistance to authoritarianism
In the case of Greece, the struggle was also given a powerful impetus by the explosion of anger following revelations of corruption at the heart of the horrific 2023 Tempi rail tragedy. Significantly, the same theme of criminal corruption and neglect causing mass casualties was the trigger of Serbia’s biggest protest movement in history, opening up an existential crisis for the Vucic regime which has still not been closed. This movement also helped to inspire militant protests in North Macedonia in response to the deaths of over 60 people in a needless blaze at a nightclub, and likewise a major teachers’ strike in neighbouring Croatia.
Vucic is not the only Bonapartist strong man living in fear of an historic mass movement. In Turkey, millions have defied Erdogan’s unprecedented clampdown in the aftermath of the jailing of his main (bourgeois) opponent, Imamoglou. At the time of writing, protests have still not been snuffed out despite mass arrests numbering in the thousands. However, the movement is severely limited by both the hegemony of the capitalist CHP party within it, and the labour movement’s failure to challenge this. As explained earlier, the question of class independence and a socialist program is key.
However, it is of course the United States which will be the most important theater or mass struggle against Trumpism. After more limited manifestations of active opposition in the months prior, April saw a breaking of the logjam with two mass days of protest, the first (5 April) being the biggest day of mobilization since the BLM rebellion in 2020, with millions on the streets.
Trump’s historic assault on the labour movement, with mass layoffs and executive orders seeking to abolish the collective bargaining rights of 5% of US union members, place the spectre of a showdown with organized labour squarely on the agenda. Despite the largely woeful response of the union bureaucracy to these attacks, the idea of working class action has already been present among a section of those fighting back. A small layer of union leaders, including flight attendants’ leader Sarah Nelson, have made propagandistic, though nevertheless extremely important and welcome, calls for a general strike. Our forces in the US, which have been building resistance on the streets since day one of Trump 2.0, emphasize the call for a day of national strike action as the necessary next step to build the kind of movement which could decisively set Trump back.
Highlighting the need for struggles against authoritarianism and austerity to merge with the ongoing international movement in solidarity with the Palestinian people is also crucial. The biggest international protest movement for years, having brought millions onto the streets consistently over more than 18 months, this struggle currently stands at an impasse. While it has had a major political impact across the world, it has not succeeded in stopping the Israeli state’s genocidal onslaught, nor the decisive backing it receives from US and Western imperialism.
This is in no way the fault of the tens of millions who have participated, but in essence because of the fundamental importance of the imperialist interests at stake in the region, and the Israeli state’s strategic role in maintaining them. It is also linked to the basic weaknesses of most of the movement’s leadership, which lacks the necessary class struggle-based, socialist internationalist perspective. Our answer to his impasse is not resignation or demoralization, but a program which can take the struggle to a new level.
A clear cutting edge of this program should be our calls to combine mass street demonstrations with direct working class action, led by the labour movement, to cut across the Israeli state’s war machine. We demand that union leaders, both in the Middle East and in Western countries, turn words of opposition to the slaughter into determined action to shut down the production and supply of weaponry and other assistance to the Israeli government of death. This program of action for the movement must be linked to a broad political program for working class power throughout the region, which can make the cause of Palestinian liberation — of which Trump and Netanyahu wish to extinguish all hope — viable in our epoch.
Socialist program and leadership is key
Addressing the crisis of working class leadership is crucial to the building of the fightback required in the age of Trump 2.0. In general, the leadership of the vast majority of the world’s labour movement are in no way armed with the conviction that mass working class struggle can reverse the slide towards reaction. In contrast, this conviction is fundamental to our socialist perspective and program.
This contradiction has already made its presence felt in the struggles of this moment in history. In Argentina, the general strike was organized, from the CGT leadership’s point of view, not as the beginning of a decisive showdown with the Milei government and its policies, but as an “escape valve”, to be followed by demobilization. US unions facing existential crisis under the impact of Trump’s attacks have largely resorted to the weapon of “legal action” rather than mobilization of their members. In many cases, this failed strategy is also deeply political, with mainstream union leaderships determined to cling to the coattails of discredited “centrist” establishment parties, often of a social democratic colouring.
In this period, however, socialists’ political battle within the labour movement is not only against those with bankrupt strategies to fight Trumpism, but also against the penetration of reactionary nationalist ideas into the ranks of the movement itself. An historic trait of many Bonapartist regimes throughout history, from Charles De Gaulle to Peron in Argentina, has been a tendency to seek to co-opt elements of the labour movement to a bourgeois nationalist agenda. Trump has already made important inroads in this regard with the leader of the country’s biggest private sector union (Sean O’Brien of the Teamsters), who has been a useful idiot for the Trumpists since before his re-election. Other union leaderships, including the UAW’s Sean Fain have also lined up in support of the administration’s tariff policy.
These positions have been echoed by union leaderships in Canada, Mexico and beyond, as class collaborationist bureaucracies take the bait in support of “national interests” and industries. Socialists stand for neither free trade nor protectionism. Not supporting the protectionist policies of “our” governments is part and parcel of asserting working class independence today. To the position of union leaders who tail-end the policies of national governments, we counterpose international solidarity and working class action across borders in defence of jobs, wages and conditions. We demand that industries threatened with closure by the impact of trade wars should be nationalized under democratic workers’ control, and where necessary reorientated to socially useful work and production.
Another extremely significant new element in the dynamic of class struggle today is the centrality of war and imperialism to the new age of austerity. In country after country, “tough choices” will be justified in the name of military spending and the defence of the realm. This will give the class struggle a sharper edge, with striking and protesting workers demonized as aiding and abetting the enemy. A glimpse of this has already been offered in the “anti-semitism” witch hunting and persecution which has been meted out against antiwar protesters in many countries.
This situation underlines the importance of fighting for a consistent internationalist and anti-imperialist position in the labour movement. As well as opposing support for “our” national interests in a given capitalist state, this also includes an opposition to all imperialism. In particular, we must continue to combat the idea that Chinese imperialism represents a progressive counterweight to the hated US empire. ISA’s understanding of the restoration of capitalism in China is a valuable attribute in assisting our understanding of events and our tasks
Conclusion
Ultimately, these considerations all point to one fundamental conclusion: the need to build the forces and influence of Marxism among working class, young and oppressed people. In the final analysis, clear World Perspectives are only worth having if they can be coupled with the revolutionary organization, discipline and determination required to make an impact on the processes being described.
The dizzying pace of change which characterizes the world situation demands both audacity and humility from Marxists. Audacity expressed in eagerness and determination to understand, characterize and intervene in events. And the humility required to be open to reconsider any and all ideas and schemas, under the hammer blows of merciless changes in the objective situation. ISA will continue to develop its World Perspectives in this spirit.
