164/YOUR MONEY OR YOUR LIFE!
that the last part be removed. In their demagogic world view, 'the
rich' are state sector workers; these workers use the state to exploit
the poor. But it is pure communist heresy to say that the state was set
up to defend the private property of the rich against those who have
none.
There is good reason to fight the state, and replace it. The
overthrow of the capitalist state comes as part of an authentic eman
cipatory revolution. This revolution must also end with the withering
away of the new state structures, which are established for a transi
tional period. The objective is indeed the elimination of the state - not
to give free rein to market forces; but rather to replace class dictator
ship with a free association of working people.
Which brings us to the following question: What do the World
Bank and the neo-liberals have in mind when they fulminate against
the state? Is it not the system of social security partially financed from
state funds? And overly accessible public education and healthcare
programmes? And labour laws that more or less protect workers
against unjust dismissal?
The main targets for neo-liberal wrath are the fragments of
democracy and collective solidarity that exist within the state, and
whose existence is guaranteed by the state. These fragments of
democracy and collective solidarity stem from a mix of social gains
secured through tremendous struggle by the oppressed, and
concessions made by the rulers to maintain social peace. We must
protect these fragments of democracy and solidarity.
The World Bank seeks to dismantle other areas of state authority.
It insists on the elimination of remaining legislation protecting
domestic markets in the countries of the South. It seeks to eliminate
the control that some states in the South still have over strategic
industries and natural resources. For the World Bank, these things
must be eliminated to allow for the totally free circulation of capital
- which can only bolster the supremacy of MNCs and the North's
economies.
In this respect, we must learn to handle certain lines of argument
with caution, lest we give credence to World Bank demagogy. The
World Bank argues, for example, that the privatisation of state-run
enterprises reduces corruption, increases company efficiency and
curtails corrupt state bureaucracy. Let us not jump from the frying
pan into the fire: there is surely no need, on the eve of the third