Published originally in German on February 26, 2025 by Walter Grobe
English translation done by Google, with some corrections by the author
The reflections set out in writing below contain little or nothing in the way of concrete political objectives or recommendations for action. I am simply trying to formulate something about the framework conditions that, in my opinion, cannot be ignored by people who set themselves a humane and progressive political goal.
The federal election on February 23, 2025 triggered a high level of participation among the population. The number of ballots cast was a record and there was a considerable amount of civic activity such as demonstrations on the issue of migration, mostly in favor of or against certain parties.
The outcome did not look like a significant questioning of the previous political framework, the existing parties and their view of the world. However, it seems that more and more citizens are worried about social developments, about their personal future, and hope that by participating in elections and other forms of political activity they can give things momentum in a direction that they believe is the right one.
The ensuing process of putting together a new government, however, promises more economic misery and more foreign policy uncertainty, further rearmament, preparations for war and also domestic political disciplining, such as further restrictions on the right to freedom of expression. For my part, I hope that many more citizens will become active and gradually find a style of political debate in which even deep fundamental differences in opinions and interests do not lead to further divisions, but to clarifications about the real conditions and, on this basis, to more joint democratic action.
What the most frequently used media, such as public broadcasting and most representatives of the parties standing for election, do: blame other parties or other governments and countries for grievances and only discuss a selection of superficial phenomena from the world’s major economic and political development trends, as far as they fit into the current self-promotion – I would like to keep myself as free as possible from this in the following paragraphs.
So first the global fundamentals: the ’social question‘:
… the global development of the relationship between poverty and wealth. It is the final and most important frame of reference for all political events, even for an event that is only of momentary and local importance, such as a federal election in a country like Germany, and it determines to a large extent, often quite directly, what is said and done politically here.
In recent years and decades, and not only in the „West,“ we have seen a seemingly unstoppable tide that guarantees obscene increases in personal wealth (and public influence) for a small upper stratum of billionaires, while the economic adequacy of life is not getting better, and is often getting worse, not just for billions of people in the world’s major poverty zones. Loss of purchasing power, job insecurity and fears of poverty in old age are also becoming noticeable in large, previously relatively secure sections of the population in developed countries.
Not only is human labor being further disempowered by exploitation, but the whole of nature is being subjected to a merciless exploitation for which there can and will be no tomorrow.
China, which has only been integrated into modern capitalism for a few decades, is also undergoing a similar development in principle: after it had rapidly become the ‚workbench of the world‘ since the 1990s and the leadership had apparently secured a certain bonus from a large part of the population through wage increases, participation in urban life and modern civilisation goods, this model is now clearly shaky.
It is actually inappropriate to mention Russia here because it plays in a lower league due to its small population and weak economic base; only its geostrategic position and its military power make it a ‚great power‘ for almost every political conception. Due to its geographical location, its role as the largest country in terms of area and its military capabilities, the foundations of which date back to the time of the so-called Cold War, Russia is a sought-after partner of both the USA and China; it is a kind of wild card in global power games depending on which alliance it is more inclined to. Russia has only about 150 million inhabitants, a little more than a tenth of China’s 1.4 billion or India’s 1.4 billion, and even compared to Europe (over 500 million inhabitants – excluding the European part of Russia) and the USA (340 million), it cannot keep up in terms of economic or finally of military power; I am mentioning it here anyway, mainly because it is currently perceived or publicly portrayed as a superpower between the West and the East (China). There is much to suggest that Russia is dominated by super-rich oligarchs in a similar way to the West or China, and that the government apparatus is also trying to impose comprehensive digital controls on its citizens. I will return to Russia’s real global position below when discussing multipolarity.
In concrete terms, the struggle between rich and poor in all important centers, in the USA, in China, in Europe, and in many other countries, has developed in such a way over the last few decades that capital has become enormously centralized and the economic mass and power of a few conglomerates in the financial, digital und industrial realm continues to grow, so that the gaps between top and bottom are inevitably widening.
The oligarch networks are preparing for the confrontations that they themselves see coming, some of them probably much more clearly than the mass of the population. Systems of digital surveillance of the population are being further developed at enormous expense. This is not just about recording even the smallest movement of the citizen, ostensibly for the purposes of advertising and consumer incentives, but in reality about controlling the opinions, political partisanship, and activities of every single individual, as well as of political and social mass movements.
As if in a negative mirror to this enormous knowledge of the ruling apparatus, the level of knowledge and education in large parts of the population is generally falling and with it the opportunities to articulate oneself and to empower oneself against the power of wealth. The repressive apparatus is being strengthened, the police and secret services are being granted more weapons and rights and the constitutions are being further eroded. For the oligarchic regimes, even the average citizen is virtually an enemy because he could make use of his democratic rights. Books and political programs are being published that massively denounce democracy because the citizen is supposedly too stupid to make the right use of it in his own interest; only his submission to central digital controls that turn the citizen into a cyborg, including implants, can save him from his own incompetence and stabilize the states. Nothing other than a few huge private accounts should remain of the communities.
In principle, these developments are affecting the West just as much as China, for example, which is already showing in practice, at least partly, how this can work with its ’social credit system‘.
What does „multipolarity“ mean in the context of the question of rich and poor?
International politics is an essential part of such efforts by the capitalist oligarchies in the East and West to prevent their impending downfall and to secure eternal life for themselves. Multipolarity, an important buzzword for several years, is now supposed to divide the world into spheres of interest in such a way that the rivalries, especially those between the oligarchs of the USA and China, are balanced and dampened. In addition to and between these two „giants“, several secondary centers are to be permitted, such as Europe. Russia – will you turn more towards the USA again? China: will you fall behind in the rivalry with the USA due to the lack of this ally? Will Europe or an alliance of important European countries actually become more independent in the so-called multipolar world order that is now being hyped everywhere? Can social relations within the respective centers or secondary centers be improved by investing less in armaments and war and more in the internal improvement of the countries?
Both sides, the rulers in the USA and in China, probably see the need to postpone some of the major confrontations for the time being and to strengthen the internal forces, to expand their own economic and military potential and to shape their own populations into ultimately docile tools of exploitation and the coming major wars. In my view, however, multipolarity is only the current form of the struggle between the two for the position of number 1. It has nothing to do with stabilizing the political situation on the globe. Both superpowers basically see themselves as the only possible and legitimate superpower and cannot give up this endeavor despite all the promises of peace. There can be no real talk of a truly balanced division of the globe into fixed dominions and respect for the rights of smaller, less powerful countries and groups of countries.
The Trump-Musk complex is symptomatic here.
As far as can be seen so far, Trump is combining some attempts to temporarily defuse certain major power confrontations such as the one in Ukraine with attempts to strengthen the internal economic base and at the same time to subject the population to increased digital registration and police state discipline. The appointment of the politician R.F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health is propaganda-wise linked to a review of the emergency policy under Biden that was carried out under the label „Corona“, but there is no relaxation, no re-democratization whatsoever in terms of police armament and preparations for civil war. On the contrary. In other places, such as the Middle East (Israel, Palestine, Gaza), there is also no sign of peacefulness. Genocide and displacement are even intensified in Trump’s declarations.
As during Trump’s first term in office, attempts are being made to detach Russia from the firm ties to China that the USA itself had provoked with its previous policy. China, the main rival, is to be militarily and territorially isolated. There are no signs of detente on this front. Under Trump, the USA is by no means giving up its global hegemony. The current homage to multipolarity is a tactical means in a difficult situation. Trump’s gang is trying to clear up some sideshows and win more allies again in order to gather forces, both internal and external, to intensify the fight with China. For its part, the Middle Kingdom is gradually gaining the positions all over the globe that it wants to use to outdo the USA. The traditional self-image of the Chinese elites of being the real center of the world is reviving.
Trump’s concept, which actually seems to bring some advantages for Putin, is at the same time massively directed against the European countries, including against Ukraine, which is actually part of Europe, and against the entire population of Europe. Ukraine is being divided, the larger part – the center and the west – will fall to US companies, which will in future directly control the mineral resources and agriculture. Even if there are actually hardly any rare earths to be had: there are plenty of other treasures; the eastern part remains with Russia. The European states are sitting at the kids‘ table when it comes to such agreements, but are allowed to continue to ruin their ailing economies through huge rearmament programs and politically take up a permanent, militarily charged conflict position against Russia. While Trump’s USA promises the Russians great deals, there is no talk of repairing Northstream2. The USA wants to keep the energy supply, especially for Germany, in its hands.
The impoverishment of large parts of the population – in Europe, too – is being massively accelerated.
The tendencies towards division within the European Union are being promoted no less by Trump; Musk’s media show to strengthen the AfD party (“Alternative für Deutschland”) and his flirting with the equally questionable Italian government seem symptomatic to me.
I would like to try a few paragraphs here about the „weakness of Europe“.
The political weakness of Europe, or rather the governments of European countries and their associations such as the EU, is even more evident than before in Trump’s current concepts under the auspices of the struggle between the USA and China. Trump is only provocatively expressing what the US oligarchs have always done and desired. The US has never wanted and could never have wanted the EU or any other conceivable major alliance of European states to free itself militarily from the US’s dominance in European military relations, and it will undermine this at any time with all means possible. This will not change under Trump’s nonsense that the Europeans are weak because they cannot defend themselves and now they must arm, arm, arm and defend themselves against the Russians. Those willing to arm themselves like Macron or Stamer or Merz apparently still cannot imagine a world without the ultimate military anchor of the USA and are practically begging for it. But Europe also has a strength. However, it is not represented by those who currently control the European countries and especially by an institution like the EU, but rather further ruined; nevertheless, it is a basic fact of the global situation and can also be made use of politically. Incidentally, it is not identical with the number of inhabitants and the economic power. These should not be underestimated: depending on whether and how Russia and Turkey (which in any case do not belong to the European continent for the most part) and some still existing colonies are included, the number of inhabitants is around 500 to 750 million.
What interests me most are the questions of cultural strength and the ability to develop thrivingly.
The question of the „strength of Europe“ is deeply connected to the historical development of the relationships between rich and poor in this region of the world; one could even say that Europe’s political and cultural identity consists in how these relationships have been shaped and fought out over centuries and millennia, and in which current institutions, in which culture and in which approaches for the future this has been reflected.
In European history, for at least 2500 years, social contradictions have been fought through and reasoned out in an enormous variety of approaches and also in historical solutions (i.e. in temporary and, needless to say, internally contradictory solutions), in the most diverse social models.
Throughout all eras, outside and below forms of exploitation such as slavery, feudalism and bourgeois-capitalist systems, other types of complexes, characterized by common property and grassroots democracy, have always been able to survive. The most obvious examples are the medieval village community and the principle of the commons; related to this are the democratic or semi-democratic principles of the city republics, which have not been completely eradicated to the present day, from ancient Greece through the Roman era and the medieval city freedoms. This is an important feature (and there are probably parallels in other cultures and regions).
On the other hand, systems of domination and exploitation such as slavery, feudalism and the capitalist order have been repeatedly shaken by political thinkers and inspirers, by mass movements and revolutions, and when the time was right, conditions that were no longer sustainable were overcome; however, modern capitalism still awaits upheaval.
Although ancient slavery was not directly defeated by the slave revolts, such as those of Spartacus in the Roman Empire, it was gradually overcome in the course of the later decline and collapse of the Roman system through the migration of the peoples and later through reforms within the Christian-feudal „Middle Ages“. The feudal-aristocratic order developed in the centuries before the year 1000 and was the dominant one in Europe for more than a thousand years, but since the 18th century, especially since the French Revolution, it was unable to withstand the demands for political equality of citizens and for the development of productive forces (that happened under often extremely brutal conditions of capitalist exploitation).
This development was only possible due to the simultaneous expansion of European colonialism and the wealth that flowed to European countries such as Spain, England, the Netherlands and France from the brutal exploitation of half the world; and one of the encouraging cultural trends of the last decades in Europe and the USA is that young people in particular are coming to terms with this past and rejecting the continuation of colonial and racist practices today.
At the same time, in honor of European culture, it must be noted that capitalism and colonialism have also been radically questioned from within in the modern era since industrialization. The workers‘ movement in Europe has made the greatest efforts to deal with capitalism since the uprisings in France in 1830, the movements in the British Isles at that time and especially the German movement since the 1860s. Millions have risked and lost their lives for this cause. I consider this to be a very important part of the European heritage and also of Europe’s cultural strength, and the strength of these moments will assert itself again in new forms in the current situation – where they seem almost forgotten, but the problems with which they have grappled have not yet been solved.
The wealth of practical and intellectual exploration of the most diverse forms of human social existence in European history has, to my knowledge, not been surpassed by any other culture, perhaps not even reached. This view does not mean a devaluation of other cultures, because the fact that it has come to this is a concrete product of real developments, not of a superiority that was present early on or would last historically.
In any case, Europe not only has weaknesses as seen by power- and war-hungry oligarchs, but also strengths that can be made use of.
—–
A technical note concerning the commentary function on this website: already long ago I had to disable it because of tons of rubbish, advertisments etc. being constantly uploaded to the website. If you want to comment on my articles, therefore, please write to my e-mail-address krixel@aol.com. I promise to publish, as an annex to the article concerned, any contribution loaded with some element of factuality, except the sender does not wish that.