{"id":9229,"date":"2020-02-03T22:03:30","date_gmt":"2020-02-03T22:03:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lavozlit.com\/?p=9229"},"modified":"2020-02-03T22:03:30","modified_gmt":"2020-02-03T22:03:30","slug":"imperialist-financial-capital-in-africa","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/workersvoiceus.org\/es\/2020\/02\/03\/imperialist-financial-capital-in-africa\/","title":{"rendered":"Imperialist Financial Capital in Africa"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Yves Mwana Mayas & Cesar Neto<\/strong><\/em>
\n 
\nOver-exploitation<\/b>\u00a0of the working class and the theft of natural wealth<\/strong>
\nIn the thought-provoking text \u201cThe Gravity of a Possible New World Recession\u201d, published by Marxismo Vivo magazine number 15, the author, Eduardo Almeida, makes an important statement: \u201cFinancial capital controls the world at levels higher than that described by Lenin when he defined this as one of the central characteristics of imperialism[1]<\/a>\u201d. Although the statement seems correct, we decided to investigate this process on the African continent and see if this statement applies or not. In addition to seeking to understand and interpret financial capital in Africa, we also want to discuss how to get out of this situation. How to break with imperialism and how to fight for the second independence.
\nOf the various sectors for the study at this time we chose to start with mining, but we could have chosen oil, given its importance. Thus, the African oil industry, although dispersed in five countries (Angola, Nigeria, Algeria, Libya and Egypt), according to 2017 data, together produced 5.690 million barrels per day. That is a production superior to the production of important producers such as Canada (4th producer in the world), Iraq (5th), China (6th), Iran (7th), Brazil (8th) United Arab Emirates (9th) and Kuwait (10th).
\nEven with all the importance of oil production, we consider that mineral exploration, not as concentrated as oil, is carried out in almost all 54 countries, and is the best example we find of the presence of imperialist financial capital on the African continent.
\nWe will try to explain this vicious circle that involves the abundance of mineral resources, mining, investment funds, relations with imperialist governments, relations with local governments and, finally, the explanation of the reason for poverty.
\nData from mining on the continent points to the presence of the 10 largest mining companies in the world. There are other smaller and no less important companies. However, in this text we will deal with the nine largest, since two of them were unified in 2018, the year which our data is from. These companies are: Anglo American, Rio Tinto, Vale, BHP Billiton, Barrick Gold, Freeport-McMoran, Newmont Mining, Teck and ALCOA.
\n 
\nWho are the main shareholders of these companies?<\/strong>
\nOn the specialized Market Screener website are the 10 largest shareholders of each of these companies, considering only the shares with voting rights. Altogether they are 49 banks and investment funds. And no more than that. Thus, of these 49 institutions, six of them have participation in five or more companies among the nine mining companies. Of these 49 institutions, by origin, five companies are from the USA and one is from Norway.
\nBelow is a description of the main investment funds and the stake held in the ten largest mining companies:
\nThe Vanguard Group, Inc.: Anglo American, Rio Tinto, Vale, BHP Billiton, Barrick Gold, Freeport-McMoran, Newmont Mining, Teck and ALCOA.
\nCapital Research & Management Co. (Global Investors): Rio Tinto, Vale, BHP Billiton, Barrick Gold, Freeport-McMoran, Newmont Mining, Teck and ALCOA.
\nCapital Research & Management Co. (World Investors): Rio Tinto, Vale, Barrick Gold, Freeport-McMoran, Teck and ALCOA.
\nBlackRock Fund Advisors: Rio Tinto, Vale, BHP Billiton, Freeport-McMoran, Newmont Mining and ALCOA.
\nBlackRock Investment Management (UK) Ltd.: Anglo American, Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton, Barrick Gold and Teck.
\nNorges Bank Investment Management: Anglo American, Rio Tinto, Vale, Teck and ALCOA.
\nThese nine companies, according to the Market Screener website, had an EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization) profit of US $88.898 billion dollars. This is not revenue, it is profit. With that profit, if these mining companies were a European country, it would be the 25th richest country on the continent; or 7th out of 55 African countries.
\n\"\"\u00a0<\/strong>
\nSee:\u00a0BLACK ROCKS in English<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0<\/em>
\nDissecting investment funds<\/strong>
\nAnd who controls these investment funds? To explain this we will use the exemplary case of the Black Rock Inc fund.
\nFounded in 1988, BlackRock is an American corporation, headquartered in New York, and has offices in 30 countries and clients in more than 100 countries. In 2019 it was considered the largest investment fund in the world. Economic magazine \u201cThe Economist\u201d considers BlackRock the largest shadow bank in the world.[2]<\/a>
\nDue to its weight, size and importance, Black Rock was hired by Barack Obama to advise him on issues related to the 2007-2009 crisis.
\nBlack Rock also stands out for being the world\u2019s largest investor in coal plants, holding shares worth US $ 11 billion[3]<\/a>. It also has more oil, gas and thermal coal reserves than any other investor. For environmentalists, Black Rock is the \u201cbiggest driver of climate destruction on the planet\u201d[4]<\/a>, due in part to its refusal to part with fossil fuel companies.
\n 
\nWho are the main shareholders of Black Rock?<\/strong>
\nContinuing with information from the specialized website Market Screener, the 10 largest shareholders of Black Rock are[5]<\/a>:\u00a0 PNC Bank NA (Investment Management); The Vanguard Group Inc.; Capital Research & Management Co. (World Investors); SSgA Funds Management Inc.; Wellington Management Co. LLP; China Investment Corp. (Investment Management); Mizuho Financial Group Inc.; Black Rock Fund Advisors; Norges Bank Investment Management; and Merrill Lynch,Pierce, Fenner& Smith Inc.
\nIn the book, \u201cImperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism\u201d, Lenin explains how banks \u201cincorporate and subordinate\u201d each other. \u201cI have emphasised the reference to the \u201caffiliated\u201d banksbecause it is one of the most important distinguishing features of modern capitalist concentration. The big enterprises,and the banks in particular, not only completely absorb the small ones, but also \u201cannex\u201d them, subordinate them,bring them into their \u201cown\u201d group or \u201cconcern\u201d (to use the technical term) by acquiring \u201choldings\u201d in their capital, by purchasing or exchanging shares, by a system of credits etc., etc\u2026<\/em>\u201d
\nIn the diagram below we can see how this incorporation and subordination process takes place, in the specific case of BlackRock. In order not to be boring, of the 10 largest shareholders we will describe 3 of them and the reader will be able to confirm how this intricate network of financial capital presents itself.
\nAbove we see that the investment funds that control Black Rock Inc. have close relations with those described below:
\n* SSgA: its main shareholders: The Vanguard Group Inc.; Capital Research Management Co.; BlackRock Advisors (an arm of BlackRocks Inc.) and SSgA Funds Inc. (which is an arm of SSgA itself).
\n* Mizuho: its main shareholders are: The Vanguard Group Inc.;BlackRock Advisors; and Norges Bank Investment Management.
\n* Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith Inc.: After the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in 2008, as part of the bailout program for companies and banks on the brink of bankruptcy, the Barack Obama administration incorporated Merrill Lynch into the Bank of America as a department of that bank. So, instead of introducing the shareholders of Merrill Lynch, we are presenting the ten largest shareholders of Bank of America, which has among its main shareholders: The Vanguard Group Inc.; SSgA Funds Management Inc.; Wellington Management Co. LPP; BlackRock Advisors; Capital Research Management Co.;and Norges Bank Investment Management.
\n 
\nClose relations between Black Rock and Obama<\/strong>
\nThe gigantic crisis of 2007 \u2013 2009 was the first challenge of Barack Obama who was president of the USA from 2009 to 2017. Obama\u2019s chief economic advisor was a then 31-year-old (born in 1978), Brian Christopher Deese[6]<\/a>, serving on the National Economic Council. He was responsible for the rescue operation of the auto industries, especially Chrysler and General Motors, which meant huge injection of public capital, closing factories, thousands of layoffs and reduced rights.\u00a0 The New York Times, when describing the emerging figures of the new government, saw him as \u201d one of the most influential voices[7]<\/a>\u201c. But it was not only in the industrial field that he acted. Thus, B.C. Deese played an important role in saving Merrill Lynch, one of Black Rock\u2019s 10 largest shareholders.
\nAs vice president of the National Economic Council, since 2011, B.C. Deese has been responsible for all liberalizing policies to the taste of financial capital in the fields of: financial regulation, housing, clean energy, manufacturing and the automotive industry.The newspaper \u201cThe New Republic\u201d described him as one of the \u201cmost powerful, least famous people\u201d[8]<\/a>. The newspapers never tired of talking about how cultured and intelligent B.C. Deese was. Would he have been famous in the Bronx or as the son of renegade immigrants?
\nAfter the Obama administration, B.C.Deese took on the important role of \u201cManaging Director, Global Head of Sustainable Investing<\/em>\u201d[9]<\/a>\u00a0at BlackRocks Inc.
\n 
\nIntensification of capitalist exploitation and its consequences<\/strong>
\nLenin wrote that \u201cFinance capital, concentrated in a few hands and exercising a virtual monopoly, exacts enormous and everincreasing profits from the floating of companies, issue of stock, state loans, etc., strengthens the domination of the financial oligarchy and levies tribute upon the whole of society for the benefit of monopolists.<\/em>\u201c[10]<\/a>. When Lenin says that \u201clevies tribute upon the whole of society for the benefit of monopolists<\/em>\u201c, it can be translated today into:
\nOverexploitation of workers: through low wages, exposure to carcinogenic chemicals, and accidents at work (Rio Tinto recognizes that only in 2018 did three workers lose their lives \u201cdue to fatality\u201d).
\nChild labor: child labor in mining in Congo, for example, causes countless deaths of children. Only one action brought in the USA points to the death of 14 children in the collapse of mining tunnels[11]<\/a>. In Ivory Coast, cocoa harvesting for Nestl\u00e9 is carried out with child labor[12]<\/a>.
\nDestruction of the environment: There is no mining without destruction. The more than three hundred deaths at the Brumadinho mine in Brazil are a tragic example. But there are other ways, such as the forced removal of 10,000 families in Congo so that cobalt can be exploited for Tesla, Microsoft, Dell, Google, etc.[13]<\/a>
\nTheft of raw materials: France has been extracting uranium in Niger for decades. It pays only 5.5% of taxes and gets 94.5% net of sales. The lights that illuminate Paris, the City of Light, are generated by the Niger\u2019s uranium. The horrible image of poverty in that country is a consequence of the \u201cParisian beauty\u201d.
\nTheft of land and natural resources: The charming English tea is stained with blood from peasants expelled from their land in Kenya[14]<\/a>; and Unilever\u2019s institutional propaganda says: \u201c2.5 billion people in the world use Unilever\u201d but what the propaganda does not say is that this empire was built with the theft of land, slave labor and the appropriation of natural wealth in the Congo occupied by the imperialists Belgians and English.
\nGenocide: More than 150 years of genocide and impunity; civil wars and wars between countries[15]<\/a>.
\nIn this way\u00a0\u201cthe monopoly, once it is formed and controls thousands of millions, inevitably penetrates into every sphere of public life, regardless of the form of government and all other\u00a0<\/em>\u2018details\u2019\u201d<\/em>. This quote from Lenin made over a hundred years ago remains true. There are several examples- one of the most scandalous was during the civil war in Angola at the end of the Cold War. The MPLA, aligned with the USSR, was attacked by UNITA, which was funded by South Africa and the US. At this time, Anglo American diamond company De Beers, based in South Africa, declared itself \u201cneutral\u201d in the conflict and had an air route that took the diamond produced and returned with food. They didn\u2019t care about the government in power. \u00a0Just as today they invest in Latin America without questioning the government\u2019s \u00a0character. The aforementioned financial groups have no problem with the politics of the rulers. They can be right wing like Pi\u00f1era in Chile or Duque in Colombia. Or it could be the alleged rebel governments of Evo Morales in Bolivia or Maduro in Venezuela. Everyone is negotiable and the tactic is always the same: negotiate. And this is how the governments of the progressive PT, through Lula and Dilma, lent to Black Rock, with the low interest o fR $ 26 billion reais[16]<\/a>. In contrast, in the 2010 and 2012 elections, Black Rock contributed to the electoral campaign of the three main parties of the bourgeois order: PT, PSDB and PMDB.
\nThese examples demonstrate with complete clarity how correct the central theses of Lenin\u2019s \u201cImperialism\u201d are, and further, how imperialist domination in Africa goes hand in hand with the ruling elites and involves the complicit silence of many organizations that claim to be representatives of the workers and poor people.
\n 
\nStruggle for independence<\/strong>
\nBetween the end of the 1950s and the end of the 1970s, there was a long period of struggles for independence that resulted in major changes in the colonial relationship. Several subjugated countries in Africa gained their independence. We say it was a great victory, but an incomplete victory. Alejandro Iturbe, editor of the magazine \u201cInternational Courier\u201d, says: \u201cIn each country, the independence process had specific characteristics, but with many common elements. One of them is the nature of the leaderships that led them. These movements of national liberation were led by organizations of bourgeois nationalist ideologies and programs, with strong anti-imperialist elements (although some of them self-defined as \u201cMarxist Leninists\u201d), petty bourgeois directions and popular-plebeian rank and file<\/em>\u201d[17]<\/a>.
\nThe masses waged heroic resistance struggles against colonialism in the first place and over time they transformed the resistance struggle into an open struggle for independence. The masses with their struggles did their part, but the process did not continue until true independence.
\nThis happened firstly because they tried to stop and control the momentum of the masses, thus \u201cfreezing the rebellious processes\u201d. Second, to the extent that their program was essentially bourgeois nationalist, they did not advance in the expropriation of large capitalist properties, in the nationalization of mineral exploitation, in the expulsion of foreign capital and in other anti-capitalist measures.
\nWe can say that it was an important political victory. However, as there was no progress on economic issues, in a few decades, they went backwards and many governments turned into bloodthirsty dictatorships.
\n 
\nThe struggle for Second Independence<\/strong>
\nThe \u201cfreezing\u201d of the independence struggle has brought serious damage to the African continent. The first big problem is that by not expropriating the bourgeoisie, by not expelling imperialism, these gradually grew stronger and created a black, ultra-reactionary ruling elite. The end result has been the frightening growth of poverty. The World Bank recognizes that \u201cthe number of Africans living in poverty has increased and global poverty will become increasingly African[18]<\/a>\u201c. In the same report, the World Bank says: \u201cIf the circumstances remain the same, the [global] poverty rate is expected to drop to just 23% by 2030 and global poverty will become increasingly African, rising from 55% in 2015 to 90% in 2030\u201d.
\nThe World Bank states that \u201cLimited public resources challenge the financing of the poverty agenda\u201d. In other words, it recognizes that governments do not have the money to fight poverty due to lack of resources, because they do not receive taxes from financial and commercial transactions, and because of tax evasion. However, the solution to the problem, in the opposite direction, is posed by the Economic Commission for Africa, a UN body, which supports free financial transaction; and the financing of the necessary infrastructure (roads, ports, electricity, internet, etc.) for the application of free trade treaties such as the BRICS and Free Trade Area[19]<\/a>.
\nThe economic situation that this generates in the continent can also be seen in other expressions of a colonial economy. 2015 data[20]<\/a>\u00a0indicates that:<\/p>\n