It fights Interclasista and Lucha Intraclasista

By Manuel C. Martínez M.
04 Jun. 07

So soon they appeared the commercial interchanges, became the fights between the different communities inevitable, first by simple own disagreements of the competividad, and soon by geoeconómicos controls, routes, supply centers, market. This fight has not stopped to the point of which some managed to dominate the rest of them and from then we have only known the society militant, one of most bloody and wild of them it is empire of the present international capitalist community, with the U.S.A. to the front of all the industrial companies of the planet by its universalist, antinationalistic and unpatriotic character.

In the posnapoleónicas societies, such fights necessarily they happen through the conquest of the political power, and at the moment qua is a requirement sine non for societies that follow embobalicadas with the ingenuous trilogy agent chief executive inculcada by Juan J. Rousseau, a desconocedor prerrevolucionarista francoburgués of the dominion executive, legislative, moral and judicial underlying that exerts the main economic groups on rest of its competitors of smaller equal turn or (fight that we called Intraclasista), and, with greater force, on the workers of the world (it fights interclasista). This capitalist absolute Power is the truely original one and of game one is over any electoral political transitory power.

It is good for clarifying popularly that while the dominant class uses the political Power to hold fast ideological, military and, the operated class or worker is disabled departure to do it because their electoral fights always are pregoverned by representatives of the dominant power, independently of whom with governors the working town receives transitory quotas of being able minor, or receives one better temporary dose of economic well-being, but to the cost of following submissively exploded in his chronic condition of wage-earning and not of collective co-owner.
The patronos capitalist do not fight against their workers, single negotiate with them, they are limited to dominate them. The revolutionary fight of the worker is strike either neither the wage reclamation, nor the improvements of life, its true clasista fight would be by the elimination of the idle patronage that lives on illicit rents.

For that reason it is necessary to define these two (2) types of fight that occurs in the society: 1. - the fight between the groups of being able economic by the conquest of the political power, a fight always hoisted with slogans Populists to enlist to the worker in a fight that does not belong to him, but that electoral the working joint party while lack clasista conscience, and 2. - the fight that still does not appear, between the working-class against all its patronos and all their political governors.

Thus the things, we must define between the fights staged between the national and world-wide to conquer markets through docile governors, and still the nonexistent fight in sólidum between the workers and their patronos, orerators and operated capitalist industrialists.

Obsérvese that the worker continues fighting by the relief of governors, of industralists, but has still fought by the replacement of a political control who run to their position, by the call *Dictadura Proletaria*.

On the contrary, this it fights interclasista it has been and it follows strongly fought by the group of being able, to the point of which, for example, in present Venezuela the fight of the puntofijistas of IV the republic against the government of the present bolivariana republic is sold, as a revolutionary sociolaboral conquest, when that simply is relief of representatives of the Empire, because they do not go more there of the simple bargaining of better wages, of labor vindications that have only contributed to the improvement of their condition of wage-earning, and they make see him these that its fight is question of reforms and not of revolution.