Mohsen Abdelmoumen: Reading your very informative and gripping book, « La démocratie aux États-Unis, les mascarades électorales » (Democracy in the United States, electoral masquerades), a question arises: is there really a democracy in the United States and what is the use of elections in the USA?
Robert Bibeau: Yes, there is a real democracy for the bourgeoisie in the United States as in all the capitalist countries of this world. There is obviously no popular-proletarian "democracy" in the United States or any other country. Do you believe that joining a bourgeois party of a multibillionaire and its relations – given its power of pressure, of its television channel and its administrative centers - is of the same "democratic" weight as the adhesion of my neighbor – a Proletarian – to a pseudo-socialist political party? There is only the bourgeois left to let it believe. American workers know it, they do not move to vote and "to use the false power of the voting pencil" nor benefit from a fanciful electoral power exclusive to the rich.
I wrote this volume outlining the 2016 US election campaign (and in prologue a compendium of the Macron campaign in 2017) to demonstrate that these election campaigns are large and expensive staging in order to deceive the population, to compromise it, and in the end, to allow the power to declaim: “it's your democratic choice, stop protesting and wait until the next electoral masquerade where it will be again the same thing.”
Let us stop giving credibility to these electoral masquerades by our participation and fight our class enemy at our workplaces, traffic circles and barricades, where lies our true class economic power, the power demonstrated by Yellow Vests, power that will be in proportion to our ability to hinder or block the production of capitalist increase. At that moment, you will see where the true power lies.
Is the United States not a plutocracy?
This type of name pleases much to the left. In this way, the petty bourgeoisie tries to distract us from the one and only truth... The United States of America is the hegemonic power of a declining capitalist world and its "plutocrats" - its class of globalized big capital interconnected with the big capitalists of the world - are in disarray economically speaking. Therefore, it is extremely evil and dangerous and, like a wounded tiger, it could trigger the nuclear apocalypse. If that fits your concept of "plutocracy" then yes, the United States of America is an internationalized plutocracy which is competing for capitalist hegemony at the imperialist camp of emerging Chinese and Russian plutocrats. Both are the enemies of the world proletariat.
In reading your book "Manifeste du parti ouvrier” (Manifesto of Worker Party), we note that for a Marxist, concrete updates must be always done according to the concrete situations. In your opinion, what are the major challenges today for the working class and its revolutionary leadership with a view to the emancipation of this working class facing the 1% which rules the world?
Your question suggests a huge program. Let us first say that the social class of big capital, which effectively governs the world through its overpaid boards of directors, governments and administrators, with golden parachutes, does not even constitute 1 % of the world's population, but this is unimportant. The important thing is that they are bound by their deep economic interests, forging and sharpening their class consciousness. Moreover, these people, less than 1 % of humanity, I say again, who will be brought shortly to face the precarious proletarians - pauperized petit-bourgeois, downgraded middle-class - in fact, does lead nothing or almost nothing. The laws of political economy are imperative and their only power is to accelerate or delay the economic and political decisions that are required, pushed by the necessities of the development of the capitalist mode of production. Have you not noticed that, whatever the political tendency of the political parties in power, the austerity programs are everywhere similar? This is why Yellow Vests have decided to trust neither the left nor the bourgeois right.
Have not you noticed that for many years neither the leaders of the financial world nor the politicians have been able to avoid repeated economic crises, repeated stock market crashes, sovereign debt accumulation, currency devaluation, unemployment, depreciation of the proletariat's purchasing power and so many other calamities? These tycoons of finance and industry do not control anything, not even the profit rate of their companies. Unlike the left-wing, we, the revolutionary proletarians, do not think that the capitalists are wormy and cruel and that they take pleasure in triggering economic crises where many of them go bankrupt. In this book "Manifeste du parti ouvrier", I explain that the capitalist plays conscientiously the role of class which has been assigned to it under the capitalist mode of production. You would suddenly replace all these businessmen by a new cohort of businessmen and bankers that nothing would change in the global political economy. Moreover, you will be able to see soon the veracity of this allegation, since a new dynasty of Chinese and Russian multibillionaires will take the reins of the world economy and yet the economic and social crises will continue. It is the capitalist mode of production that must be abolished.
Since I wrote this “Manifeste du Parti ouvrier”, I have come to think that the revolutionary proletarian party will not pre-exist the proletarian revolution, contrary to what Lenin and the Bolsheviks proclaimed. This federative party will be born in the very course of the popular insurrectional movement leading to the proletarian revolution. It is enough to remember that all these pseudo vanguard parties, so-called Social Democrats then communists which have followed one another since Marx and which have succeeded only to substitute for the revolutionary class to make of it an appendix of their totalitarian state power. It is in and through the class movement in revolt that the party of the revolutionary proletarian class will be born. Everything comes from the class and everything goes back to the social class. If Marx did not write it, he should have.
The proletarian class must rid itself of the influence of the bourgeois organizations of so-called "resistance" that oppress and hinder its development. The proletarian class must get rid of its illusions about the bourgeois "democratic" state it will have to overthrow (so, what is the point of voting for those Governments that it will have to overthrow?). Finally, the proletariat must resign itself to destroy the capitalist mode of production without regret or remission. The proletarians collectively have the capacity of it. In this class mission, the Party will come from the class and will be to its exclusive service, never the opposite, or we will relive the illusions and disappointments of Soviet power.
For the rest, what is lacking in the proletarian class to unleash the proletarian revolution? A favorable economic and political situation and a social class consciousness in tune with these conditions.
How do you explain that in the face of a savage ultraliberal offensive, the working class is struggling to organize itself?
The mechanized and urbanized industrial proletarian class is still young historically, 200 years of seniority it is not very long in the world historiography. Remember that the class of slaves has existed for more than a thousand years and that it was ultimately the feudal aristocracy that freed it to better exploit it as serfs assigned to the chores of the lordship. The first element that must be taken into account in this so-called "ultra-neoliberal" offensive is that this "offensive" is in fact a defensive reflex of a threatened system in its existence. The left-wing does not like to hear what I reveal to you, because the left, like the right also, likes that the proletariat thinks that the capitalist system could function otherwise, and become an economic system of the left, alter globalist, just, equitable, fraternal, with solidarity, if only the alienated voters granted them their vote and the pseudo political power (under state control) from which these leftists could carry out reforms and improve the lot of the workers as in the 60s and during the "Thirty Glorious" (sic), they say, neglecting to point out that it was the sixties that led this mode of production in the current dead-end and that this situation was inevitable. Conclusion, the so-called "ultra-neoliberal" offensive and austerity policies are inevitable, inescapable, necessary, whether they come from the left wing or the right wing of the bourgeoisie. This is why the revolutionary proletarians as well as the "Yellow Vests" are neither left nor right which puts the working class in front of a serious dilemma. The more the economic crisis deepens, the working class becomes aware that the reforms proposed by the left – or by the right – or by the union bureaucracy, which is the transmission belt of power – or by intellectuals, who are the watchdogs of power – are futile, ineffective, illusive, hence the only alternative available to it: reject and overthrow this production infrastructure and the social superstructure that it supports.
Marx summarizes this dialectical connection between infrastructure and superstructure in the following manner: “In the social production of their existence, men enter into definite, necessary, independent relations of their will, relations of production which correspond to a certain degree of development of their material productive forces. All these relations of production constitute the economic structure of society, the concrete basis on which a juridical and political superstructure rises, and to which correspond certain forms of determined social consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the process of social, political and intellectual life in general. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being; it is inversely their social being which determines their consciousness”, Critique of political economy.
However, the proletarian class hesitates and collectively questions whether it has the strength to overthrow the totalitarian bourgeois state apparatus, its army and its organs of repression. The revolt of the Yellow Vests may be seen as an experiment to verify the degree of resistance of the bourgeois state and to test the cohesion and power of the revolutionary proletarian class in action.
You have studied the Yellow Vests movement in France in different writings. In your opinion, are we in front of a revolutionary movement?
The Yellow Vests movement is a popular movement of global refusal that expresses the despondency of the vast majority of the French population in the face of the deterioration of their living and working conditions. We say that this movement is "popular" because it federates not only the demands and resistances of the small capitalists in difficulty, the small traders under threat, the insecure craftsmen, the neglected pensioners, the abandoned students, the pauperized petty bourgeoisie but also the demands of the unemployed, alienated proletarians and insecure workers.
Such a populist movement, bringing together both reformists who only want to improve their living conditions, a tax cut, and a fairer distribution of capitalist wealth (they can always dream), a change in government policies of austerity, or a change of political pawns at the head of the bourgeois state - these demands are federated with the demands of the working class for a substantial increase of wages (that is to say, an increase in the value of the labor force and a fall in the value of surplus labor and therefore capitalist surplus-value) - such a "multiform" movement, I would say, can not be revolutionary. It can, however, be at the origin of a popular insurrection which would be the first stage of a proletarian revolution, if, and only if, the proletarian class seizes the hegemonic direction of the movement - rejecting the reformist petty-bourgeois leadership and bringing the class struggle to the level of the overthrow of power and the bourgeois state machine and thus to the level of the global social revolution. Only the proletarian social class can carry out a proletarian social revolution. We are not there yet, neither in France nor elsewhere. The Yellow Vests movement is, however, a necessary moment in the vast revolutionary proletarian movement. It confirms all the theses that the web magazine Les7duquebec.com has put forward for five years. We will come back to it.
The risk of revolutionary escalation in the Yellow Vests movement was fully understood by the experienced French capitalist class with a high level of class consciousness and strong social cohesion. If Macron was not allowed to make bigger concessions to Yellow Vests, it's because the state coffers are empty and the economy is on the brink of recession, then Macron proposes palaver and saves time before launching the great masquerade of bourgeois elections as we describe in prologue of our volume « La démocratie aux États-Unis: Les mascarades électorales » (Democracy in the United States: The electoral masquerades).
Do not you think that the Yellow Vest movement is likely to spread all over Europe and the world, opening up new perspectives for the working class?
First, I thank you for putting the perspective of the proletarian revolution at European and global level. The proletarian social revolution will be international or will not be. In this perspective the national referents (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Belgium, and Canada) are destined to fade, little by little, at the same time as the spread of globalization of the capitalist economy and the proletarian internationalist class. As I said to the previous question, the popular revolt movement of the Yellow Vests confirms the proposal we made in the volume: “Question nationale et révolution prolétarienne sous l’impérialisme moderne“ (National question and proletarian revolution under modern imperialism). For the proletarian revolution to take place, the class will have to free itself from chauvinistic nationalist prejudices and freed from the grip of the petty bourgeoisie, which is particularly fond of nationalism and the fascist form of capitalist power. We believe that the movement of Yellow Vests in its form has many proletarian characteristics, which disconcerts the petty bourgeois in the misinformation media. Thus, this idea of refusing to appoint star representatives that the paid media could pay for is a legacy of previous struggles. In short, the moment Yellow Vest clearly demonstrates that the proletarian class is not devoid of resources and the international welcome that this initiative receives proves it. Can the proletarian class make this movement its instrument of organization and liberation? I do not know, but already the experience was worth it. Let's learn of Yellow Vests, dear comrades of traffic circles and barricades.
Is the world immune to a new total war between US imperialism on one side and China and Russia on the other? In your opinion, has the Third World War already begun?
The Third World War is in progress, I regret to announce it to you. Let us immediately refute the "revisionist" theory of the Euro communists and other leftists about the "balance of terror". According to the Soviet-American theory of the sixties which communists around the world peddled, the thermonuclear arsenal would be so important that the capitalist powers could not use them without destroying the entire planet. This idealistic theory is based on false premises that there is only one form of war - the military war - and that the military war is the voluntary fruit of psychopathic strategists whom petty-bourgeois experts catalog under the terms of "hawks" in opposition to "doves", as if there were good and bad capitalists with whom the proletarian class should maintain a "peaceful coexistence"... what stupidity! All this is just a soap opera and only aims to produce "news" to sell advertising and put the populace to sleep. As we will explain in our next volume in preparation, the military war is the final act - the culmination - of the other forms of war that precede it and who have for name: the commercial war, the ideological war (propaganda and false news), the diplomatic war, the monetary and financial war, the political war, and so on. The great economic powers are in permanent war, even those which say they are allied. Has the United States not sanctioned by heavy fines some French banks having contravened American laws from the European soil? Has the European Union not responded by punishing Google - Microsoft - Apple - Facebook for monopolistic practice? Donald Trump has launched a trade war against China, dragging Canada in his wake, a war he can not win, as our web magazine Les7duquebec.com recently demonstrated. I repeat, under the capitalist mode of production, war is permanent and multiform and it is out of the control of businessmen, bankers, politicians or military strategists who only oversee it.
Here is another example. China and Russia have launched a trade exchange policy banning the US dollar, knowing that this "monetary" offensive would provoke the ire of the American big capital which, in fact, retaliated by sanctioning certain Chinese companies as well as men of Russian business to make an example in order to scare businessmen around the world. China and Russia do not seek the war against America, but their economies have no choice, the use of the dollar in international trade is increasingly risky given the US indebtedness and the gigantic imbalance of his trade balance. Very soon, the US dollar will be devalued and woe to who holds huge reserves of dollars. This measure of defensive financial warfare was required, regardless of the political party in power in Moscow and Beijing.
What do you think of the withdrawal of the US army from Syria decided by the Trump administration?
Unlike the patented experts, I was not surprised by this "unpredictable" announcement that Donald Trump's campaign team had suggested to him in 2016, in the midst of the US presidential elections. This electoral commitment of Donald Trump is recorded in our volume Democracy in the United States; the most important is to understand the reason for this decision and in what international context it occurs.
We must always begin a political analysis by studying long-term economic prospects. In the long run, the US economy is on the brink of bankruptcy, a stock market crash is brewing, worse than that of 1929, or that of 2008: currency devaluation, unemployment, hyperinflation, and finally the Great Depression are on the horizon. The big American capital already knows all this and it is for this reason that the bankers called a star of "reality show" at the White House as they had called an actor of B-movie, Ronald Reagan, to sponsor the collapse of the Soviet empire. If the economy does not work, nothing will work. America must rethink its military, political, diplomatic, legal, financial, monetary ambitions to the extent of its declining economic power, just as the British Empire had to do in the inter-war period. With this in mind, America must abandon some zones of intervention and redeploy its armies according to the next zones of conflict where the future of the global economy will be played out. Clearly, the Middle East and its oil is no longer the hub of the global economy. Through economic sanctions, the United States is waging war on Iran without deploying a single soldier on the ground. The China Sea will be a much bigger issue in the coming years. Facing huge emerging China, the contribution of the Persian Gulf fleet will be appreciated by Taiwan. Watch for the Korean-American parody on the border of the two Koreas. Europe will also be an area of intensive conflict, particularly in Ukraine. The United States wants to impose its hegemony on all of America, and Trump wants to rehabilitate the Monroe doctrine related to his campaign slogan “America first ... to Americans”, that is to say: here, to the Yankees. The Venezuelan bourgeoisie will pay dearly for its defection in favor of China and Russia. That is all that means the withdrawal of American troops from Syria, Iraq, and soon Afghanistan.
How do you analyze the strategic alliance between Saudi Arabia and Israel? Why is Israel continuing to slaughter Palestinians with impunity?
For some time now the Pentagon has been preparing for the withdrawal of US troops from the Middle East and in anticipation of this withdrawal, Donald Trump, their henchman at the White House, had the mission to resolve the Palestinian issue - as our web magazine unveiled in February 2017 - by proposing the "deal of the century" to the Palestinian bourgeoisie, which is very annoyed with this gift that it would like to accept, but without revealing itself. The Pentagon's goal is to reduce pressure on its Israeli military base in the Levant, especially as Hezbollah and Iran strengthened during the Syrian war. On the other hand, Trump suggested the creation of a Middle-Eastern NATO comprising Saudi Arabia, the Arab Emirates, Qatar, Jordan, Egypt and Israel, to strengthen their Israeli military base before their withdrawal of the Levant. These projects and war plans will experience the same fate as the famous Zionist conspiracy to create the "new great Middle East of chaos" peddled by Western "experts" in the pay of the Pentagon.
Usually, these conspiracies underestimate the adversary and are based on the claim that US military power is limitless. Since Vietnam, we know what to think of these claims. If we want to know the future of the Middle East, we must listen to the statements of Vladimir Putin, Erdogan, Rohani, Hezbollah and Bashar al-Assad and we must stop addressing the Quai d'Orsay, London or the Pentagon.
What are the root causes of US support for Israel's Zionist and criminal entity?
You have to know that we proletarian materialists do not give credit to the theory of the great Jewish conspiracy against humanity. We believe that the history of humanity is the history of the class struggle. The laws of political economy take precedence over everything. Sooner or later, a financial group or a state comes to bend to its economic interests even though it seemed to stray from it for a while.
In 1967 exactly, the United States of America, which had been quite indifferent to Israel (proof that an "eternal" love has a beginning ... and that it will have an end) decided, following the military victory Israeli in the Six-Days War, to make this little bellicose country the centerpiece of his game in the Middle East where America intended to contain the colonial ambitions of French, British and Soviet. It must be remembered that at this time all strategists agreed that anyone who wanted to control the strategic resource of oil should occupy the ground militarily, or at least threaten to occupy it. Today, any speculator will tell you that whoever wants to control oil must have oil companies’ assets and be able to influence the price of a barrel.
Thus, Israel, a puppet state in the service of Franco-British imperialisms, changed its allegiance and became for a time the "police" of the American empire in the Middle East. Today, Israel is no longer able to play this guardian role become useless under the globalized financial economy. Then, the quarrelsome Israeli bourgeoisie suddenly becomes anxious and wonders if it has well done to martyrize the Palestinian people now that their powerful protector finds less interest in its strategic attractions. If I were Israeli of Jewish faith (they are a minority in Israel), I would seriously consider moving. I'm not sure that AIPAC's arm can still protect them in this far-off country. The immunity and impunity of this rogue state is coming to an end, it seems.
How do you explain the deafening silence of the world over the crime committed by Saudi Arabia and its allies against the people of Yemen?
Do not say "silence of the world" please. The ordinary world has very little means to inform itself, and even less to intervene in the Yemeni drama, any more than it had the means to intervene in the dramas of Iraq or Syria. Let's establish the responsibilities correctly. The tragedy of the Yemeni people is another of these humanitarian dramas, a consequence of the hegemony of this capitalist mode of production that corrupts everything. What are the international organizations doing in the face of the genocide of Yemeni children perpetrated by a mafia state whose princely buffoons do not hesitate to decapitate and dismember a former servant who has gone to the opposition? The big international capital has nothing to do with this Yemeni land of misery that does not even contain oil. Thus Prince Mohammed Ben Salman can have fun massacring while the dependant press turns his head not to see the unbearable. Subsidized NGOs do not do better. As long as the world is dominated by this capitalist mode of financial production, we will witness helplessly these massacres of innocent children.
In one of your very interesting articles like all your writings, you ask a fundamental question: why did not the Second World War provoke the proletarian revolution? How do you explain that more than 70 years after the defeat of fascism and Nazism, instead of having a proletarian revolution, we see neo-Nazis and fascists coming back to power in Europe, in countries like Austria, Italy, Hungary, etc. ? What is the exact role of big capital in the revival of neo-Nazi and far-right movements in Europe?
It must be understood that in bourgeois capitalist society everything is controlled, regulated, administered by the ruling class - the bourgeoisie, nothing escapes it, and if neofascist parties appear it is that it wanted it. Hitler, Mussolini, Franco and Tojo were not accidents of history, but the fruit of necessity for the survival of world capital.
The question is therefore to understand why the big international capital accepts to withdraw a part of its mask of pacifist, democratic, demagogic virginity, and to display its true warrior, fascist, hideous and murderer face, ready to fight until the last proletarian in a merciless war.
The second question is to understand the role of the fascist and antifascist groups (it was the communists in the 1930s) in this preparatory and complementary staging of a new phase of the permanent competitive war waged by the different capitalist camps. Are we seeing a remake of the scenario of the Thirties? Yes and no! Some elements are the same and others are different. While taking different paths, I believe that we are witnessing an overhaul of the tactics "radical fascist-democrats-antifascists". I will illustrate my point by presenting the speech of a bobo, paragon of the left "democratic" anti-fascist American. Noam Chomsky's writings help credibility this convoluted scenario and make it swallow by the world petty bourgeoisie. The important thing for the bourgeoisie is not that fascism flourishes, but that the proletariat never unites against its common enemy the great international capital. It must therefore be presented alternative opponents. In 1939, the scarecrows Hitler, Mussolini, Hirohito were opposed to the Punchinellos Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin. However, on the side of the paid media and its masters of big capital, they forget that today the proletariat benefits from the experience of the thirties, and that the proletariat has evolved a lot since these years of great depression. Moreover, the capitalist mode of production is now approaching its climax, and even it is already declining in certain aspects, which greatly changes the situation.
This is how Nuevo Curso's comrades summarize the contemporary conjuncture: “Under current conditions, organizations and sects that perpetuate the interclassist, pro-capitalist and authoritarian tradition of classical fascism can fulfill the functions of the framing of the proletariat (as in 1923-1939, note by Robert Bibeau), while disciplining in them and equipping them with new accoutrements with patriotic looks. For the bourgeois factions, it is not these vestiges or these tendencies adjacent to the extreme right that interest them. They are not neoliberal, overtly repressive, macho and conservative sects either. On the contrary, the new fascism (neo-fascism), like the old one, is agitating against the "elites" representative of the most obsolete sectors of the state bourgeoisie and the declining petty bourgeoisie. But neo-fascism wants to take popular flags, because it sounds "revolutionary" - on behalf of a new interclass group allegedly "democratic", "egalitarian" and of course "patriotic". That is to say that state fascism is the first candidate to endorse the jacket and to seize the banner of anti-fascism against the barbaric and frightened reaction of its own bourgeois class, because thus it generates the conditions of its possibility.”
When we see the redeployment of NATO encircling Russia, can we say that the cold war is over?
The competitive inter-capitalist trade war is permanent and therefore will never stop as long as capitalism survives. There are times when this war takes deadly military forms. At other times it takes forms of soft-cold-latent warfare, and finally, as at this moment, this permanent war intensifies in preparation for a new great world conflict where the imperialist camps will compete to share out the world markets. So yes, the cold hot war continues between the Western camp and the Russian-Chinese camp.
Why, in your opinion, the United States and its Western allies have never fought the terrorists? Do Al Qaeda and Daesh not serve the purposes of the empire? Does imperialism not need terrorism as it needs wars to survive?
To claim that big capital "needs" terrorism and war to survive is to exonerate the capitalist mode of production of its responsibility and to blur the understanding that everyone must have of class struggle, history and social modes of production. Indeed, imperialist powers on all sides create and feed terrorist groups that would not survive a week without their active support. The Western war against Russia, via the martyred Syria, has proved it. But what matters to understand is that capitalism is war, and that does not result from the Machiavellian plans of some conspiratorial bankers or rabid "hawks". Falcons are called because there is a need. The competition principle for the conquest of the markets, which is the foundation of mercantile capitalism, implies "genetically" the war, one could say, local, regional, terrorist, "jihadist", religious, ethnic, racial, commercial, financial, monetary, diplomatic, legal war, and finally military and global warfare. It must be known - war is the mistress of capital and as long as capital reigns in this land of misery, war will be our lot for all, including for the capitalists.
The comprador bourgeoisie is a real danger in some countries like Algeria. In your opinion, is not one of the major tasks to neutralize this comprador bourgeoisie to avoid an imperialist destabilization? Is it not necessary to neutralize the internal agents or the 5th column linked to imperialism to safeguard the sovereignty of a nation?
In my volume « Question nationale, révolution prolétarienne sous l’impérialisme moderne » (National Question, Proletarian Revolution Under Modern Imperialism), I explain that no nation is sovereign - none - not even the American nation.
In a recent article « Afrique 2019, jamais libérée – toujours néocolonisée et convoitée » (Africa 2019, never liberated - always neo-colonized and coveted) here is how our web magazine summarized the African problem: “In Africa, the imperialist powers erected some fifty puppet national states whose governance they attributed to national and nationalists - taking great care to keep one or more spare lackeys for each country - all willing to sell themselves and waging a war of "national liberation" (sic) or a palace coup - at the head of the official army (whose officers are trained in metropolitan France), or at the head of criminal factions of corrupt "revolutionary" secret agents. This is in a nutshell what summarizes the last fifty years of political evolution of this martyred continent, all interspersed with fratricidal wars, genocides, countless massacres and endemic famines. All these Jacobin Jacqueries and this racist and reactionary nationalism were possible only because these developing nation-states did not yet possess either a coherent petty bourgeoisie or a consequent working class, which has changed rapidly since this continent became a battleground between the two big competing blocs (China-Russia-SCO) and (USA-NATO)."
Only the courageous, experienced Algerian proletariat, aware of its historical responsibilities, will be able to liberate the Algerian people from its chauvinistic nationalist demons, comprador capitalists, and industrial, commercial and military bourgeois and state apparatchiks. The African-Algerian proletariat can not be content with doing the work of social liberation by half. It can not be satisfied to dislodge one faction of the big capital to let germinate another, it is not a good strategy, as the history of Algeria and Canada teaches us. It is the bourgeois capitalist mode of production that must be overthrown, regardless of the mask with which it is covered. The more the Algerian proletariat develops itself, the more it becomes internationalizes and the more insensitive it is to the chimeras of national sovereignty.
In your opinion, is there not a vital need to have a global anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist front that will bring the hopes of peoples against the oligarchy that controls the totality of world wealth?
Think to the history of the West during the years 1919 to 1945. It was the time of the United Fronts, Popular Fronts, Common Fronts, all the fraternal left, Third International at the head, united in a solidary communion to confront the fascist or militarist ogre and the Nazi spectrum ... and what was the result? The imperialist world war in which the proletariat mobilized on one side to defend the Germanic nation or the Italian or Japanese nation in danger, in the war of massacre against the French, British, Belgian, American, Canadian, Algerian proletariat defending the interests of the capital of the "liberal" nations in a vast united front on the military fronts of extermination. Would it not be time for an internationalist front proletarian – exclusively proletarian – to become free of declining capitalism?
Interview realized by Mohsen Abdelmoumen
Who is Robert Bibeau?
Robert Bibeau is a Canadian journalist and author living in Montreal. Economist and political analyst of the revolutionary left, Robert Bibeau directs the international economics-political magazine Les7duquebec.com.
A political activist on the left, Robert Bibeau has published several books, including: Manifeste du Parti ouvrier (1970); Le narcissisme, névrose d’une époque (2015) ; Question nationale et révolution prolétarienne sous l’impérialisme moderne (2017) ; La démocratie aux Etats-Unis : les mascarades électorales (2018).