A-Infos (en) France, OCL CA #355 - ANTI-CAPITALISM AS A BOND FOR STRUGGLES? (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

The French publication of the book *Capitalism Is Cannibalism*, written 
by the "democratic socialist" philosopher Nancy Fraser, provides a good 
opportunity to revisit the major activist question of recent decades: 
how to foster a revolutionary dynamic against a capitalist order that 
has become globalized, in the absence of a credible alternative to this 
order? After summarizing Fraser's argument, we will offer a critique of 
what anti-capitalism too often encompasses.
For some thirty years, through numerous writings, Nancy Fraser (NF) has 
been developing her reflections on the state of the world, analyzing 
both events and struggles through a Marxist lens (1). Her objective is 
to participate "in movements that contribute to changing and imagining a 
new society"-a "21st-century socialism" that breaks with the models of 
the past century (Soviet "communism" and social democracy). She calls 
for the construction of an anti-capitalism that tackles not only the 
exploitation of labor, but also the forms of domination linked to 
gender, "race," nature, and politics, as highlighted by feminist, 
anti-racist, environmental, and other struggles during the second half 
of the 20th century. Furthermore, she believes that "if[these 
struggles]are oriented in the right way-and, of course, this is not 
always the case-they can also be understood as a class struggle (2)," 
because they relate to the "essential components" of the capitalist system.

A "cannibalistic" capitalism
NF highlights two key features of the periods of value accumulation 
experienced by capitalism. First, the expansionism inherent in capital 
has been a function of the military power held by various states in the 
Core (i.e., the wealthy countries of the Global North) as well as 
transnational political arrangements. Second, the exploitation of wage 
labor in these countries has been accompanied by the political and 
economic expropriation of people and wealth in the Periphery (the poor 
countries of the Global South), through various mechanisms (slavery, 
colonialism, imperialism, land confiscation, and the plundering of 
natural resources).

Today, the word "capitalism" is back in the conversation, but NF 
believes that its nature and operation must be clarified. This 
comprehensive and complex social system is certainly based on the 
private ownership of the means of production and the endless pursuit of 
profit (with the surplus value derived from exploited labor in the 
factory), but it also seeks profit from other sources of wealth for 
which it does not pay and which it does not replenish. Its economic 
logic is based on the four internal divisions it possesses and 
compartmentalizes through a system of "boundaries": it separates the 
economy from politics, production from social reproduction (3), society 
from non-human nature, and exploitation from expropriation. But, at the 
same time, these distinct divisions are deeply intertwined (there can 
thus be no production without social reproduction or the parasitism of 
nature and public goods provided by states); And they are implicated in 
capitalism's propensity for crises that are not solely due to economic 
dysfunctions (depressions, bankruptcies, stock market crashes): because 
it is founded on a cannibalistic dynamic (like the mythical Ouroboros 
serpent that devours itself by biting its own tail), it only exists by 
emptying itself of its substance - in other words, by destroying "the 
non-economic conditions of its existence." Examples:

Nature is a source of materials and energy for him, but he also uses it 
as a garbage dump and he is "the main socio-historical driver of global 
warming".
In terms of social reproduction, it fuels a protest against itself 
because, in the private sphere, it does not remunerate the domestic 
tasks carried out by a majority of women (whose paid work outside is, 
moreover, generally less paid than that of men); and because, in the 
public sphere, it degrades, through the austerity policies implemented 
by governments, the quality of already poorly paid public educational 
and health services.
In the countries of the Center, it lives off the backs of public 
authorities, taking advantage of their legal systems, repressive forces, 
infrastructure, and regulatory bodies, but the lure of profit regularly 
incites a segment of the capitalist class to weaken the state. Hence 
what is called a "crisis of democracy."
Characteristics of current neoliberalism
The "cannibalism" of capitalism has produced crises that have led it 
through four phases: commercial-mercantile (16th-18th centuries), 
liberal-colonial (19th and early 20th centuries), statist-managerial 
(after the Second World War), and globalized-financialized (since the 
1970s).
This last phase, commonly referred to and denounced as "neoliberalism," 
does not "just" encompass the policies pursued since the 1980s by 
conservative heads of state, supranational organizations with debt, or 
multinationals with consumer credit.
The 2008 economic crisis triggered a growing disinvestment by states in 
social reproduction in the countries of the Global South. The 
privatization of this sector intensified at the same time as two-wage 
households became widespread, with a surge in female employment, and as 
social welfare and public health services were reduced, resulting in an 
acute "care shortage." A growing share of social reproduction is now 
carried out by for-profit companies with numerous dysfunctions (scandals 
periodically erupt regarding the treatment of children and the elderly). 
Nevertheless, the "traditional" female role remains strong in society, 
as many women continue to perform domestic tasks in their own homes 
while also being employed to do the same work in other households.
The Center/Periphery divide is tending to diminish because there is, in 
effect, a "peripheralization" of the countries of the Center-a trend 
that has been exacerbated by the three years of Covid. While poverty 
increases among the populations of these countries, immigrant workers, 
often undocumented (and now referred to as migrants[4]), arrive en masse 
- women to work in services or as domestic servants, or (especially in 
Southeast Asia and China) in textile and electronics industries with 
very harsh working conditions and very low wages. The distinction 
between "white" workers and undocumented immigrants allows far-right 
populists to seize power by exploiting racism.

The growing power of international institutions (IMF, World Bank, rating 
agencies, etc.) weakens the state's role in regulating the system. In 
the periphery, debt plays a central role in the dispossession of local 
populations.
Finally, large-scale environmental damage continues, with displacements 
and new phenomena-battles for minerals such as lithium or coltan, water 
privatization... Global warming is becoming uncontrollable.

Points of agreement with Nancy Fraser...
NF's stated desire to restore class struggle to its rightful place is 
welcome, given the prevailing trend toward individualistic concerns that 
benefit those in power. The same is true of her critique of what she 
calls "progressive neoliberalism"-in other words, the alliance of 
liberal currents within feminism, anti-racism, and environmentalism with 
a large segment of social democracy. NF is somewhat harsh on 
"second-wave" feminists when she accuses them of having, in the 1970s-by 
emphasizing the importance of paid work for women as a means of ensuring 
their autonomy from men-"legitimized" the dual-income family model, 
which contributed to the proliferation of commodities. It is nonetheless 
true that Democratic President Clinton in the United States, Social 
Democratic Chancellor Schröder in Germany, and Labour Prime Minister 
Blair in the United Kingdom used "progressive" themes (feminism, 
anti-racism, "marriage equality," etc.) to mask the liberal shift in 
their economic policies, which made neoliberalism hegemonic in these 
countries.
In the United States, NF reminds us, the feminist, anti-racist, and 
LGBTQI+ movements were characterized by a "moral superiority," while 
Rust Belt workers (5) saw their living conditions deteriorate under the 
weight of increasing job insecurity, which led them to reject these 
movements. NF criticizes the demand for parity or quotas in a country 
where living conditions are worsening for the vast majority of Black 
people and where the precarious situation of women at the bottom of the 
social ladder is increasing. As for the militant anti-racism that gave 
rise to Black Lives Matter, she believes it should go beyond "the 
toppling of statues[and]the strictly symbolic" to assess racism "in 
light of concrete factors and (...) seek equally concrete solutions (6)."
Finally, she emphasizes the criterion of social utility. It is not about 
producing fewer things in general, as advocated by proponents of 
degrowth, she explains, because production of things like housing, 
medicine, and nutritious food must be increased; and drinking water, 
among other things, is a public good that should not be provided or sold 
by private, for-profit companies. What must be minimized, or even 
eliminated, is the growth of value, the ultimate goal of capital 
accumulation.

... and points of disagreement
NF's analyses are of genuine intellectual interest, but we have the same 
disagreements with her as with other "leftists"-the reformists who rely 
on the state to reduce social inequalities, or wage inequalities between 
men and women, while still wanting to maintain private property and 
institutions; or the revolutionaries who wish to establish (particularly 
through planning) a more egalitarian system, counting on the state to do so.
NF states that she does not want a return to the welfare state and she 
accurately describes the function of the state institution (guaranteeing 
private property, maintaining order, etc.), but she proposes this 
institution as a tool to dismantle capitalism and regulate competition 
between the "small private businesses, cooperatives,[and]all sorts of 
different forms of organization" to come (7). She rejects neither the 
nation-state nor national corporations: she seems primarily concerned 
with ensuring that public authorities manage to "contain private power," 
counter multinationals, and adopt a more socially conscious approach. An 
anti-capitalist movement, she argues, should compel them to implement 
"working-class policies regarding income and employment." However, since 
NF does not question the working class's place in society, her 
anti-capitalism appears to be primarily anti-neoliberal. Yet, it is 
somewhat paradoxical, after presenting capitalism as a global system, to 
aim only for the disappearance of its "financialized" version. 
Furthermore, can one be anti-capitalist without challenging the social 
hierarchy?
Moreover, nation-states are not as detached from transnational 
organizations as she suggests: the influence of the United States at the 
UN and the IMF is evidence of this. The various structures of political 
power largely share the same personnel who defend the same class 
interests: a politician will, for example, hold a government post or a 
seat in the French National Assembly and the European Parliament. The 
same applies to corporate management: small business owners, like large 
corporations, seek maximum profit.
Moreover, is the electoral front uniting all the potentially 
emancipatory forces of the United States that NF advocates truly capable 
of realizing her anti-capitalist and "trans-environmental" project? In 
her view, "left-wing populism" is "an accessible entry point into the 
class struggle" (see box): after winning victories at the ballot box, it 
would become radicalized and explain how to change the system... But NF 
herself admits to doubting that such a program is feasible, and she is 
quite right because it runs up against a major obstacle: the existence, 
within the struggles, of antagonistic class interests and contradictory 
aspirations. These are all interclass groupings on specific subjects: 
the defense of such a social achievement attacked by a government, the 
demand for such equality for a "minority", the end of such a project 
harmful to the environment... Crossing the criterion "class" with the 
criteria "gender" and/or "race" in an anti-capitalist (if not clearly 
revolutionary) perspective can therefore only group together on a class 
basis a part - and not all - of the people participating in these struggles.

Bucket excavator used for digging in open-pit mines.
On the other hand, separating the exploited from the "expropriated," as 
NF does, undermines class solidarity. The discrimination, racism, and 
targeted repression suffered by the "expropriated" are undeniable 
realities that must be fought; but emphasizing a divide within the 
proletariat between "privileged" white nationals and "racialized" 
migrants inadvertently reinforces capitalism. It is better to highlight 
what the categories of proletarians have in common than what separates 
them-let us remember, therefore, that the exploited were also, in the 
past, dispossessed of everything (their land, their labor), or that what 
happens to the "racialized" often happens later to "whites." The loss of 
social gains, the rise of precarious employment, and the constant 
strengthening of social control clearly demonstrate this today.
Finally, it is better to aim for the disappearance of social roles than 
the "socialization" of care advocated by NF. Male domination will 
persist if this socialization consists of burdening women with the 
collective responsibility-even for "fair" pay-of housework and the 
management of childcare or eldercare. This work of caring for others is 
what makes us human... therefore, it must be carried out by both men and 
women, and the social hierarchy between the sexes, as well as between 
classes, must be abolished.

Vanina

* Published by Agone in 2025.

Would "social justice" require
"left-wing populism"?

NF's analyses are heavily focused on the United States and its history 
(slavery, the role of unions in triggering and managing social 
conflicts, etc.), which somewhat skews them. For example, she labels 
social struggles as "social protection" (which is the niche of the major 
union federations) while reserving the term "emancipation" for "other" 
struggles. Yet, in the history of the French labor movement, the goal 
was "social emancipation" through class struggle, whereas in "other" 
struggles, the aim is often individual emancipation, which leaves the 
existing order firmly in place.
Similarly, current political life in the United States reflects the 
strength of the two-party system: it boils down to a confrontation 
between reactionary populism and a decaying "progressive neoliberalism." 
Since Trump's opponents (even those on the far left) always end up 
supporting the Democratic Party at election time, the opposition to him 
is primarily legal in nature.
NF embraces the use of populist language for its "mobilizing" potential 
(see note 6 of the article). According to her, when "the level of 
political culture is not high enough due to poor transmission of 
left-wing history, populism can catalyze[people's]rebellion against the 
elites." In another interview (1), she adds that while Bernie Sanders 
and Donald Trump have both said, "The American system is rigged against 
working people," the left must specify "by whom, and how. That is 
what[it]must have a discourse on, to distinguish right-wing populism 
from left-wing populism."

1. "The white working class and new social movements must unite," 
Mediapart, June 11, 2023.

Notes
1. For example, the Covid-19 pandemic or the international emergence of 
feminist networks.
2. Quoted by Denis Paillard in "About Nancy Fraser's 'Cannibal 
Capitalism'" (Entre les lignes entre les mots, January 30, 2023).
3. NF does indeed integrate into capitalism the patriarchal system of 
oppression, which predates it but on which it relies.
4. The use of this term by governments rather than "(immigrant) workers" 
is not innocent: presenting them as people who are "passing through" a 
country undermines solidarity with them.
5. "Rust Belt": nickname given to the industrial region of the 
Northeast, known until the 1970s as the Manufacturing Belt.
6. "Fighting against 'left-wing' neoliberalism" (Nouveaux cahiers du 
socialisme, March 20, 2021).
7. Read the interview "Sometimes the language of degrowth lacks 
subtlety" (Grand continent, October 13, 2022).

https://oclibertaire.lautre.net/spip.php?article4595
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en