ICMLPO, December 2025
In the Final Declaration adopted by the 29th Plenary Session of our Conference, held in October 2024, we stated that “the world is going through a complex moment, characterized by the deepening of the general crisis of the capitalist system. Inter-imperialist confrontation, the dispute among monopolies and states of the most developed capitalist-imperialist economies have advanced to the point that they have turned to war as the means to resolve their divergences.
[…] The negative social effects produced by capitalist exploitation are met with the repudiation of workers, youth, women, and peoples. Massive mobilisations, workers’ strikes, and popular uprisings are taking place against the austerity policies implemented by bourgeois governments, whether liberal, neoliberal, social-democratic, or “progressive”.”
The current economic, political, and social scenario shows that these and other problems, inherent to the nature of the prevailing capitalist-imperialist system, have intensified. We live in a convulsed world, where the fundamental contradictions of the era are exacerbated.
One of the most distinctive features of today’s international arena is the intensification of the aggressiveness of U.S. imperialism. Donald Trump’s presence in the White House has deepened inter-imperialist contradictions—including those with its traditional allies—since his slogan “Make America Great Again” is, in practice, a cry of war from the most powerful international monopolies and the most reactionary sectors of the U.S. imperialist oligarchy, aimed at recovering the spaces the United States has lost on the world economic and political stage in recent years.
His tariff policy opened a new chapter in the trade war. Although it is designed to increase U.S. fiscal revenues and, mainly, to strike the economies of its strongest competitors in international trade, the negative effects are also being felt —and will continue to be felt— within the United States itself.
It is estimated that, in the medium and long term, this tariff policy will reduce U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by about 6% and wages by approximately 5%.
With higher tariffs, production costs rise and the prices of products become more expensive in domestic and international markets, so it is workers who ultimately bear the consequences of this policy: in practice, their purchasing power is reduced and real wages fall.
The countries most affected are those with economies dependent on exports of manufactured goods or agricultural products to the United States.
The World Trade Organisation (WTO) foresees that—because of this U.S. policy and similar reactions by other countries—a slowdown in world trade will occur. Other international bodies have forecast a decrease in the growth rate of the world economy for 2025 and 2026.
The forecast for growth in merchandise trade in 2025 is 2.4%, compared to 2.2% in 2024; however, the WTO projects that in 2026 the growth of goods trade will slow markedly, to 0.5%.
Donald Trump has revived the blunt use of the threat of military intervention as an instrument to subjugate those who express disagreement or resist his interventionist policies. He warned that he could intervene militarily to “recover” control of the Panama Canal; he has expressed himself in similar terms regarding his intention to annex Greenland and the North Pole. His threats against Russia persist and he attempts to reach an agreement with it to divide up Ukraine. He provides economic and military support to Israel to devastate Palestine, among other actions.
From threats against Iran for maintaining and developing its nuclear programme, he moved to bombing three Iranian nuclear plants as part of “Operation Midnight Hammer”, launched in June 2025 against that country’s nuclear infrastructure, with the aim of strengthening Zionist Israel’s attacks in its offensive against Iran.
U.S. imperialism is not only the main support of the Zionist genocide in Gaza and of military interventions in countries of the region such as Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Iran; it is the planner and director of these Zionist actions. Trump stated that he planned to turn the Gaza Strip into the “Riviera of the Middle East,” which would mean the displacement of all its inhabitants, thus coinciding with Netanyahu’s aims.
This plan to seize Gaza is part of a broader project intended to divide and dismember the states of the region within the framework of what is called “the new Middle East,” along religious, communal, and ethnic lines, in order to perpetuate U.S. domination in the region, guarantee “Israel’s” supremacy over its neighbours, and neutralise other rival imperialist forces, specifically China and Russia.
The ceasefire in Gaza, approved on October 9, does not imply the arrival of peace either in Gaza or throughout Palestine. Zionist Israel maintains the threat of continuing its military operations—and, in fact, they have persisted in the area. Israel does not renounce its plans to occupy all Palestinian territory. Netanyahu’s regime has felt enormous international pressure rejecting the genocide, and that was one of the factors influencing its decision to accept the cessation of military operations.
Since late August, the United States has deployed a naval fleet to the Southern Caribbean, which has been denounced as preparations for an invasion of Venezuela.
Racist, white-supremacist, and xenophobic ideology guides U.S. anti-immigration policy. More than a hunt for undocumented migrants, a war has been declared against them. Here the fascist profile of the most aggressive faction of the oligarchy headed by Trump is revealed.
The force of the repressive apparatuses acts against millions of workers who generate wealth both for that country and for their countries of origin. The brutal actions of ICE police against migrants are provoking open rejection, both within the United States itself and internationally.
These events have developed in such a way that they no longer constitute only a conflict between migrants and the U.S. government, but between the workers and the people of the United States against their own government. The militaristic vision with which it acts in international relations is also being applied internally: faced with protests spreading across several states, Trump has labelled some cities as war zones and has sent military troops to control the population.
U.S. imperialism has declared war on its own people.
It is evident that the process of decline of the United States as the hegemonic power began almost a decade ago. At present, China is the only power with the capacity and the intention to dispute this hegemony with U.S. imperialism.
In 2010, China became the second-largest economy in the world. Currently, the difference between the shares of the United States and China in world GDP is only about 6%, in favour of the former (25% and 19% respectively). It is estimated that in the next ten years, China’s GDP will surpass that of the United States. In the same period, India would position itself as the third-largest economy on the planet.
However, if GDP is adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity (PPP), China is already the largest economy in the world. Under that parameter, the ten largest economies are: China (19%), the United States (15.2%), India (7.75%), Japan (3.65%), Germany (3.11%), Russia (2.84%), Indonesia (2.56%), Brazil (2.31%), France (2.18%), and the United Kingdom (2.17%).
China’s share of global industrial production in 2024 was 31.6%, ranking first, while the United States’ share was 15.9%, ranking second. Then come Japan (6.5%), Germany (4.8%), and India (2.9%).
The material and technical base of Chinese industry is profoundly new and superior to that of the United States and other Western powers because it has been built over the last decade on cutting-edge technologies, modern infrastructure, and state planning oriented toward innovation. While Western industries carry aging structures, high costs, and fragmented processes, China has developed integrated industrial ecosystems that combine artificial intelligence, robotics, advanced manufacturing, and digital logistics chains. This technological base, consolidated in strategic sectors such as microelectronics, green energy, and automated production, constitutes its greatest advantage today.
The United States and China control 25% of world trade in exports and imports. The United States accounts for approximately 13% of the total volume, while China accounts for 12%. According to WTO information, China leads in goods exports with 14.2% of world trade, the United States is second with 8.5%, followed by Germany with 7.1%. In imports, the United States ranks first with 13.2% of global volume, followed by China with 10.6% and Germany with 6.1%.
China’s financial capital spans all five continents. According to the Grant Continent portal, China is currently the world’s largest bilateral creditor, lending more than the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank combined. In the last twenty years, China has provided 240 billion dollars in “emergency financing.” In doing so, it has replaced the United States in the “rescue” of low- and middle-income countries that are in debt.
In public loans and those with state guarantees alone, an analysis of 620 official loans reveals a commitment of 418 billion dollars in collateralized loans between 2000 and 2021. For the year 2025, it has scheduled payments of 22 billion dollars.
Regarding the Currency Composition of Official Foreign Exchange Reserves, the predominance of the U.S. dollar continues, although it has been losing ground. In 2000, around 71% of total reserves were in U.S. dollars; by the end of 2024 they had fallen to around 58%, that is, a decline of 13 percentage points.
Another very important fact in this regard is that 88% of operations in the foreign exchange market are conducted in U.S. dollars.
An important issue to consider is that, although the dollar remains the most used settlement currency, China is the country that trades the most and has adopted the policy of establishing the yuan (or renminbi) as the currency for its commercial transactions.
U.S. imperialism regards China as its main enemy. To confront this situation, the United States has articulated a comprehensive strategy covering the military, economic, political, technological, and diplomatic spheres. It works to ensure its presence and dominance in the Indo-Pacific, a region Washington considers the centre of strategic competition.
To that end, the United States is actively working to create and strengthen alliances, security pacts, and joint military operations to form a containment front against China:
- AUKUS: A security pact with Australia and the United Kingdom focused on the transfer of nuclear-powered submarine technology.
- Quad: A security dialogue with Japan, India, and Australia to cooperate in maritime and non-traditional security.
- Alliance with the Philippines: Strengthening the Mutual Defence Treaty, including the reactivation of military bases in the Philippines to counter Chinese assertiveness in the South China Sea.
- FONOP (Freedom of Navigation Operations): Naval and air operations carried out by the U.S. Navy in areas near islands claimed by China in the South China Sea, seeking to challenge its territorial claims.
In addition, the United States maintains support for Taiwan through the supply of sophisticated weaponry and issues frequent public warnings about possible Chinese military intervention on the island.
China, for its part, confronts U.S. imperialism’s containment policy through actions and policies that span the domestic and external economic spheres and international relations.
It works to expand its presence and relations on the world stage. The Belt and Road Initiative allows it to make multimillion-dollar infrastructure investments (ports, trains, roads) in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Europe, securing resource supply chains and creating new markets for its products.
In recent years it has strengthened political ties and economic and financial cooperation with Russia, and together they have steered BRICS action in line with their own geopolitical interests. Both countries share the objective of reforming the international order dominated by U.S. imperialism and, in its place, exercising greater influence.
China conducts intense regional cooperation, promotes trade and economic pacts such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), to cement its position as the centre of the Asia-Pacific economy.
Together with other countries, it promotes a policy of de-dollarisation in international commercial transactions and the use of the yuan or renminbi.
In hotspots of tension, China responds with demonstrations of force and legal measures. It also acts in the military arena. It promotes the militarisation of artificial islands in the South China Sea and maintains military, diplomatic, and economic pressure on Taiwan to reaffirm its territorial claims. Recently, on September 3, 2025, China demonstrated its enormous war-making capacity, particularly technological developments in the military industry.
With a military budget of 270 billion dollars for 2025, China ranks second in military spending, surpassed only by the United States, whose budget amounts to 962 billion dollars for the same year.
The countries of the European Union have lost relative weight and influence on the world stage compared to previous decades. This is not an absolute loss; the EU, as a whole remains a significant power.
The Eurozone’s GDP growth rate has consistently been lower than that of the United States and China. This translates into a reduction of the EU’s share of world GDP. It has lagged in investment in key technologies (such as artificial intelligence and semiconductors) and faces lower labour productivity compared to the United States, affecting its long-term competitiveness.
The energy crisis and abrupt supply-chain disruptions after the invasion of Ukraine and the pandemic highlighted the EU’s vulnerability and its dependence on external sources of energy and raw materials, weakening its global negotiating position.
In Africa, Latin America, and Asia, Europe has lost influence on China, Russia, Turkey, and even India, which have expanded their economic and political presence.
The war in Ukraine has reaffirmed the European Union’s subordination to the geopolitical agenda of the United States; NATO, dominated by Washington, continues to set the course of European military action. Under U.S. pressure, they have substantially increased their defence budgets, committing to raise military spending in the coming years. Nevertheless, important contradictions persist between the EU, its member states, and U.S. imperialism itself, especially in the economic, commercial, energy, and diplomatic arenas. Germany, without distancing itself —much less confronting the United States— seeks to take advantage of the situation for its own benefit.
France and several sectors in Germany speak of the need for a “European strategic autonomy” that does not fully exist, but which expresses divergences with the United States. French President Emmanuel Macron proposes strengthening a European pillar within NATO; and there are countries —such as Poland and the Baltic states— that show greater belligerence and favour a joint response against Russia.
In the context of the war in Ukraine, the process of militarisation of life in the EU has deepened, encompassing the economic, institutional, budgetary, cultural, and other spheres.
Most member states steadily increase their defence budgets; many countries have adopted the goal of 2% of GDP in military spending, aligning with standards promoted by NATO; the EU allocates its own funds to military research and development, something unprecedented a decade ago.
Although NATO remains the main security framework, the EU has created its own mechanisms: Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), launched in 2017, which groups dozens of joint defence projects—military mobility, drones, command systems, maritime surveillance, etc.; the European Defence Fund (EDF), which finances the development of weaponry, military technology, and defence innovation projects; and the EU Military Planning and Conduct Capability (MPCC), which acts as an embryonic structure of a European headquarters and manages military missions abroad.
The development of the BRICS+ group generates expectations in various sectors. Today it has significant economic and political weight and projections for the coming years are greater.
The BRICS+ member countries represent 55.61% of the world’s population; they contribute 42% of world GDP in PPP terms and 40% of global trade. They slightly exceed the G7’s nominal GDP (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States). The strength of this group is mainly due to the presence of China.
It is estimated that they will maintain a potential annual growth rate above 4% compared to 2% for the G7, which will further expand their share of the global economy.
The emergence of this group responds to the intrinsic process of capitalist development and accumulation. It is not —as sectors of revisionism and reformism present it— an “alternative development model” for peoples, much less an “anti-imperialist” alliance. It is an association of states and economic groups seeking to expand their investments, control markets, access raw materials, and broaden their spaces for accumulation in a world where the United States plays the role of hegemonic power.
Within it, tensions and disagreements are expressed. Russia and China steer it in line with their own geopolitical interests; India fears that the instrumentalisation of the group by China and Russia will affect its own interests, and it is not the only case. The countries in the group are united by special interests affected in the context of a common international scenario.
In this group, the special needs of its members combine with the geopolitical projects of imperialist powers such as China and Russia. Therefore, tensions between the BRICS and the West should be understood as a manifestation of inter-imperialist contradictions.
The world economy maintains a slow pace of growth. The global recession that some forecasts had set for 2025 has not occurred; however, growth remains below pre-pandemic rates.
International organisations such as the IMF, the World Bank, and UNCTAD project low growth rates for 2025 and 2026, ranging from 3.0% to 2.7%.
The most developed capitalist economies (the United States, the euro area, Japan, Canada, the United Kingdom) project the lowest growth rates: 1.5% and 1.6% in 2025 and 2026, respectively.
The risk of recession persists in the euro area; projected growth is 0.8%–1.0%, bordering on a situation known as “technical stagnation.” Germany’s responsibility in this situation is significant: in 2024 its economy fell into recession (-0.2%) and growth projections for this year are barely 0.1%. Germany is considered the engine of European industry.
The highest growth—led by India and China—again concentrates in the so-called emerging economies of Asia (4.1% in 2025 and 4.0% in 2026).
Although there is no full agreement among different sources on the evolution of industrial production, moderate growth is expected for 2025. Some estimates place it between 2% and 3%, with downside risks if clashes among the most developed capitalist economies persist or new disruptions occur in supply chains. As background, it should be noted that industrial production growth was between 1% and 1.6% in 2023, and between 1.8% and 2.6% in 2024, according to various sources.”
According to the WTO, the volume of world merchandise trade will grow by 2.4% in 2025, which is unlikely. Earlier estimates set growth at 0.9% for this year and 0.5% for 2026. The jump in projections for 2025 is due to the effects of front-loading (imports brought forward ahead of tariff increases), but that will fade in 2026, when the new tariffs take full effect.
No improvements in workers’ living conditions are in sight. In some regions they will worsen due to the decline in the purchasing power of wages, growing labour precariousness, job losses, and forced migration, among other factors.
In May, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) updated projections for global employment growth this year, from 1.7% to 1.5%. While it projects that the global unemployment rate will remain around 5%, one problem is job quality, pay, and stability.
There are marked differences in levels of employment, unemployment, and underemployment depending on regions, levels of development, and population groups. Youth unemployment is high: it will remain between 12% and 13%. Regions such as Latin America and the Caribbean have informal employment rates exceeding 50% in several countries. Only 46.4% of women of working age worldwide were employed in 2024, compared with 69.5% of men.
U.S. tariff policy puts tens of thousands of jobs at stake. The ILO estimates that around 84 million jobs in 71 countries are directly or indirectly linked to U.S. consumer demand. The Asia-Pacific region accounts for 56 millions of those jobs. Canada and Mexico have the highest proportion of exposed jobs (17.1%).
Technological advance —particularly the introduction of Artificial Intelligence into production processes— drives a development of the productive forces oriented toward increasing labour productivity and extracting surplus value. In the hands of capitalists, AI is not implemented to free up labour time or improve the life of the working class, but to reduce labour costs, intensify control over the production process, and deepen competition among capitalists. Its introduction accelerates the historical tendency to substitute living labour with dead labour, generating structural unemployment and enlarging the industrial reserve army, which in turn pushes wages downward and further precarizes working conditions.
Moreover, AI becomes an ideological and disciplinary instrument. Digital platforms, algorithmic surveillance, and automated management of work allow more exhaustive control over the rhythms, movements, and behaviours of workers, while reinforcing new forms of exploitation, such as gig work or short-term “independent” contracts instead of permanent full-time jobs.
This situation forces the labour movement to develop organisational and struggle forms capable of effectively confronting the new modalities of work organisation imposed by capital.
At the same time, these technologies make it possible to advance mechanisms of mass population control, such as facial recognition and other surveillance systems. It is no coincidence that the military sphere was the first target of AI development: its research and funding have been strongly driven by defence needs and geopolitical competition. Today, the major Chinese and U.S. tech monopolies dominate this strategic sector.
The accelerated environmental degradation the planet is experiencing is the responsibility of the capitalist system. It is expressed today in increasingly extreme climate disruptions: unprecedented heat waves, devastating floods, massive wildfires, and an accelerated loss of biodiversity. These phenomena are not isolated events or simple “natural cycles”; they are the direct result of an economic model based on unlimited exploitation of resources and unrestrained accumulation. The most developed capitalist countries have historically been the main responsible parties for greenhouse-gas emissions, excessive fossil-energy consumption, and the expansion of polluting industry. Although they represent a minority of the world’s population, they concentrate most of the ecological footprint and have built their wealth on a pattern of production that ignores the limits of the planet.
Their executing arm is the monopolies and large transnational corporations, whose economic and political power allows them to impose highly polluting practices in pursuit of profit. Companies in the energy, mining, agribusiness, and transport sectors have been central protagonists in the destruction of ecosystems, mass deforestation, the expansion of polluting infrastructure, and the systematic obstruction of deep environmental policies. While they externalize environmental costs onto communities and the most vulnerable countries, they continue promoting an extractives model that intensifies natural disasters and deepens the global climate crisis.
The exploitation of so-called rare earths reveals the profound contradiction of so-called “green capitalism,” which promises an ecological transition without questioning the accumulation logics that produced the environmental crisis. The production of “clean” technologies —such as electric cars, high-capacity batteries, or wind turbines— depends on intensive mineral extraction whose procurement involves destruction of ecosystems, contamination of soils and waters, and abusive labour conditions in dependent countries. Thus, under the discourse of sustainability, the great powers and corporations shift environmental and social costs to other regions, reproducing neo-colonial relations while presenting themselves as climate leaders. Far from being an emancipatory alternative, this “green capitalism” covers up new forms of dispossession and deepens dependence on aggressive mining, showing that there will be no environmental justice without transforming the very foundations of the economic system.
Right-wing, far-right, ultra-conservative, fascist, and proto-fascist forces continue gaining ground in several regions of the planet. This is a trend present for several years, which currently manifests with greater aggressiveness.
The explanation for their growth lies in the ability of the most reactionary sectors of the international bourgeoisie to manipulate and exploit, for their benefit, economic and social problems produced by the capitalist-imperialist system itself, such as job losses, migration, or processes linked to the development of interculturality and the emergence of movements that claim sexual, gender, age-related rights, among others.
Particularly in Europe and the United States, these right-wing parties have managed to present migration and multiculturalism as existential threats to national identity and security. They promote chauvinist nationalism and reject cultural diversity. They use migrants as scapegoats, blaming them for economic and social problems and even for crime.
In South America, these political currents maintain an openly anti-communist discourse, a staunch defender of neoliberal precepts (as in Argentina and Ecuador), praising U.S. imperialism and criminalizing the actions and struggle promoted by left parties and movements, as well as popular organisations.
These forces act openly against the democratic rights of workers and peoples, as well as against trade unions and left parties. They even attack institutions of bourgeois democracy itself in order to have free hands to impose their reactionary political projects, aimed at facilitating conditions that increase the rate of profit in production.
Ultra-conservative forces and fascism are a serious danger for workers and peoples, which we must confront with a policy of unity in the labour and popular movement and with democratic and left political organisations.
Reformist parties and movements and those labelled “progressive” have lost ground; however, they retain significant influence in important segments of the population in various regions. Their ability to deceive the masses is based on rhetoric that criticizes the neoliberal model and savage, inhuman capitalism, and uses left-sounding discursive elements, thereby gaining support among sectors of the working class and the population living in poverty.
A growing militarisation of society is taking place, crossing the economic, political, and social planes. Most countries subordinate their budgets, public policies, and management forms to preparations for confrontation, reinforcing repressive apparatuses, criminalizing protest, and normalizing military presence in spheres that previously belonged to civilian life.
This phenomenon is particularly visible in the most developed capitalist countries, where military power is not only a central component of foreign policy but also a structuring factor of internal order. Militarisation is not limited to expanding defence budgets or strengthening armed apparatuses; it is also expressed in the way states, the media, and large corporations shape perceptions, behaviours, and social priorities according to security logics.
The sustained increase in military spending in the United States, the European Union, Japan, China, Russia, and other imperialist and developed capitalist countries is an obvious sign. In recent decades, and especially after events such as the war in Ukraine, tensions in the Pacific, or China’s rise, Western capitalist countries have devoted increasing percentages of GDP to military equipment, technological modernisation, and the strengthening of strategic alliances such as NATO.
At the same time, militarisation advances within borders. The growing presence of heavily equipped police forces, with weapons and tactics of military origin, is an increasingly evident feature in many cities around the world. In the United States, for example, the transfer of military equipment to local police departments has led to the emergence of security forces increasingly resembling combat units. This has a direct effect on the population: the normalisation of extreme surveillance, repression of social protest, and the perception that internal conflict must be handled with instruments typical of war.
At the cultural level, militarisation operates through entertainment, education, and advertising. Industries such as Hollywood and video games maintain close relations with military-industrial complexes, reproducing narratives that glorify war, martial heroism, and technological superiority. The figure of the soldier is presented as a symbol of order, security, and patriotism, while geopolitical conflicts are simplified to legitimize military interventions or the expansion of overseas bases. This cultural penetration contributes to people perceiving force as a natural or inevitable response to international tensions.
Finally, militarisation also takes economic forms. The military-industrial complex is one of the most lucrative sectors of contemporary capitalism. Companies dedicated to developing weapons, surveillance systems, and dual-use technology pressure governments to guarantee multi-billion-dollar contracts. This alliance between state and capital makes war and preparation for war an economic engine, distorting social priorities and diverting resources that could go to health, education, housing, or combating climate change.
The world is witnessing a rise in the struggle of workers, youth, and peoples. We are living through a period of growing breadth, massiveness, and combativeness in the struggle of the masses—the most intense in more than a decade. These events have shattered bourgeois, revisionist, and reformist theorizing that still attempts to show that the working class and youth have lost the political protagonism that characterized them until the end of the last century.
On all continents, massive protest actions are taking place against austerity policies of governments, against rulers’ corruption, against war and for peace, in solidarity with the Palestinian people, against various forms of intervention that violate the sovereignty of countries —including those carried out through the customs tariffs imposed by Donald Trump— for particular demands related to wages, health, education, housing, democratic and political rights. Even in the United States there are mass protests against the xenophobic policy practiced against immigrants, against the annexationist military action in Gaza alongside the Nazi-Zionist state of Israel.
These struggles take the form of sectoral strikes, national work stoppages, street demonstrations, and popular uprisings; they demand specific claims and also raise political banners.
Solidarity with the Palestinian people and condemnation of the genocide committed by Zionist Israel have mobilized millions of men and women around the world, especially young people.
The response by workers in Italy is historic, with a general strike and massive street demonstrations. One of the most relevant aspects of this struggle was the refusal of dockworkers to handle cargo coming from and destined for Israel. That example spread to other countries as well.
The strike in Italy was an expression of political, anti-imperialist, and internationalist struggle.
Across practically all of Europe, massive protest actions have also occurred against budget cuts, the militarisation of the economy, for wage demands, and against the high cost of living; likewise, in defence of labour rights and for global causes such as environmental protection.
Mass actions have also taken place to confront ultra-right parties, as occurred in France, Germany, Austria, or Turkey, and in Brazil demanding that Jair Bolsonaro be convicted for his coup attempts. This shows the existing concern among the population about the danger represented by the rise of ultra-conservative, extreme right, and fascist parties.
The participation of youth in the struggle of workers and peoples—and particularly that of students in mobilisations with a clear political content—reaches notable expressions. In the massive mass actions and popular uprisings that have occurred in Nepal, Morocco, Indonesia, Peru, Myanmar, Argentina, Panama, the United States, Thailand, Kenya, Mali, South Africa, Madagascar, Turkey, among others, the combativeness of youth stands out, particularly the student movement. In several of these countries, youth have raised political banners, fighting corruption and defending democratic rights. In Nepal and Peru, it was the main force that brought down their governments in September and October, respectively. However, it is necessary to clarify that in Nepal the youth movement was clearly used by the right.
The struggle of agricultural workers and Indigenous peoples also stands out in several regions. In India, Brazil, Iran, El Salvador, Peru, Sudan, and Kenya, massive protest actions have occurred for their special demands.
In Latin America, Indigenous peoples maintain an important leading role in the struggle for their national rights, against large mining and oil projects, and in defence of water and the environment.
Workers, youth, women, and peoples struggle against the policies applied by the bourgeoisie and its governments, as well as against the consequences inherent to the prevailing capitalist-imperialist system. In these battles their discontent and rejection of this system is expressed, while at the same time they manifest their desire for change.
The working masses suffer the effect of a strong ideological and political offensive of imperialism and the international bourgeoisie. The result is greater ideological and political dispersion, particularly among young people who have been won over by trends such as pragmatism, hedonism, individualism, consumerism, among others, which hinder revolutionary political activity.
This offensive is carried out using the most varied means and instruments; it forms part of the exercise of ideological domination by the ruling class.
The development of communication technologies (telematics, social networks, and other virtual platforms) facilitates the proliferation of bourgeois values, the reinforcement of bourgeois ideological conceptions, and people’s alienation from their own realities.
There is an overabundance of messages on the internet that creates the fiction that people are now better informed. Fake news abounds, along with junk information consumed as if it provided innovative criteria, “revealing hidden realities.”
The world of neoliberal information is presented as the world of freedom, when in reality it is an instrument of domination.
The above should not lead us to condemn technological development, in this or any other sphere of society. We are obliged to use and take advantage of these advances and tools to disseminate our revolutionary ideas, conceptions, and policy. They can and must be means to drive our own ideological and political offensive.
For some years now, the right and the far right have spoken of the so-called “culture war,” which functions as an instrument to justify a reactionary offensive in different spheres of social life. They claim to wage a battle to defend tradition, the family, and national identity, but in reality they seek to reverse democratic advances won by feminist, Indigenous, trade-union, LGBTI, and anti-racist movements. They present these movements as external threats or “internal enemies” in order to polarize society and consolidate a disciplined political base around conservative values.
This discourse seeks not only to control the production of ideas but also to distract working masses from real economic conflicts: exploitation, precariousness, and the growing concentration of wealth. It is a political strategy intended to defend the capitalist order, erode democratic rights, and prepare conditions for increasingly reactionary and authoritarian projects.
They also promote attacks on science and promote anti-scientific viewpoints, presenting science as “indoctrination” or “ideology,” and claiming that there is no absolutely true, universal, or objective knowledge, but that every form of knowledge depends on the cultural, social, historical, or individual context from which it is produced.
Also, part of the bourgeois ideological offensive are the “theories” and viewpoints coming from revisionism and reformism, which, using pseudo-leftist discourse, promote viewpoints and policies functional to the capitalist system.
Not a few sectors of workers, youth, and women from popular sectors fall into the nets of these positions and—mistakenly—believe they are participating in movements that propose the revolutionary transformation of society.
Our parties must also unmask these positions, understanding that this forms part of the ideological and political struggle against factions of the same big bourgeoisie.
The current political scenario offers more favourable conditions for the revolutionary activity of our parties. Workers, peasants, youth, and women of the working classes today face a reality that allows them to see clearly what capitalism offers humanity.
This visible and undeniable reality must be used by our parties and organisations to advance in building the forces of revolution, in shaping a revolutionary mass movement, a fundamental element for the victory of the proletariat’s social revolution.
It is very important that new and large contingents of the masses understand that struggle is the path to win demands and rights, as well as to halt the plans of the bourgeoisie and imperialism, and to join the fight. However, if the revolutionary vanguard is not present in those struggles, organizing and leading them, they will not go beyond the limits imposed by trade-unionism and action intentionally directed by bourgeois and reformist parties and movements to limit the struggle of the masses.
The working class, youth, and women of the working classes and strata, and the peoples must understand that to achieve their emancipation they must rely on all forms of struggle, legal and illegal. The party of the proletariat has the obligation to organize all those expressions of struggle.
Our parties have the responsibility to assume a more leading role both in the countries where we are present and on the international stage. To achieve that role, it is indispensable to define correct orientations and policies based on Marxist-Leninist principles; however, that is not enough. It is necessary to have sufficient strength to materialize that policy, and that strength comes from the worker, peasant, youth, and working classes and strata —exploited and oppressed— who mobilize under the influence of our policy.
We will reach new and broader sectors of the masses to the extent that our parties grow numerically. The recruitment of new communists must become one of the priority tasks of our organisations.
To attract the working class, youth, and women of popular sectors to the struggle for revolution, it is essential to develop an intense and systematic dissemination of our policy, our programmematic theses, and our viewpoints on the various problems facing the world and society. A Marxist-Leninist party is inconceivable without constant propaganda of its policy and its actions. In this sense, the printed newspaper plays a fundamental role, as it allows establishing direct contact and an immediate physical relationship with the masses.
The world political scenario demands deepening unity work with the social and political forces interested in fighting imperialism and the policies of the international bourgeoisie. We work to build an international anti-imperialist and anti-fascist front that is expressed in concrete actions and struggles, both in the places where we are present and through international initiatives.
The anti-imperialist struggle takes on particular importance today, when we are witnessing a period of intensified aggressiveness of U.S. imperialism —the main enemy of the peoples— and the sharpening of inter-imperialist contradictions, which warn of the danger of a new world conflagration.
We have said it on other occasions: it is not possible to confront one imperialism by relying on another imperialism. This is how an authentic anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist position is expressed.
The international struggle of the proletariat against the capitalist-imperialist system is manifested in the class confrontation in each country, but it must be linked to actions and struggles of an international character. The working class and the peoples, in their struggle to win their emancipation, must uphold a policy of class independence.
XXX Plenary Session
International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organisations (CIPOML)
November 2025
Sources:
- The economic effects of President Trump’s tariffs (April 10, 2025)
- “AI goods and front-loading boost world trade in 2025, but the outlook for 2026 is bleak” (WTO)
https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news25_e/stat_07oct25_e.htm?utm_source=chatgpt.com
- Hegemonía y disputa de la hegemonía imperialista. Alejandro Ríos. Agosto de 2025.
- Informes de Perspectivas de la Economía Mundial
- World Employment and Social Outlook Trends 2025
https://www.ilo.org/sites/default/files/2025-01/WESO25_Trends_Report_EN.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com