Mexico and the british imperialism
What follows is a set of materials related with the current events in Bolivia. In the first place, there is an article written by Leon Trotsky in 1938m after the nationalisation of oil carried out by the Lazaro Cardenas administration. In this material he highlights the basic criteria of the position to be upheld by revolutionaries whenever steps of this type are taken by bourgeois governments. In the second place we are reproducing a proposal signed by diverse trade unions and organisations of Brazil, Paraguay and Spain for the “Continental Encounter for the Nationalisation of Hydrocarbons in Bolivia, Against Privatisations and in Defence of the National Sovereignty of our Peoples” held in August 2005 in La Paz, Bolivia. We believe that, after the recent events in Bolivia, the proposals to develop a great continental campaign in support of this demand acquire tremendous validity. Finally, we are publishing a part of the article titled “Oil Revenue” published in Marxism Alive 12, dedicated precisely to the topic of the Bolivian gas.
5th June 1938
The international campaign that imperialist circles are carrying out about the expropriation of the Mexican oil companies that the government has accomplished outstands for all the features of the imperialist propaganda pageants combining shamelessness, deceit, speculating with ignorance and certainty of impunity.
The British government began the campaign by declaring boycott on Mexican oil. As everybody knows, the boycott always involves a self-boycott and therefore comes together with great sacrifice on behalf of the one who does it. So far, Great Britain has been the great consumer of Mexican oil; that was obviously not due to any sympathy for the Mexican people but out of sheer consideration of their own benefits.
The greatest consumer of oil in Great Britain is the state itself due to its gigantic navy and the fast growth of its air force. A boycott of the British government on the Mexican oil meant, therefore, a simultaneous boycott not only on the British industry but also on their national defence. Mr Chamberlain’s administration has proved with unusual forthrightness that the benefits of the British capitalist robbers are above the interests of the state. The oppressed classes and peoples are to draw lessons from this fundamental conclusion.
Chronologically as well as logically, General Cedillo’s uprising was the outcome of Chamberlain’s policy. The Monroe Doctrine advises the British Admiralty to abstain from applying a naval-military blockade on the Mexican coasts. They should act by means of internal agents who, as a matter of fact, do not actually wave the British flag even if they do favour the same interests as those Chamberlain serves, the interests of a gang of oil tycoons. We can rest assured that the negotiations of these agents with General Cedillo have not be included in the recently published White Book of the British diplomacy. Imperialist diplomacy carries out its major business under the shade of the secret.
In order to mar the expropriation in the eyes of the bourgeois public opinion, they portray this measure as “communist”.
There is a combination here of ignorance of history and deliberate deceit. The semi colonial Mexico is fighting for its national, political and economic independence. This is the basic meaning of the Mexican revolution at this stage. The oil tycoons are not mass capitalists, they are not current bourgeois. Having grabbed hold of the natural wealth of a foreign country, upheld by their billions and leaning on the military and diplomatic forces of their metropolis, they do all they can in order to establish a regime of imperialist feudalism in the subjugated country, overriding legislation, jurisprudence and administration. In such conditions, expropriation is the only effective means to safeguard national independence and the elementary democratic conditions.
The direction Mexico will follow later on depends, decidedly, on international factors. But this is something for the future. Mexican revolution is at present carrying out the same tasks as, for example, the United States did three quarters of a century earlier beginning with the Revolutionary War of Independence and finishing with the Civil War for the abolition of slavery and national unity. In the late XVIII century, the British government not only did every possible thing in order to maintain the USA as a colony but also, later on, during the Civil War, gave their support to the slave owners of the south against the abolitionists of the north, making great efforts in the interest of the imperialists to sink the young republic in a situation of economic backwardness and national disunion.
Also for the Chamberlains of those days, expropriation of the slave owners must have looked liked fiendish “Bolshevik” measure. As a matter of fact, the historic task of the northerners was to clean the ground for the development of a bourgeois democratic and independent society. This is precisely the task that is being tackled today in Mexico. General Cardenas is one of those statesmen who have been carrying out tasks of similar magnitude to those of Washington, Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and General Grant. And of course, it is not a coincidence that also in this occasion British government is to be found in the opposite historic trench. No matter how absurd it may seem, the world press and particularly the French one, keep on dragging my name about the expropriation of the oil industry. If I have already refuted this folly, it is not because I might fear the “responsibility” as a babbling agent of the GPU said. Quite to the contrary, I would consider it an honour if I could claim but a part of the responsibility for the brave and progressive measure of the Mexican government. But I have no grounds for it whatsoever. I learned about the decree of expropriation from the papers. But naturally, this is not the point.
Two targets are aimed at by mentioning my name. Firstly, the organisers to the campaign wish to grant the expropriation a “Bolshevik” tinge. Secondly, they aim a blow at the national respect of Mexico. The imperialists insist on presenting this event as if the Mexican statesmen were incapable of defining they own way. A hereditary psychology of slave owners, mean and infamous! Precisely it is because today Mexico is still one of those underdeveloped countries that they are only now propelled to struggle for their independence and the most audacious are spawned in the minds of these statesmen than could ever be with the conservative junk of a great past. We have seen similar phenomena in history over and over again!
The French weekly Marianne, an outstanding mouthpiece for the French Popular Front, went as far as to assert that on the oil issue General Cardenas acted not only with Trotsky, but also. in favour of Hitler’s interests. It becomes obvious that the point is the leave the great “democracies” without oil in case of war and to supply it to Germany and other fascist countries. That doe not make any more sense than the Moscow trials. All mankind learns – not without astonishment – that Great Britain is deprived of Mexican oil due to the ill will of General Cardenas and not because of the boycott spawned by Chamberlain. But then, the “democracies” propose a simple way of paralysing the “fascist” complot: Let them buy Mexican oil, again Mexican oil and once more Mexican oil! As far as any honest and rational person is concerned it should be beyond all doubt that is Mexico is forced to sell the liquid gold to fascist countries, the responsibility for this deed would be entirely on the imperialist “democratic” countries.
Behind Marianne and its people there are the Moscow instigators. It may seem absurd at first sight for other instigators of the same school use diametrically opposed librettos. But the entire secret lies in the act that the friends of the GPU adapt their points of view according to the geographic graduations of latitude and longitude. I someone promises support to Mexico, other will portray General Cardenas as Hitler’s ally. From this point of view, Cardenas’ oil rebellion should apparently be regarded as struggle in favour of the interests of world democracy.
Let us leave the clowns and intriguers to their own fate. We cannot bee bothered about them but the workers with class awareness all over the world are our concern. Without yielding to illusions and without any fear of slander, the advanced workers will grant full support to the Mexican people in their struggle against imperialists. Oil expropriation is neither communist nor socialist. It is highly progressive measure of national defence. Of course, Marx did not regard Abraham Lincoln as a communist but this did not prevent him from regarding the struggle Lincoln led with the deepest sympathy. The First International sent to the president of the Civil War a message of congratulations and Lincoln responded and thanked immensely this moral support.
The international proletariat has no reason at all to identify their programme with the programme of the Mexican government. Revolutionaries have no need to change colour and bow like the lackeys of the Moscow GPU school who in times of peril sell and betray the weakest. Without giving up their own identity, all the honest organisations of the working class, principally in Great Britain, are duty-bound to take an unrelenting stand against the imperialist thieves, their diplomacy, their press and their fascist offsprings. The cause of Mexico, just like the cause of Spain or the cause of China, is the cause of the international workers’ class. The struggle for the Mexican oil is just one of the skirmishes of the advance guard of the future battle between the oppressors and the oppressed.
