Indonesia eyes Cambodia rice firms to pad reserves, but plan may falter on export quota, local laws

In 2023, Indonesia produced 31.1 million tonnes of rice in 2023, up 1.4 per cent from 2022. PHOTO: AFP

Linda Yulisman
Indonesia Correspondent
JUN 26, 2024


JAKARTA – Indonesia’s recent plan to acquire Cambodian rice companies to shore up its rice supplies may hit a snag due to export restrictions and local land ownership laws, experts say.

State-owned logistics agency Bulog has begun talks with several Cambodian rice companies and some Indonesian banks about the acquisition plans. Bulog president director Bayu Krisnamurthi told The Straits Times that it is still early days yet and the matter will be discussed with all relevant parties in stages.

The wheels were set in motion after outgoing President Joko Widodo asked Bulog on June 10 to consider acquiring a rice producer in Cambodia to ensure that the country’s rice reserves are at a “safe level”.


Indonesia, the world’s fourth-biggest rice producer and the third-largest consumer of rice, plans to import more than 3.6 million tonnes of rice in 2024, in anticipation of a smaller harvest due to droughts, and to maintain stable rice prices for consumers, officials said.

In 2023, Indonesia produced 31.1 million tonnes of rice in 2023, up 1.4 per cent from 2022, according to Statistics Indonesia. The fourth most-populous nation in the world consumes about 30 million tonnes of rice annually.

Rice is a crucial staple for many in Asia. Indonesia imports less than 5 per cent of its total national needs, Mr Widodo said in May. From January to May 2024, Indonesia bought the most rice from Thailand, followed by Vietnam, Pakistan and India, with Cambodia a distant fifth, according to Statistics Indonesia.

Although the vast archipelago has plenty of land, the most suitable rice-planting areas are located in Java, which is already heavily planted, experts say. Paddy cultivation in the other main islands – Sumatra, Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Papua – is less productive due to factors like climate and soil fertility, as well as lack of infrastructure such as proper irrigation canals.

In addition, as urbanisation spreads in Java, which is home to 56 per cent of the country’s nearly 280 million people, farmland conversions into more-profitable industrial and residential developments are happening at a fast clip.

As such, Agriculture Minister Amran Sulaiman told Parliament on June 20 that a smaller rice harvest is expected in 2024 due to weather changes and a decline in cultivated areas, which shrank 36.9 per cent to 6.55 million hectares from October 2023 to April 2024.

Mr Widodo had said recently that it would be better for Indonesia to invest in a rice producer in Cambodia, rather than solely importing from its neighbouring countries.

But, while acquiring a rice producer there is a fairly straightforward process – Cambodia allows up to 100 per cent foreign ownership of companies that operate in the country – there are other factors at play.

Mr Bhima Yudhistira, executive director of Jakarta-based think-tank Centre of Economic and Law Studies, said there is no guarantee that such an acquisition would bolster Indonesia rice supplies because a Cambodian company, even one that is foreign-owned, would be subject to local laws and directives.

“If the Cambodian government decides that its rice should be prioritised for its domestic needs, the company cannot maximise its exports to Indonesia. Bulog must take into account such restrictions,” he told ST.

Bulog’s Dr Bayu said that for now the agency has not yet touched on export-related issues that acquired companies will face.

Under a memorandum of understanding on bilateral rice trade renewed in 2023, Indonesia can buy up to 250,000 tonnes of rice from Cambodia a year from 2024 to 2028. The bilateral rice trade is carried out both under a government-to-government arrangement between Bulog and Cambodia’s Green Trade Co., as well as a business-to-business scheme between Indonesia’s state-owned food company ID Food and Cambodia Rice Federation.

But this annual export allowance is a small amount, compared with Indonesia’s overall rice needs, said Mr Khudori, an agriculture expert from the Association of Indonesia Political Economy, who noted that the Cambodian rice comes from a surplus of domestic production.

For the first four months of 2024, Indonesia imported 2.26 million tonnes of rice, of which 25,000 tonnes came from Cambodia.

Mr Khudori said that increased consumption of rice worldwide, especially in areas like Africa, has added to the uncertainties in the global rice supply chain. At the same time, he noted that major rice-exporting countries such as India have imposed export restrictions when facing their own supply crisis or disruption in production.

Therefore, he suggested that Bulog should look into purchasing farmland in Cambodia for enhanced food security.

“Land acquisition will guarantee the acquired rice company secures paddy to be milled,” Mr Khudori said, highlighting the example of China’s land acquisition in Brazil and Africa to secure its soybean supply.

Elsewhere, Saudi Arabia has bought agricultural land in the US and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has done so in Africa for food security purposes. But for Indonesia, purchasing land for rice farming in Cambodia is easier said than done, experts say.

Mr Bora Chhay, Cambodia’s managing director at advisory firm Bower Group Asia, pointed out the restrictions concerning land ownership in Cambodia.

“Ownership of land for the purpose of conducting promoted investment activities is reserved exclusively for individuals holding Cambodian citizenship, or for legal entities in which more than 51 per cent of the equity capital is directly owned by Cambodian citizens or legal entities,” he said.

Meanwhile, Mr Bhima said that instead of looking abroad for solutions, Indonesia could tackle the current issues plaguing rice production.

These include inadequate warehouse and storage options that affect the quality of the rice stocks, and lack of investment in equipment and technology to help rice farmers and millers remain competitive.

Agriculture Minister Andi Amran Sulaiman said on June 20 that the acquisition proposal should be done in concert with domestic efforts to maximise local food resources, such as establishing new rice fields where possible, optimising existing ones, and improving watering systems.

MORE ON THIS TOPIC

Indonesia asks military to help farmers boost rice production

Indonesians adapt to soaring rice prices with smaller portions, lower-quality grains

Indonesia considers extending rice handout programme to year end

Indonesia tenders to buy 500,000 tonnes of rice: Traders

Marxists.orgwww.marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1924/impacck/index.htm

Imperialism and the Accumulation of Capital - Nikolai Bukharin - 1924

Source: Rosa Luxemburg and Nikolai Bukharin Imperialism and the Accumulation of capital. Edited with an Introduction by Kenneth J. Tarbuck. (Allen Lane The ...

Archive.orgarchive.org/details/cu31924013841154

Imperialism and world economy : Bukharin, Nikolaĭ Ivanovich, 1888 ...

Oct 22, 2009 ... ... PDF etc.). See also the What is the directory structure for the texts? FAQ for information about file content and naming conventions ...

INDIA

Odisha: Unbridled Commercial Activities May Take Heavy Toll on Bhitarkanika Flora, Fauna

DN Singh | 21 Jun 2024


Destruction of the Inner Kanika (core area) looks imminent if the government’s proposed drinking water project through Kharasrota river goes ahead, warn experts.

After Sundarbans in West Bengal, the Bhitarkanika National Park in Odisha is the second-largest mangrove forest in India. There are 55 different types of mangroves in the sanctuary, where migrant birds from Central Asia and Europe camp.

More famous for being a home to about 1,671 saltwater crocodiles, this National Park is spread over 145 sq km in North East of Kendrapara district.

Being a rich repository of innumerable flora and fauna, this park is supposedly one of the best among many such treasures in the world. Unfortunately, uncontrolled commercial activities are gradually becoming a death knell for the park.

The rich biodiversity of this park is evident from its pride possession of more than 70% of the country’s saltwater crocodile population that remain the flagship species in the meandering tidal creeks and mangrove forests.

The largest among the crocodiles in the park’s creek was measured 23 feet and still rules.

“In a way, the crocodiles are doing the job of protecting the park, else people could rummage through the park’s eco-system if the fear of the crocodiles was not there” said a forest official in Bhitarkanika, requesting anonymity.

The threat to these crocodiles comes from the expanding human population coupled with a drop in freshwater from the promontory source, the Kharasrota river, endangering the health the National Park and the flora and fauna,” said Biswajit Mohanty, an environmental activist.

Destruction of the Inner Kanika (core area) looks imminent if the government’s proposed drinking water project through Kharasrota river goes ahead, as that may bring an end to the eco-system and biodiversity of the park in another 25 years from now, he added.

If there is no balance between the saltwater coming from the ocean’s mouth and the freshwater from the river in the mangroves, then this system will collapse, experts warned.

The role of mangroves is important in battling the threat of cyclones that has been increasing along the coast of Odisha. This was amply proved during the 1999 Supercyclone that protected the entire Rajnagar block fortified by thick clusters of mangrove forest.

Besides saltwater crocodiles, the national park is also a home to the Indian python, king cobra, wild boars, chital, jackals, fishing cats and a huge population of water monitor lizards and many other species.

On the mud flats of the creek one can notice a number of mud-skippers who play a crucial role in the pool and food chain. These red crabs crawling on the mud flats play a vital role in the food chain, making this national park resilient in the self-support mechanism.

The mangrove forest also plays a significant role. A large-scale initiative was taken three-four years ago to plant mangrove saplings to replenish the loss, but that has not succeeded as expected.

“Most of the exercise remains on pen and paper and the job given to selective organisations are an eyewash” said a forest official.

Pink Rush

A few years ago, prawn farming became a big threat for the estuarine flow of water from the tidal creek, which is a major lifeline for the park.

Those who do prawn farming in the outer ring of the park and even inside areas usually dump toxic effluents into the rivers and ponds, causing severe pollution.

This went on despite an order from the Odisha High Court in 2017 when illegal prawn farms were removed.

“But the rot did not stop at that and a nexus between the prawn mafia and some forest officials saw to it that illegal farming restarted after a hiatus. Experts tell us that prawn farms impact the health of mangrove forests almost by combing the spread of mangrove” rued Mohanty, who also heads Wildlife Society of Odisha.

But the way the national park is being honey-combed by human activities through artificially created shrimp cultivation by siphoning brackish water from the adjoining creeks has been impacting the creeks and endangering the life cycle of the inmates around it.

There is a view that illegal immigrants from Bangladesh and Bengal have added to the problems.

“It has become a political problem and the forest department does not have a handle to check it. Each family that comes illegally, builds its own shelter for which a patch of mangrove is razed. One can imagine the rapidity at which the forest cover is reducing”, said Mohanty.

“In Bhitarkanika’s entire expanse, there is a rich layer of biomass on which many herbivores like Chital, wild boars feed themselves. That is being reduced by construction of rest houses and bungalows in Dangamal, which is drastically destroying the biomass reserves” said Mohan Rout, an activist working on the conservation of Bhitarkanika for the past 15 years.

As the Sun sets, sitting in the verandah of the forest bungalow, one can witness dozens of wild boars and chitals grazing on the surrounding biomass which is a rich and salty layer of earth they feed on. How long will this last, remains to be seen.

The writer is a freelance journalist based in Odisha.

Odisha: Women and Machine: How Gender-Friendly Equipment Bring Ease to Farmwork

Abhijit Mohanty | 19 Jun 2024

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Modifications in equipment to suit women millet farmers under the flagship Odisha Millet Mission reduce their drudgery, save time.

A woman farmer using cycle weeder in her farm in Parvathipuram under Manyam district of Andhra Pradesh (Photo - Abhijit Mohanty, 101Reporters).

Koraput, Odisha: Bati Bhumia (46) and her colleagues at Shree Maa Women’s Self-help Group (SHG) in Boipariguda block of Koraput now get some free time for themselves, thanks to the gender-friendly farm machinery and equipment introduced with an aim to reduce the drudgery of millet growing women farmers.

Traditionally, women process millets and it is a labour-intensive job where they spend hours separating the grain from straws, removing the outer cover of the grain, cleaning, grading, polishing and pounding it into flour. The cultivation of millets also involves much work.

“Every day, we used to spend five to six hours removing weeds from the farm. That has come down to three hours now as we use cycle weeders,’’ said Bhumia. What has made life easier for Bhumia is a crucial modification to include horizontal handlebars to cycle weeder, thereby enhancing its ergonomics.

Under Odisha Millets Mission (OMM), ragi thresher-cum-pearler, cleaner-cum-grader and cycle weeder were provided to 10 women SHGs in Koraput. However, after operating them, SHG members and farmers reported several challenges.

A tribal woman standing on her farm where she has grown little millet in Kundra block under Koraput district in Odisha (Photo - Abhijit Mohanty, 101Reporters).

“Cleaning ragi thresher-cum-pearler used to be a hassle because the sieves were not removable,” said Malati Jani (42), a member of Maa Tarini women’s SHG in Koraput block.

“Moving the thresher was also tough. The machine is very heavy. It required more hands to move it from one place to another,” added Parima Badnayak (23), another member.

When such challenges came to the fore, the Department of Agriculture and Farmers’ Empowerment (DA&FE) formed a Gender Analysis Committee (GAC) by involving gender specialists in 2022. It observed that machinery used in agriculture catered only to male biological aspects. It consulted SHG members and women farmers to comprehensively document their operational challenges as well as suggested modifications to the machine. Based on this, the manufacturers made modifications to make the machines women friendly.

Participatory machinery development (PMD) under OMM was one of the suggestions given by the GAC. The DA&FE has been promoting it under OMM since last year in Gajapati, Nuapada, Kendujhar, Koraput and Sundargarh districts, where it has reached out to 75 farmers in 15 villages in its first phase to create farm equipment that address their specific needs, preferences and challenges, with a special focus on women. In the subsequent phases, more farmers will be reached and the PMD initiative will be scaled up to all operational districts under OMM.

Therefore, when horizontal handlebars were introduced in cycle weeder, it allowed for a more natural and comfortable grip that facilitated pushing and pulling and reduced physical strain during prolonged deweeding operations. The cycle weeder is operated in a standing posture, whereas women stay bent for hours to uproot weeds in the traditional approach. Besides the transition from one to three tyne configuration, the blades have enabled more effective soil penetration, ensuring thorough coverage and effective weed control.

Similarly, the thresher has got wheels. “We can easily load it in a vehicle now and transport it to the farm and remote villages,” beamed Badnayak.

Jani too said that things have improved. “The sieves are removable now. We can easily clean the machine in less time,” she said.

Feminisation of agriculture

India is the largest producer and second-largest exporter of millets in the world. According to the Economic Survey of India, 2023, India alone produced 80% of the millets in Asia and accounted for 20% of its global production. According to the Annual Periodic Labour Force Survey, 2021-22, agriculture has the highest estimated female labour force participation of 62.9%.

“Rural men generally find it easy to operate most of the farm machines after receiving orientation and training,’’ said Usha Dharamraj, Principal Scientist, Central Food Technological Research Institute, Mysuru. She added that women farmers faced numerous challenges in operating farm machines as they are heavy and women unfriendly, often resulting in health hazards.

“Increasing feminisation of agricultural operations and ageing farmers are two fundamental social transformations taking place in rural heartlands. While developing plans for increasing productivity through mechanisation, the government should acknowledge and integrate this major social transformation,” Arabinda Kumar Padhee, Principal Secretary, DA&FE, told 101Reporters.

According to him, a pragmatic way of doing this is to promote customising suitability of technologies and tools through participatory approaches. “We will be gender and age testing every machinery that is used in the field, especially in millets and other crop operations.’’

Mini millet mixer used by local SHGs in Telangana (Photo - Abhijit Mohanty, 101Reporters).

A recent study conducted by Mahila Kisan Adhikaar Manch (MAKAAM) in neighbouring Telangana revealed that majority of women farmers suffered from body aches, pains and musculoskeletal disorders due to intensive manual farm labour. “There is a need to explore new ways of design and development of machinery through participatory approach. Involving women farmers and elderly people, and incorporating their suggestions are the key,’’ said Dr V Rukmini Rao, a member of the national facilitation team of MAKAAM.

Private participation  

The private sector can play a major role in delivering affordable and accessible farm solutions for women farmers. For instance, Farm Easy, a Hyderabad-based social enterprise founded by Watershed Support Services and Activities Network (WASSAN) is promoting innovative technology in farm implements to reduce manual workload of small and marginal farmers, especially women.

“We aim to ensure accessibility and availability of farm machines without compromising scientific rigour at a reasonable price,” said Farm Easy director Gembali Goutham. They are easy to operate and suitable for both men and women. They are also environment friendly as we ensure integration of decentralised renewable energy (solar energy), he added.

Farm Easy’s mini millet mixer efficiently removes husk from foxtail and little millets and processes them, including destoning and sieving. It is suitable for small-scale millet processing at household level. According to Goutham, several successful pilots to dehusk minor millets have been carried out. Azim Premji Foundation supported the research and development of the mixer.

Arika Ismeri (33) at Achapuvalasa village in Andhra Pradesh’s Manyam district is very happy with the mixer. “Earlier, we dehulled millets by pounding them in a wooden mortar.  It is an extremely tedious process. It usually took half a day to prepare 2 kg of grain. But now, with the help of this mixer, we could process 4 kg of little millet in an hour.”

Similarly, combo sprayer designed ergonomically by Farm Easy reduces fatigue and back strain associated with the work. “As it is solar-powered, we can use it even when there is no power supply,’’ said Pallala Saraswati, a woman farmer at Thuruvada in Alluri Sitharamaraju district of Andhra Pradesh.

Farm Easy has designed and improved several other farm equipment as well. “These include a motorised baby pulper for coffee, a comprehensive and automated solution of preparing bio-inputs through fermenter-controller, and solar energy mobile carts that enable access to irrigation in uneven terrains,” said Gijivisha Khattry, senior programme officer, WASSAN, Hyderabad.

Policy concerns

“Amidst the changing climate, men in large numbers are migrating to cities in search of jobs,’’ said Sabarmatee, a Padma Shri recipient and founding member of Sambhav, an NGO working in Odisha’s Nayagarh district on gender justice and regenerative agriculture. “Left behind, women in villages bear the burden of agriculture alone. They spend a lot of time in their farms, but very little effort has been made to design equipment based on women's ergonomics and gender perception,’’ she added.

Sabarmatee said various factors, including the size of land holding, availability of replacement parts locally and power efficiency, should be kept in mind while agritech companies design farm machines, which are crop, operation and region specific.

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization estimates, if women had the same access to productive resources as men, they could increase yields on their farms by 20 to 30%, potentially resulting in a fall in hungry people globally by 100 to 150 million.

Peter Bakos has worked extensively with smallholders in India to develop appropriate technologies and multipurpose implements for agriculture and post-harvest mechanisation. “There should be a balance between men and women in agriculture to make it sustainable. The first step should be to involve men and initiate discussions on redefining masculinity and sharing agricultural responsibilities,” he said.

Abhijit Mohanty is an Odisha-based freelance journalist and a member of 101Reporters, a pan-India network of grassroots reporters. 

AUSTRALIA

More than 1m birds to be destroyed as bird flu detected at a seventh Victorian farm

By Jane McNaughton and Warwick Long for ABC Rural


Victoria's chief veterinary officer, Graeme Cooke, said the latest infected farm housed between 150,000 and 200,000 egg-laying chickens. (File pic) Photo: AFP

Australia's largest outbreak of bird flu has hit a grim milestone, with Victorian authorities confirming more than 1 million birds will be killed to try and prevent the spread of the virus.

Seven farms across south-west Victoria have now been found with highly pathogenic strains of avian influenza, affecting hundreds of thousands of farmed birds.

The outbreak began on an egg farm near Meredith in May, and has continued to spread in the region as local farmers face the harsh reality of Australia's biosecurity response to outbreaks of emergency animal diseases.

Victoria's chief veterinary officer, Graeme Cooke, said the latest infected farm housed between 150,000 and 200,000 egg-laying chickens.

"This latest infected premises was once again picked up on very early surveillance and that means it can be dealt with very early," Dr Cooke said.

"I really thank producers within the restricted area where all the cases have been for their help and collaboration as we work our way through this outbreak."
Nation's largest outbreak

The death toll from the current outbreak of bird flu is more than double the state's most recent outbreak in 2020, which resulted in the death of over 400,000 birds, including emus, turkeys and chickens, across the state.

The current outbreak is concentrated mostly to the Golden Plains Shire, one of the largest regions that produces eggs and chicken meat in Victoria, producing about a quarter of Victoria's eggs.

A control zone is in place spanning approximately 100 kilometres from west to east across the region, covering six of the seven farms detected with the H7N3 strain of avian influenza.

"[Control measures] really reduce the level of virus in an area. The faster we can pick it up, the less risk there is of onwards spread," Dr Cooke said.

"The requirements in the controlled areas, especially the restricted areas, are to prevent onward movement of the virus either by vehicles, people or other means.

"Meredith has consistently been detecting [bird flu].

"If this virus was allowed to spread onward it would be devastating for the rest of the poultry industry in Victoria and perhaps onward through Australia.

"The right thing to do is to stop the infected premises being any further risk, and that's the action that is taken through the humane destruction and disposal and the onwards cleansing and disinfection of the farms."

An egg farm near Terang was also found to have bird flu within its chicken population last month, however authorities found a different strain, H7N9.

Agriculture Victoria is investigating the cause of the outbreaks but so far it is believed the disease has spread from wild birds into domestic poultry.

The disease has spread from wild birds into domestic poultry, experts believe. (File pic) Photo: Pixabay
Duck farm infected

The state's outbreak of avian influenza has also spread to a commercial duck farm near Meredith.

Australian Duck Meat Association chief executive Greg Parkinson said the farm represented about two percent of Australia's commercial duck population and mostly supplied meat to restaurants, not supermarkets.

"It was not unexpected, it's a smallish duck farm - about 40,000 birds - and it was very close to the infected egg farms," he said.

"Ducks are kept in sheds precisely for these sorts of reasons - we try to buffer ourselves from wild bird incursions and virus spillovers.

"About 30 million ducks are processed for meat per year."

Australia's duck meat industry is relatively concentrated and run by two main processors, Luv-a-Duck, which has about 30 farms in western Victoria, and Pepe's Ducks which runs out of New South Wales.

The infected duck farm does not supply either of these companies.
International infections

There are many types of bird flu, including the highly pathogenic H5N1 strain, which has been detected in Asia, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, North America, South America and Antarctica.

This strain of the disease has spread beyond poultry, affecting various mammals including penguins, cattle and humans.

This strain has not been detected in Australian animals, however, the nation recorded its first ever human case in March, when a child returned home from India with the disease.

The child has since recovered and authorities have confirmed there is no ongoing threat to the public.

Australia's response to eradicate avian influenza is in stark contrast to countries like the United States, where more than 96 million birds have been affected by the disease since an outbreak that began in 2022, according to the US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention.

This story was first published by the ABC.

The Specter of Neo-Fascism Is Haunting Europe

SLAVOJ ŽIŽEK

Jun 18, 2024

With mainstream parties and politicians already preparing to accommodate the far right following this month's European Parliament election, the axiom of post-World War II European democracy has been quietly abandoned. “No collaboration with fascists" is being replaced by a tacit acceptance of them.

LJUBLJANA – The surprise in this month’s European Parliament elections was that the outcome everyone expected really did come to pass. To paraphrase a classic scene from the Marx Brothers: Europe may be talking and acting like it is moving to the radical right, but don’t let that fool you; Europe really is moving to the radical right.

Anatomy of a Massacre
SHLOMO BEN-AMI considers what the 1860 massacre of Christians in Damascus can and cannot teach us about preventing genocide.


Why should we insist on this interpretation? Because most of the mainstream media has sought to downplay it. The message we keep hearing is: “Sure, Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, and Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) occasionally flirt with fascist motifs, but there is no reason to panic, because they still respect democratic rules and institutions once in power.” Yet this domestication of the radical right should trouble us all, because it signals a readiness by traditional conservative parties to go along with the new movement. The axiom of post-World War II European democracy, “No collaboration with fascists,” has been quietly abandoned.

The message of this election is clear. The political divide in most EU countries is no longer between the moderate right and the moderate left, but between the conventional right, embodied by the big winner, the European People’s Party (comprising Christian democrats, liberal-conservatives, and traditional conservatives) and the neo-fascist right represented by Le Pen, Meloni, AfD, and others.

The question now is whether the EPP will collaborate with neo-fascists. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is spinning the outcome as a triumph of the EPP against both “extremes,” yet the new parliament will include no left-wing parties whose extremism is even distantly comparable to that of the far right. Such a “balanced” view from the EU’s top official sends an ominous signal.

When we talk about fascism today, we should not confine ourselves to the developed West. A similar kind of politics has been ascendant in much of the Global South as well. In his study of China’s development, the Italian Marxist historian Domenico Losurdo (also known for his rehabilitation of Stalin) stresses the distinction between economic and political power. In pursuing his “reforms,” Deng Xiaoping knew that elements of capitalism are necessary to unleash a society’s productive forces; but he insisted that political power should remain firmly in the hands of the Communist Party of China (as the self-proclaimed representative of the workers and farmers).

This approach has deep historical roots. For over a century, China has embraced the “pan-Asianism” that emerged toward the end of the nineteenth century as a reaction against Western imperialist domination and exploitation. As historian Viren Murthy explains, this project has always been driven by a rejection not of Western capitalism, but of Western liberal individualism and imperialism. By drawing on pre-modern traditions and institutions, pan-Asianists argued, Asian societies could organize their own modernization to achieve even greater dynamism than the West.

While Hegel himself saw Asia as a domain of rigid order that does not allow for individualism (free subjectivity), pan-Asianists proposed a new Hegelian conceptual framework. Since the freedom offered by Western individualism ultimately negates order and leads to social disintegration, they argued, the only way to preserve freedom is to channel it into a new collective agency.

One early example of this model can be found in Japan’s militarization and colonialist expansion before WWII. But historical lessons are soon forgotten. In the search for solutions to big problems, many in the West could be newly attracted to the Asian model of subsuming individualistic drives and the longing for meaning in a collective project.

Pan-Asianism tended to oscillate between its socialist and fascist versions (with the line between the two not always clear), reminding us that “anti-imperialism” is not as innocent as it may appear. In the first half of the twentieth century, Japanese and German fascists regularly presented themselves as defenders against American, British, and French imperialism, and one now finds far-right nationalist politicians taking similar positions vis-à-vis the European Union.

The same tendency is discernible in post-Deng China, which political scientist A. James Gregor classifies as “a variant of contemporary fascism”: a capitalist economy controlled and regulated by an authoritarian state whose legitimacy is framed in the terms of ethnic tradition and national heritage. That is why Chinese President Xi Jinping makes a point of referring to China’s long, continuous history stretching back to antiquity. Harnessing economic impulses for the sake of nationalistic projects is the very definition of fascism, and similar political dynamics can also be found in India, Russia, Turkey, and other countries.

It is not hard to see why this model has gained traction. While the Soviet Union suffered a chaotic disintegration, the CPC pursued economic liberalization but still maintained tight control. Thus, leftists who are sympathetic toward China praise it for keeping capital subordinated, in contrast to the US and European systems, where capital reigns supreme.

But the new fascism is also supported by more recent trends. Beyond Le Pen, another big winner of the European elections is Fidias Panayiotou, a Cypriot YouTube personality who previously gained attention for his efforts to hug Elon Musk. While waiting outside Twitter’s headquarters for his target, he encouraged his followers to “spam” Musk’s mother with his request. Eventually, Musk did meet and hug Panayiotou, who went on to announce his candidacy to the European Parliament. Running on an anti-partisan platform, he won 19.4% of the popular vote and secured himself a seat.

Similar figures have also cropped up in France, the United Kingdom, Slovenia, and elsewhere, all justifying their candidacies with the “leftist” argument that since democratic politics has become a joke, clowns might as well run for office. This is a dangerous game. If enough people despair of emancipatory politics and accept the withdrawal into buffoonery, the political space for neo-fascism widens.

Reclaiming that space requires serious, authentic action. For all my disagreements with French President Emmanuel Macron, I think he was correct to respond to the French far right’s victory by dissolving the National Assembly and calling for new legislative elections. His announcement caught almost everyone off guard, and it is certainly risky. But it is a risk worth taking. Even if Le Pen wins and decides who will be the next prime minister, Macron, as president, will retain the ability to mobilize a new majority against the government. We must take the fight to the new fascism as forcefully and as fast as possible.

THUMBNAIL LE PEN  Horacio Villalobos/Corbis/Getty Images


SLAVOJ ŽIŽEK
Writing for PS since 2022
33 Commentaries
Follow
Slavoj Žižek, Professor of Philosophy at the European Graduate School, is International Director of the Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities at the University of London and the author, most recently, of Christian Atheism: How to Be a Real Materialist (Bloomsbury Academic, 2024).

 

Killing of 2 Cattle Transport Workers ‘Premeditated’: AIKS Accuses Chhattisgarh Police of Bias

Newsclick Report | 11 Jun 2024

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

The farmers’ body demanded that the NDA government enact a law to prevent mob lynching and hate crimes in the name of cow protection.

New Delhi: The All-India Kisan Sabha (AIKS) has condemned the brutal killing of two cattle transport workers and injuring of another on the Mahasamund-Raipur border in Chhattisgarh last week (June 7), ostensibly in the name of cow protection.

Alleging that the attack was “premeditated”, the farmers’ body said a group of 15-20 people had been tailing the truck carrying cattle toward Odisha and had “put nails on the bridge to deflate the tyres”.

“Tehseen Qureshi died on the spot and Chand Khan was declared dead after reaching the hospital. Another worker Saddam Qureshi suffered severe injuries and is in hospital. It is very clear that this is an incident of premeditated murder and a hate crime, and not a mob lynching,” AIKS said in a statement. The workers were from Saharanpur in Uttar Pradesh,

The farmers’ body accused the Chhattisgarh Police of “communal bias in registering the FIR avoiding Section 302 of IPC in the dreadful incident of brutal murder of two transport workers.”

AIKS demanded a judicial enquiry, immediate arrest of culprits and prosecution, compensation of Rs 50 lakh each to the families of the deceased and Rs 20 lakh for the injured.

It also demanded that the newly sworn in NDA government at the Centre enact a law to prevent mob lynching and hate crimes.

 

Read the full statement below:

 Press Statement by AIKS

*AIKS accuses State Police of Chhattisgarh of Communal Bias* 

*Demands Judicial Enquiry, Immediate Arrest of the Culprits and Prosecution, Compensation of Rs 50 Lakh each to the Families of the Deceased and Rs 20 Lakh to the Injured* 

*Demands that Parliament Enact a Law to Prevent Mob Lynching and Hate Crimes and Establish Fast Track Court for Speedy Trial and Conviction*  

AIKS has strongly protested the brutal murder of two cattle transport workers and the severe injury to another worker between 2 and 3 am on 7th June 2024 on the Mahanadi Bridge, in the Mahasamund–Raipur Border, Chhattisgarh, by criminal gangsters. The culprits – a group of 15-20 people – had been following the truck load of animals travelling towards Odisha, put nails on the bridge to deflate the tyres and after stopping the truck, the drivers were attacked, beaten severely and thrown to the rocks 30 feet below the bridge. Tehseen Qureshi died on the spot and Chand Khan was declared dead after reaching the hospital. Another worker Saddam Qureshi suffered severe injuries and is in hospital. It is very clear that this is an incident of premeditated murder and a hate crime, and not a mob lynching.  

However, as per the State Police, the FIR has been registered under Section 304 and 307 of IPC for attempt to murder and culpable homicide that attracts punishment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with a fine, or with both. There is no Section 302 of IPC for murder. The police justify this serious omission as suspected mob lynching in the name of cow protection.

AIKS strongly condemns the Chhattisgarh State Police for its rabidly communal bias in registering the FIR avoiding Section 302 of IPC in the dreadful incident of brutal murder of two transport workers. AIKS demands that the Deputy Chief Minister Vijay Sharma in charge of the Home Portfolio ensure rule of law in the state of Chhattisgarh, take strong action against the top police officers involved in the conspiracy to protect the murderers, immediate arrest of all the criminals and ensure unbiased prosecution. AIKS strongly demands a judicial enquiry into the incident, including the role of the police in protecting the criminals.

Though the workers are from Saharanpur of Uttar Pradesh, the BJP-led state government also is silent, without making any intervention to ensure justice to the hapless families of the murdered workers. AIKS condemns the callous attitude of the BJP-led state governments of both the states and demands compensation of Rs 50 lakh each to the family of both deceased workers and Rs 20 lakh to the severely injured worker.

Most of the political parties of Chhattisgarh are so far silent on the brutal murder and the callous attitude of the state government. This is highly unfortunate. The Chhattisgarh Kisan Sabha and other Kisan organisations have strongly condemned the murder.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

The cattle economy is a part of agriculture contributing 27% of the income of farmer households. India is the second largest country in beef export. The attack on cattle traders and workers affects the cattle trade and farmers are unable to sell their animals and get remunerative prices.

AIKS strongly demands the NDA-led Union Government and the newly elected Parliament to enact a law to prevent mob lynching and hate crimes in the name of cow protection, to establish fast track courts to expedite trial and conviction in order to protect the interests of the cattle farmers, traders and workers in the Industry. 

Ashok Dhawale, President                        

Vijoo Krishnan, General Secretary

Trumpism, fascism, and political realities in the United States

Paul Le Blanc
11 June, 2024


First published at Europe Solidaire Sans Frontières.


Donald Trump represents a kind of politics that has powerfully transformed political realities in the United States, a kind of politics labeled by some as Trumpism. This useful label helps us understand that regardless of what happens to Donald Trump – whether he finally goes to prison or once again takes command of the U.S. Presidency, whether he lives for another decade or dies tomorrow – Trumpism will be with us for a long time. Before examining Trumpism, let us pause to consider the person with whose name this “ism” is identified.

One approach to this task might involve working our way through the alphabet. Beginning with the letter “a” – and setting aside rude and insulting expletives – we come upon the word “arrogant,” which certainly fits, although this quality is, sadly, not unique to Trump.

The qualities of Donald Trump certainly include dynamics reflecting The Three Bs – bigot, bully, and braggart. His bigotry reflects deep currents within the culture, the attitudes, and the psychological make-up of millions of people in the United States. He has shown that, when it suits him, he can assume a bullying stance and tone, whipping many into submission – intimidating some, delighting others. The bragging takes many forms: a “go-getter” who compulsively highlights his achievements but also claims to have gone further and gotten more than is actually the case; an ignorant man who glorifies his ignorance (“I don’t read books!”) while claiming to know far more than he knows; someone who exaggerates the esteem in which people hold him and takes credit for accomplishments that are not his own. One should add a fourth “b” – billionaire, adding luster and resources and authority to all that is involved in the narcissistic self-construction of the person who is Donald Trump.

Starting with the next letter of the alphabet, we can note that Trump is quintessentially, and very proudly, a capitalist, and there are thirty-four felony convictions which cause many to label him a crook.
Trump and Trumpism

Jumping ahead to another letter in the alphabet, there are many who insist that he is a fascist. Others question whether he is consistent and coherent enough to play the role of a Mussolini or a Hitler, insisting that the term is not useful in defining Trump. Some add that the term “fascist” has largely become a meaningless epithet – a freely-used insult applied to ideas and practices and people we find oppressive. Trump himself uses it (jumbling it with such words as “Marxists” and “Communists” and “terrorists” and “very bad people”) to denounce enemies lurking in the courtroom, in the mainstream news media, in the government, and in the Democratic Party.

How disciplined and single-minded is Trump as a political leader? He could hardly be compared favorably to a Churchill or a Reagan, let alone to a Mussolini or a Hitler. “By the spring of 2020,” according to New York Times chronicler Maggie Haberman, “it had become clear to many of his top advisors that Trump’s impulse to undermine existing systems and bend institutions to suit his purposes was accompanied by erratic behavior and levels of anger requiring others to try to keep him on track nearly every hour of the day.”1

It is instructive to consider the experience of Steve Bannon, one of the most focused far-right ideologues serving as a central advisor in the early phase of the Trump administration, as reported by Michael Wolff:


Part of Bannon’s authority in the new White House was as keeper of the Trump promises, meticulously logged onto the white board in his office. Some of these promises Trump enthusiastically remembered making, others he had little memory of, but was happy to accept that he had said it. Bannon acted as disciple and promoted Trump to guru – or inscrutable God.2

Over time, Bannon would become exasperated and disillusioned, realizing that the details of the right-wing “populist” agenda he envisioned “were entirely captive to Trump’s inattention and wild mood swings. Trump, Bannon had long ago learned, ‘doesn’t give a fuck about the agenda – he doesn’t know what the agenda is.’”3

One is struck by reports from Trump’s so-called press conference of May 31, 2024, after his felony convictions. Far from a defiant right-wing or fascist clarion call, “the thing was kind of a slog,” according to A.O. Scott of the New York Times. Scott adds: “Mr. Trump has never been an orderly orator or a methodical builder of arguments; he riffs and extemporizes, free-associates and repeats himself, straying from whatever script may be at hand.” Scott reports that “his manner was subdued” and “curiously flat: a rehash of the trial, with a few gestures toward the larger political stakes.” Rex Huppke of USA Today was less charitable, describing it as “a rambling, incoherent mess,” with Trump claiming that witnesses in his trial were “literally crucified,” that President Joe Biden wants to “stop you from having cars,” and that the judge who will sentence him on July 11 is “really a devil.” Hafiz Rashid of the New Republic commented: “At times, his words were hard to follow, as the first convicted felon former president went off on tangents with sentences with no clear end.”4

But what can be termed Trumpism transcends the personal limitations and dysfunctionality of this aging individual. Three essential elements hold together this broad entity that we are labelling Trumpism.

One element is armed and dangerous – the forces that came together to storm the Capitol on January 6, 2021, which included the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, some of the more militant components of the Tea Party movement, latter-day partisans of the old Southern Confederacy, various Nazi and white supremacist groups. U.S. General Mark Milley, then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, listed the groups in a January 2021 notebook, with the comment, “Big Threat: domestic terrorism.” According to the Washington Post’s Bob Woodward and Robert Costa: “Some were the new Brown Shirts, a U.S. version, Milley concluded, of the paramilitary wing of the Nazi Party that supported Hitler. It was a planned revolution. Steve Bannon’s vision coming to life. Bring it all down, blow it up, burn it, and emerge with power.” These once-marginalized elements had come into the political mainstream, and had grown substantially, with the active encouragement of Donald Trump and others around him. But this cunning, avaricious, profoundly limited individual and his acolytes were hardly capable of controlling them.5

A second element essential to Trumpism’s make-up can be found in a quite different cluster of conservative entities and individuals drawn together in The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 –The Presidential Transition Project. Founded in the 1970s, the Heritage Foundation has served as a center for conservative academics, intellectuals, and policy-makers since the Presidency of Ronald Reagan. Its newest effort is a volume of 900 pages, Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, meant to serve as a policy-making guide for a second Trump administration. “This book is the product of more than 400 scholars and policy experts from across the conservative movement and around the country. Contributors include former elected officials, world-renowned economists, and from four presidential Administrations. This is an agenda prepared by and for conservatives who will be ready on Day One of the next Administration to save our country from the brink of disaster.” It is worth noting that Trump is by no means the centerpiece of this document – rather, reference is made to “the next conservative President.” Trump is mentioned frequently and very respectfully, but the Heritage Foundation, its collaborators, and its program are framed as entities transcending this individual.6

(Also worth noting are a few odd wrinkles in this “Conservative Promise,” including a seeming overestimation of “the Left,” combined with an apparent borrowing of left-wing ideas – to be discussed in the final section of this analysis.)

The third essential element in Trumpism is today’s Republican Party. Leading figures and staffers of that party – as was the case with the conservative mainstream as a whole – did not begin as Trump supporters. One knowledgeable Republican operative, Tim Miller, describes what happened this way:


When the Trump Troubles began there wasn’t a single one in our ranks who would ever have said they were in his corner. To a person we found him gauche, repellent, and beneath the dignity of the public service we bestowed with bumptious regard. We didn’t take him seriously. … And you wouldn’t have caught us dead in one of those gaudy red baseball caps.

But, at first gradually and then suddenly, nearly all of us decided to go along. The same people who roasted Donald Trump as an incompetent menace in private served his rancid baloney in public when convenient. They continued to do so even after the mob he summoned stained the party and our ideals and the halls of the Capitol with their shit.7

Miller offers an insider’s view of a terrible cynicism permeating the Republican Party leadership, which contributed to Trump’s triumph within its ranks. Seeing the political arena as “a big game” through which – by winning – they “awarded themselves the status of public service, the Republican ruling class dismissed the plight of those we were manipulating, growing increasingly comfortable using tactics that inflamed them, turning them against their fellow man.” Miller and other operatives “advanced arguments that none of us believed” and “made people feel aggrieved about issues we had no intent or ability to solve.” He confesses that a quiet and unacknowledged racism was often employed. And “these tactics became not just unchecked but supercharged by a right-wing media ecosystem that we were in bed with and that had its own nefarious incentives, sucking in clicks and views through rage hustling without any intention of delivering something that might bring value to ordinary people’s lives.” Miller concludes:


Should it have come as a surprise that a charlatan who had spent decades duping the masses into joining his pyramid schemes and buying his shitty products would excel in such an environment? Someone who had a media platform of his own and a reptilian instinct for manipulation? Someone who didn’t hesitate to say the quiet part aloud?8

“Donald Trump cannot succeed alone,” mused Liz Cheney. “He depends upon enablers and collaborators.” Cheney, a lifelong conservative Republican and former Congressperson from Wyoming who resisted – more doggedly than most – Trump’s efforts to bully the Republican Party into supporting him, ended up lamenting that “we have now learned that most Republicans currently in Congress will do what Donald Trump asks, no matter what it is. … I am very sad to say that America can no longer count on a body of elected Republicans to protect our Republic.”9

Tim Miller identifies psychological reasons for this in discussing one of his friends. “Caroline has been sucked in by the cult,” he concludes. “She is obsessed with Trump and adores him, as incommodious as that may seem.” He sees a very dark dimension in this: “She’s the masochistic follower who feels a compulsion to be tested, abused and forced to prove they are deserving of the leader’s love over and over and over again.”10

Adam Kinzinger, former Republican Congressman from Illinois, reflects on the psychology of some of his colleagues, commenting: “More than they fear death, they fear being kicked out of a tribe, and they fear losing an identity.” The tribe is the Republican Party, and as for the identity: “You’re going to lose your identity as a member of Congress.”11According to Liz Cheney: “So strong is the love of power that men and women who had once seemed reasonable and responsible were suddenly willing to violate their oath to the Constitution out of political expediency and loyalty to Donald Trump.”12

Of course, the Republican Party has a long and complex history. Just as in the case of the other essential elements of Trumpism, it did not begin with Trump and will not end with him. He can be credited with playing the important role of helping to bring these elements together – but regardless of what happens to Trump, the larger phenomenon of “Trumpism” will be with us for some time to come.
Fascism of the past … and fascism in the making

One thing more. We are dealing with a global phenomenon noted by many different observers – involving powerful movements and, sometimes, governments in a diverse range of countries (Argentina, Brazil, France, Greece, Hungary, India, Italy, Russia, Turkey, the United States, and more). A combination of terms describes what is happening – right-wing populism, authoritarian xenophobic ultra-nationalism, etc. – indicating its complex content. Sometimes the word “fascism” is applied, but the term quasi-fascism seems more apt. The prefix quasi- means “resembling” and “having some, but not all of the features of.” The term quasi-fascism, in the present moment, can be understood as “fascism in the making.”

Fascism has been much analyzed and debated – among scholars as well as among left-wing theorists and activists. Here we will restrict ourselves to touching, first, on one of the earliest explorations in 1923 by Clara Zetkin (a close comrade of Rosa Luxemburg and a pioneer of German Communism), followed by 1940 comments of Leon Trotsky.

The global quality of this development was captured in the opening sentence of Zetkin’s 1923 analysis: “Fascism is the concentrated expression of the general offensive undertaken by the world bourgeoisie against the proletariat.”13It should be recalled that this particular “concentrated expression” was not embraced by the entire capitalist class – larger sections of the British bourgeoisie preferred support to Neville Chamberlin or Winston Churchill rather than Oswald Mosley, for example, and in the United States some elements from the capitalist class helped craft the New Deal program advanced by Franklin D. Roosevelt. But we cannot understand the realities of that time, and of our own, unless we engage with the global dimension stressed by Zetkin.

This global dimension is inseparable from another aspect of the reality that Zetkin identifies as a primary root of the fascist development, “the disintegration and decay of capitalist economy, and the symptom of the dissolution of the bourgeois State.” She adds that “symptoms of this decay of capitalism were observed even before the [First World] War.” But the catastrophic war “shattered capitalist economy to its foundation.” The result was “not only … the colossal impoverishment of the proletariat, but also … deep misery for the petty bourgeoisie, the small peasantry and the intellectuals.” As Zetkin notes, “all these elements had been promised that the war would bring about an amelioration of their material conditions. But the very opposite has happened,” with not only the devastation of war, but also a sudden, massive proletarianization, combined with mass unemployment, among “the former middle classes.” She observes: “It was among these elements that Fascism recruited quite a considerable contingent.”14

According to Zetkin, “the second root of Fascism lies in the retarding of the world revolution by the treacherous attitude of the reformist leaders.” She is referring here to the massive Social Democratic parties and unions. It is worth considering at length what she describes:


Large numbers of the petty bourgeoisie, including even the middle classes, had discarded their war-time psychology for a certain sympathy with reformist socialism, hoping that the latter would bring about a reformation of society along democratic lines. They were disappointed in their hopes. They can now see that the reformist leaders are in benevolent accord with the bourgeoisie, and the worst of it is that these masses have now lost their faith not only in the reformist leaders, but in socialism as a whole. These masses of disappointed socialist sympathisers are joined by large circles of the proletariat, of workers who have given up their faith not only in socialism, but also in their own class. Fascism has become a sort of refuge for the politically shelterless.15

This provides the analytical framework for Zetkin’s understanding of fascism. She makes a major point of distinguishing fascism from authoritarian right-wing violence such as that employed by forces around the reactionary military leader Miklós Horthy, savagely repressing Socialist and Communist workers in Hungary in 1919, replacing an abortive workers’ government with a right-wing dictatorship.

Zetkin insisted that this was not fascism: “Although the methods of both are similar, in essence they are different.” She explained: “The Horthy Terror was established after the victorious, although short-lived, revolution of the proletariat had been suppressed, and was the expression of vengeance of the bourgeoisie. The ringleaders of the White Terror were a quite small clique of former officers.” In contrast, fascism “is not the revenge of the bourgeoisie in retaliation for proletarian aggression against the bourgeoisie, but it is a punishment of the proletariat for failing to carry on the [socialist] revolution begun in Russia. The Fascist leaders are not a small and exclusive caste; they extend deeply into wide elements of the population.”16

Zetkin offers a complex and expansive understanding of fascism’s meaning:


The bourgeoisie wants to reconstruct capitalist economy. Under the present circumstances reconstruction of bourgeois class domination can be brought about only at the cost of increased exploitation of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie is quite aware that the soft-speaking reformist socialists are fast losing their hold on the proletariat, and that there will be nothing for the bourgeoisie but to resort to violence against the proletariat. But the means of violence of the bourgeois States are beginning to fail. They therefore need a new organisation of violence, and this is offered to them by the hodge-podge conglomeration of Fascism. For this reason the bourgeoisie offers all the force at its command in the service of Fascism. Fascism has diverse characteristics in different countries. Nevertheless it has two distinguishing features in all countries, namely, the pretence of a revolutionary programme, which is cleverly adapted to the interests and demands of the large masses, and, on the other hand, the application of the most brutal violence.17

Zetkin’s analysis became influential within the early Communist International, although it was gradually adulterated, dogmatized, and diluted in the years stretching from 1923 to the Comintern’s 1943 dissolution. But it is clearly evident in Leon Trotsky’s end-of-life effort to summarize the essentials in his 1940 discussion of political perspectives in the United States. The bottom-line for revolutionaries – which constituted a headline of this section of the document – adds up to eight words: “Fascism Will Come Only If We Fail.” But, of course, Trotsky has much more to say. Two excerpts, however, will be sufficient. Here is the first:


In all the countries where fascism became victorious, we had before the growth of fascism and its victory, a wave of radicalism of the masses; of the workers and the poorer peasants and farmers, and of the petty bourgeois class. In Italy, after the war and before 1922, we had a revolutionary wave of tremendous dimensions; the state was paralyzed, the police did not exist, the trade unions could do anything they wanted – but there was no party capable of taking the power; as a reaction came fascism.18

Here is the second excerpt:


We must not identify war dictatorship – the dictatorship of the military machine, of the staff, of finance capital – with fascist dictatorship. For the latter there is first necessary a feeling of desperation of large masses of the people. When the revolutionary parties betray them, when the vanguard of workers shows its incapacity to lead the people to victory, then the farmers, the small businessmen, the unemployed, the soldiers, etc. become capable of supporting a fascist movement, but only then.19

The fascism described by Zetkin and Trotsky has not crystallized in the United States, but a plausible argument could be made that the converging elements of Trumpism represent fascism in the making.
The power, failure and future of the U.S. left

There are riddles to be solved. One involves precisely how the perspectives of Zetkin and Trotsky apply to the realities of the United States. Another involves the earlier mentioned “few odd wrinkles” in the Heritage Foundation’s “Conservative Promise” document of 2025. In solving these riddles, we will – hopefully – get a better sense of political realities in the United States, as well as the power, the failure, and the possible future of the U.S. Left.

We have already noted the global dimensions – no less the case now than was true in the time of Zetkin and Trotsky – of the issue we are dealing with. More than this, we are also seeing, in our time as in theirs, a decades-long crisis of capitalism which has generated capitalist policies detrimental to the living standards and to the quality of life for the laboring millions in multiple countries, including our own – the decades’ long restructuring of the economy associated with “globalization.” Catastrophic impacts of global environmental degradation, as well as imperialist violence on multiple fronts, are also in evidence.

On the other hand, at least superficially, the organized Left (whether headed by socialist or communist parties, militant trade unions, or whatever) is far from posing any revolutionary threat or even maintaining a credible presence – at least in Donald Trump’s homeland, the United States of America. This makes the Heritage Foundation’s “Conservative Promise” document seem an absurd, scare-mongering, slanderous exercise when (in the same breath as its complaints about the Democratic Party) it raises a hullabaloo about “the Left” and “the Marxists.”

Trotsky’s apparent promise was that we on the Left will have a shot at making a revolution before the threat of fascism becomes serious. This is how many of us understood the bald assertion that “Fascism Will Come Only If We Fail.” The possibility of Trumpism morphing into fascism would thereby be precluded. But this involves a serious misunderstanding of our history, which in a unique way does correspond to the development described by Zetkin and Trotsky. In an important sense, the scare-mongering conservatives of the Heritage Foundation have a point.

Over the past century, the organized Left has had powerful impact, influencing politics, laws, consciousness and culture within the United States. The labor movement, the waves of feminism, the anti-racist and civil rights movements, the struggles against the Vietnam war, the various student movements, and more – instrumental in bringing about far-reaching changes on the American scene over many decades – would not have been nearly as effective (and might not have come into existence) without the essential organizing efforts of left-wing activists.

This was accompanied by another development, however. Although a significant element among the left-wing activists insisted on the need for political independence from the pro-capitalist political parties, this was largely overpowered by a deep adaptationist trend. In the Red Decade of the 1930s, convergence between socialist-minded forces and a somewhat expansive social liberalism was especially accelerated, as the Democratic Party under Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) “stole” many reform components of the socialist program. This was done, as FDR insisted, to save capitalism during the angry Depression years – but also to ensure the continuing popularity and election of FDR. More than this, the bulk of the organized Left was absorbed into the New Deal coalition.20

Over half a century, six decisive pivots have made absorption of the organized Left into the Democratic Party almost complete. (1) The trade union movement of the 1930s – particularly the dynamically left-leaning new Congress of Industrial Organizations – formed a firm alliance with FDR’s New Deal Democrats. (2) A 1935 decision by the Communist International under Joseph Stalin to form a “People’s Front” alliance with liberal capitalists such as FDR, brought the dynamic U.S. Communists into the Democratic Party coalition. (3) At the start of the Cold War, the bulk of the organized labor movement (along with most moderate socialists) embraced the Democratic Party’s anti-Communist and liberal capitalist agenda, leading to a broad liberal capitalist “social compact” and consensus, from the late 1940s through the 1950s. (4) The civil rights coalition of the early 1960s became intimately entwined with the party of John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. (5) Through the 1970s and 1980s, much of the 1960s “new left” would commit to the reform wing of the Democratic Party. (6) As the twenty-first century began to unfold, new waves of young activists joined with older layers – amid radical-sounding promises and soaring hopes – to put Barak Obama in the White House.

From the early twentieth century, the organized Left had been a dynamic force of considerable significance in the United States. Among workers and the oppressed, it had mobilized effective struggles that won genuine victories. It inspired hopes for further effective struggles that would advance human rights, improve the lives of the working-class majority, and bring to birth a better world. Among the wealthy and powerful, of course, it inspired fear and rage.

By the end of the century, through the process we have traced, the organized Left had largely evaporated. Some of its rhetoric, many of its values, and much of its reform agenda (often in diluted form) could be found in the Democratic Party. Yet a sincere and practical commitment to replace the economic dictatorship of capitalism with the economic democracy of socialism was no longer on the table. Nonetheless, among the wealthy and powerful there were those who still felt fear and rage, and also a deep determination to recover lost ground.21

The analyses of Zetkin and Trotsky can be adapted to this quite different context. “Soft-speaking reformist socialists are fast losing their hold on the proletariat,” according to Zetkin in the 1920s, particularly because “the reformist leaders are in benevolent accord with the bourgeoisie.” A hundred years later, in the United States, a highly compromised “working-class vanguard” in the trade unions (AFL-CIO) and in the “progressive” wing of the Democratic Party had, arguably, shown “its incapacity to lead the people to victory,” particularly as the global capitalist economy entered an extended period of crisis. The reformists’ capitalist partners – initially so generous – felt compelled to restructure the economy at the expense of the working class, and the reformists felt able to do little more than adapt. As “too big to fail” corporations crashed the economy in 2008-2009, the newly elected radical-reformer, Barak Obama, hurried to bail out the corporate elite at the expense of the working-class majority. In such a situation – as security, stability, and the quality of life give way to social and economic catastrophe – masses of people who were disillusioned with this variant of the so-called “Left” were inclined, inevitably, to look for alternatives among right-wing demagogues.

The demagogues can be as crude as Trump, but they can be as polished as the Heritage Foundation. This brings us to another odd wrinkle in the “Conservative Promise” document. We have seen the logic of its “overestimation” of the Left. But more than once, it sounds a seemingly left-wing note, as in this radically flourished description of the American Revolution:


The American Republic was founded on principles prioritizing and maximizing individuals’ rights to live their best life or to enjoy what the Framers called “the Blessings of Liberty.” It’s this radical equality—liberty for all—not just of rights but of authority—that the rich and powerful have hated about democracy in America since 1776. They resent Americans’ audacity in insisting that we don’t need them to tell us how to live. It’s this inalienable right of self-direction—of each person’s opportunity to direct himself or herself, and his or her community, to the good— that the ruling class disdains.22

The seemingly left-wing note is sounded again and again. “Ruling elites slash and tear at restrictions and accountability placed on them,” we are told. “They centralize power up and away from the American people.” The Conservative Promise adopts the tone of many a left-wing agitator: “America’s corporate and political elites do not believe in the ideals to which our nation is dedicated – self-governance, the rule of law, and ordered liberty. They certainly do not trust the American people, and they disdain the Constitution’s restrictions on their ambitions.” Taking advantage of the fact that so much of the so-called “Left” has unified with the Democratic Party elite’s pro-capitalist liberalism, the document announces that “socialists … are almost always well-to-do,” insisting that “the Left does not believe that all men are created equal – they think they are special,” adding: “Every hour the Left directs federal policy and elite institutions, our sovereignty, our Constitution, our families, and our freedom are a step closer to disappearing.”23

Despite the radical-democratic flourishes of The Conservative Promise, however, the bottom line is a defense of unrestrained capitalism. The primary goal of the President of the United States, we are told, should be to unleash “the dynamic genius of free enterprise,” because in countries where there is “a high degree of economic freedom, elites are not in charge because everyone is in charge.” According to The Conservative Promise, the elitism, corruption, greed, and contempt for ordinary people prevalent in the political sphere is miraculously absent in the economic sphere. Capitalist “free enterprise” is very wonderful indeed: “People work, build, invest, save, and create according to their own interests and in service to the common good of their fellow citizens.”24

From certain things The Conservative Promise says, and from what it fails to say, one can only assume that the document’s authors would welcome whatever support can be rendered to the realization of this glowing vision by forces that mobilized on January 6, 2021 to keep Donald Trump in office – Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, right-wing militias, white nationalist contingents, etc.

There is definitely a fascist potential in the current situation – some of the elements appear to have been crystallizing before our eyes. Whether or not this crystallization is completed, it seems clear that a different pathway is required for the Left than that of being trapped in an accommodation with capitalism, especially in this extended period of capitalist crisis and catastrophe. Revolutionaries will do what they can to rebuild and renew an orientation, a set of struggles, a movement and organization, consistent with the insights of Clara Zetkin and Rosa Luxemburg, of Leon Trotsky and Vladimir Lenin, and of the many others who recognized that we face the fateful choice of genuine socialism or horrific barbarism.

Underlying crises, deep-felt oppressions, and repressed rage have periodically resulted in amazing activist explosions – such as the Occupy Wall Street movement and the Black Lives Matter upsurges, tilting political realities qualitatively leftward. This energizes and expands the numbers of those on the activist Left. Of course, such developments inevitably also deepen the fear and increase the determination of those on the Right – there’s no stopping that. Partisans of Trumpism will always use such things for their own purposes.

The problem is that the mass leftward rage and energies – which cannot be sustained indefinitely – presently have nowhere to go, once the dust settles, except in one of two directions: either apathetic quiescence or reformist channels. Those channels are compromised by corporate liberalism and have proved incapable of transcending the economic system that generates the crises, oppressions, and rage. The creation of something better and more effective than that appears to be on the agenda.251

Maggie Haberman, Confidence Man: The Making of Donald Trump and the Breaking of America (New York: Penguin Books, 2022), p. 429.
2

Michael Wolff, Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 2018), pp. 115-116.
3

Michael Wolff, Siege: Trump Under Fire (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 2019), p. 29.
4

A.O. Scott, “What Donald Trump Didn’t Say After His Trial,” New York Times, June 1, 2014, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/01/books/review/donald-trump-speech-verdict.html; Rex Huppke, “Guilty Trump’s Press Conference Was a Disaster,” USA Today, May 31, 2024, https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2024/05/31/trump-verdict-press-conference-republicans-replacement-election/73923859007/; Hafiz Rashid, “Trump Loses It Like Never Before in Wildly Incoherent Press Conference,” The New Republic, May 31, 2024, https://newrepublic.com/post/182142/trump-incoherent-post-guilty-verdict-meltdown-press-conference. For the full press conference, see: “Former President Trump Conference Following Guilty Verdict,” C-Span, May 31, 2024, https://www.c-span.org/video/?536064-1/president-trump-press-conference-guilty-verdict
5

Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, Peril (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2021), pp. 273-274; Matt Prince, “What is President Trump’s Relationship with Far-Right and White Supremacist Groups?,” Los Angeles Times, Sept. 30, 2020, https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-09-30/la-na-pol-2020-trump-white-supremacy; Aram Roston, “The Proud Boys Are Back: How the Far-Right is Rebuilding to Rally Behind Trump,” Reuters, June 3, 2024, https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-election-proudboys/.
6

Spencer Chretien, “Project 2025,” The Heritage Foundation, Jan. 31, 2023, https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/commentary/project-2025; Project 2025 - The Presidential Transition Project: Policy Agenda, including the text of Paul Dans and Steven Groves, ed., Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, https://www.project2025.org/policy/. For critical evaluations, see: E. Fletcher McClellan, “A Primer on the Chilling Far-Right Project 2025 Plan for 2nd Trump Presidency,” Lancasteronline, June 3, 2024, https://lancasteronline.com/opinion/columnists/a-primer-on-the-chilling-far-right-project-2025-plan-for-2nd-trump-presidency-column/article_ef88858e-1e9b-11ef-9e81-bf8485299455.html; Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, “Project 2025: The Far-Right Playbook for American Extremism,” https://globalextremism.org/project-2025-the-far-right-playbook-for-american-authoritarianism/. The quotation describing who composed to Project 2025 document is in Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, pp. 2-3.
7

Tim Miller, Why We Did It: A Travelogue from the Republican Road to Hell (New York: Harper, 2022), p. xii.
8

Miller, p. xx.
9

Liz Cheney, Oath and Honor: A Memoir and a Warning (New York: Little Brown and Co., 2023), pp. 2, 366.
10

Miller, p. 245.
11

“Former Rep. Kinzinger Reflects on GOP and Future of Democracy in ‘Renegade,’” (interview with Geoff Bennett), PBS News Hour, Nov. 1, 2023, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/former-rep-kinzinger-reflects-on-gop-and-future-of-democracy-in-renegade
12

Cheney, p. 2.
13

Clara Zetkin, “Fascism (August 1923),” Marxist Internet Archive, https://www.marxists.org/archive/zetkin/1923/08/fascism.htm
14

Zetkin, “Fascism.”
15

Zetkin, “Fascism.”
16

Zetkin, “Fascism.”
17

Zetkin, “Fascism.”
18

Leon Trotsky, “American Problems” (August 7, 1940), Writings of Leon Trotsky, 1939-1940 (New York: Pathfinder Press, 1973), p. 337.
19

Trotsky, “American Problems,” p. 338.
20

Details and documentation on the Red Decade can be found in Paul Le Blanc, Marx, Lenin, and the Revolutionary Experience: Studies of Communism and Radicalism in the Age of Globalization (New York: Routledge, 2006), pp. 153-198, with aspects of subsequent years touched on in pp. 221-258.
21

This is traced in Kim Phillips-Fein, Invisible Hands: The Making of the Conservative Movement from the New Deal to Reagan (New York: W.W. Norton 2009), summarized in Paul Le Blanc, “The Triumphant Arc of US Conservatism,” Left Americana: The Radical Heart of US History (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2017), pp. 179-186.
22

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, p. 14.
23

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, pp. 8, 10, 15, 16
24

Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, pp. 14, 15
25

For efforts to define possibilities, see: Paul Le Blanc, “The Third American Revolution: How Socialism Can Come to the United States,” in Frances Goldin, Debby Smith, and Michael Steven Smith, eds., Imagine: Living in a Socialist USA (New York: HarperCollins, 2014), pp. 249-261; Paul Le Blanc, “Pathways for Building a Revolutionary Party,” International Socialism, issue 164, 17 October 2019, https://isj.org.uk/pathways-for-building-a-revolutionary-party/; Paul Le Blanc, “Bernie Sanders, US Politics, and Socialism Today,” Links: International Journal of Socialist Renewal, August 13, 2019, https://links.org.au/paul-le-blanc-bernie-sanders-us-politics-socialism-today; Paul Le Blanc, “The Rise, Fall, and Aftermath of the Sander Challenge,” Irish Marxist Review, Volume 9, Number 27, 2020; Paul Le Blanc, Lenin: Responding to Catastrophe, Forging Revolution (London: Pluto Press, 2023), pp. 177-186.