Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Methodology of Coyuntural Analysis
Methodology of Coyuntural Analysis
This material that you have in your hands is the product of a practice and reflection of
many years of work. As a product of this process, we in SIPRO arrived to this
systemization with the contribution of many people and with the valuable collaboration
of Enrique Valencia who made the basic text of this edition possible. From his document
we try to be loyal to the methodological process he plants in a difficult theme, but
essential for those who carry out a labor of education and accompaniment to social
processes and the reality of our country.
These materials are aimed at contributing to all of those people from the ngo’s,
promoters, advisors, students, professionals, educators who accompany processes of
popular education and of social organizations, and for those intellectuals who produce
coyuntural analysis.
The notebooks we present here are a basic text, a contribution that does not signify the
last word over this subject. There is a lot still to be said, proposed, and written over it. For
many, the approaches and concepts can be debatable, questionable and anachronistic.
We are in agreement over that and that is what it is about: generate a reflection and
understanding that begins to find new roads and horizons in this galloping reality.
The content of these notebooks can be used in multiple forms depending on the interest.
It can easily be part of an extensive course, used for a more deep and focused discussion
on the theme, or it can be used as a tool for consulting. It does exempt its readers from
the task of going into depth, questioning, criticizing, connecting, proposing changes and
even less so of the challenge of sharing in a more accessible way if the theme is deeply
comprehended. This would be the central objective of our proposal.
In the face of the disordered reality in which we live, we see the necessity of stopping to
analyze it with the objective of accompanying the historical process of change and be
participants of it. That is why in Servicios Informativos Procesados, A.C., we revisit this
document and we retransmit it for those actors who want to be an active part of their own
history.
We hope that the systemization of these notebooks can be a modest contribution and
useful for the best development of the analysis of coyuntura.
1
Contents
Introduction
The Central Concepts of Coyuntural Analysis: The Correlation of Forces in the Context
of a Theory of Power
B. Conceptions of “Power”
Analytical Index
Bibliography
2
Introduction
We have arrived at the nexus of coyuntural analysis: the correlation of forces in a context
of a theory of power. This notebook entails what has been seen in the ones preceding.
We hope that this methodological proposal is enriched by your experience and that you
can communicate your contributions and suggestions to SIPRO.
In the notebook you will not find many examples so that you will be able to do it as a
coyuntural analysis while going through the chapters.
Our questions at the end of each chapter are intended to open avenues reflection. We will
talk about many concepts: power, hegemony, domination, consensus, militarism, politics,
dictatorship, etc.
We will try to give an answer to the questions: What criteria do I use to measure the
forces of other organizations? How can I do it? What indicators can I manage? What
technique do I use to measure the forces?, etc.
3
THE CENTRAL CONCEPTS OF COYUNTURAL ANALYSIS: THE
CORRELATION OF FORCES IN THE CONTEXT OF A THEORY OF POWER
In the previous notebooks we have already introduced the topic which is:
1. Generally the content of this expression is taken for granted and few efforts are made
to elucidate it (the central concept remains in the field of the implicit).
But these problems are not exclusive to the methodology of coyuntural analysis. In the
combined social sciences there is still no satisfactory answer to the problematic of
POWER.1
We need to recuperate the theoretical richness that is found in the discussions in reference
to POWER and they have been relatively absent in the debates about the method of
coyuntural analysis.
Here we will try to reclaim some elements contributed by Fossaert, Foucault, Gramsci,
Marx, Poulantzas, and Weber, Cuéllar and Giménez.
What complicates this problematic is that the words POWER and FORCE are part of the
usual vocabulary of daily life and that we suppose that we all know their meaning.
Using them with little regard gives rise to slipping into uncritical conceptions and
appraisals.
B) CONCEPTIONS OF “POWER”
In the coyuntural analysis exercises, among other slippery concepts, we highlight six
extremes. We could mention others, but we will only refer to these by way of illustration.
1
GIMENEZ, 1981: 11.
4
6 extreme concepts of power:
The extreme relation Power/No Power can then be described.2 This distinction suits
these hypotheses well. [maniqueas?]
Power is:
considered as negative.
suspected of lacking ethics.
No-Power is:
considered as positive.
covered by “Good and Christian customs.”
2
See the critique of this conception in Foucault, 1979: 144.
5
Those who understand power as something totally foreign and that they are completely
without, the correlation of forces and their modifications tend to be conceived on the
same plane: No strength against Maximum strength.
Then, this conception will mythically privilege revolutionary conjunctures –against the
accumulation of forces in daily life—that supposedly open the doors for the assault of
power: Revolution.
Power is:
total dominance (dictatorship or pure domination)3 that is basically exercised through
violence (pure domination is an extreme case).
Within the conception we are discussing here supposedly would be the everyday case.
Said another way: Power is only equal to the domination of resources of physical
force that is expressed in the privileged way of military strength.
This conception of power demands the elimination of the enemy: not only to control him,
but to make him to disappear.
One considers:
Power as: the capacity to eliminate enemies.4
E. Canetti, in his extraordinary essays “Power and Survival” describes for us in this way
delirious power and “Hitler According to Speer” in the conscience of words. From here a
psychoanalysis of the use we give (text and context) to the notion of power seems
indispensable.
3
Gimenez, 1981: 28.
4
FCE, México, 1981.
5
Gimenez, 1981: 15.
6
See the Foucauldian critique of this supposition in Morey, 1983: 257.
6
The path to arrive at power would be then the conquest of the apparatus (the army, the
judicial and juridical apparatus, economic and financial, of external and internal
relations).7
At the root:
Power = the state
Civil society = no power
This conception arrives at an erroneous conclusion: The correlation of forces will always
favor those who control the apparatus.
The basic supposition is: the economic forces are always the central political forces of
a society.8
If that were the case, a diagnostic of the productive sectors would be enough to find
through magic the diagnostic of political forces.
To make this expression more ridiculous, it would go like this: So much capital
corresponds to so much political power.
From the Marxist perspective the contributions of Gramsci are fundamental to discuss the
basis of economism.
The vote
The only source of potency comes from fundamental and intentional contractual act or
the “cession” of individual sovereignty.
In other words:
a. diverse individuals constituting the majority grant the power or decision making
capacity to an elected person.
b. only the vote of individuals can strip power from the elected individual and pass it
on to another.
c. it is an electoral notion of power.
d. it reduces consensus to its mere electoral expression.
7
See Fossaert, 1977: 52-53 and Notebook No. 4.
8
See the critique by Foucault, 1979: 134; distinctions in Cuellar, 1986: 111 (review the historical analysis
of K. Marx).
7
e. the privileged correlation of forces will be revealed in the recount of votes.
QUESTIONS
1. Explain in your own words the diverse conceptions of power that are suggested.
2. Do you know another conception of power? Can you explain it in a few words?
3. Make a list of dictatorships that there have existed in Latin America and explain
why consider them so.
4. Give concrete names —give examples—to the other conceptions of power that
exist in your locality, region, country.
5. under what conception of power do you believe social change occurs?
We begin with the definition of coyuntural analysis as: as a correlation of forces in the
current moment of a national totality.
Its not just any correlation, but a specific one “in the current moment of a social totality.”
In essence:
8
12. Hegemony unites and leads.
13. There is active and passive consensus.
14. The state procures consensus and participation.
15. Power materializes in a historical bloc.
16. Strategic preparation possesses force.
17. Struggle is asymmetrical.
18. Domination is multidimensional.
19. This analysis of power is for capitalist society.
At the most generic level, we can talk about power as “a relation of force.”9
POWER
→we do not understand as
mere will to dominate (extreme subjectivity)
mere capacity of an individual (extreme individualism)
We also clarify this in relation to the opinion of Poulantzas: “The concept of power,
then, cannot be applied at a structural level.”
“Where there is power there is resistance,”11 where there is power there is correlation.
The relation of force A → B will tend to react b → a, although the first relation can
continue being the predominate one.
9
Foucault, 1979: 135. (Gimenez, 1981: 22) (Poulantzas, 1978: 118).
10
Gimenez, 1981: 14.
11
Foucault, 1983: 177.
9
→does not indicate a simple relation of force: A ↔ B
→signals a reciprocal relation, confrontation or struggle: A ↔ B
Against the supposition of the binary opposition Power/No Power, we propose with
Foucault that: “We all have some kind of power in the body.”12
In a social formation in which the capitalist mode of production is the subordinate, the
least that actors have is the power of labor.
In representative societies, the “common man” possesses at the very least a “infinitesimal
fraction of power” with which one decides “about the course of the life of the state.”13
But neither do we propose the opposite extreme as if power was distributed in the best
way.
We only try to break away from the models that tie POWER exclusively to a center or
dominant class and ignore the reactions of the dominated sectors and therefore social
complexity.14
Even Marx makes “force” and “capacity” similar when he speaks of the force and
capacity of work.
12
Foucault, 1979: 144.
13
Gramsci, 1975a: 110.
14
Fossaert, 1981: 29.
15
See Cuellar, 1986: 107-108.
16
Marx, 1980a: 203.
10
But the question of this differentiation does not refer only to RESOURCES that are
committed to conjuncture or current resources (in the sense that they are in play in that
period).
ACTORS do not commit in all periods (with some exceptions) all of their resources;
they are partial: they act on some in certain moments.
Example
17
See Cuellar, 1986: 97; Gimenez, 1981: 24.
18
Gimenez, 1981: 23.
19
Cuellar, 1986: 107.
11
This play of resources (what Gramsci also calls the “relation of forces”) implies diverse
“stages or moments” that constitute an expression of the contradictory social totality:
→ THEORETICAL RECONSTRUCTION
↓
of these three stages
→ demands the concrete investigation of the nexus and contradictions of the economic,
political-ideological and political-military forces.
But:
This ARTICULATION has nothing to do with economism that, for example, postulates
that the “fundamental historical crisis are provoked immediately by economic crises.”20
Let’s clarify:
* Proposing as methodological-theoretical principal once and for all the total superiority
of dominant economic groups would be to ignore the complex reality of power.
20
Gramsci, 1975a: 74.
12
* Rejecting economism does not mean ignoring the conditioning that the economic
moment exerts on the rest of the relations of forces.
* The economic moment allows us to detect if the “necessary and sufficient conditions”
exist for the transformation of society.21
In the second moment, the political, one of the ideologies transformed in part [en
partido]:
“tends to prevail, to impose itself, to distribute itself throughout every social area,
determining besides the unity of economic and political ends, the intellectual and moral
unity, proposing all of the questions around which the struggle boils not on a corporate
plane but rather a “universal” plane and creating in that way the hegemony of a
fundamental social group over a series of subordinate groups.”22
This will be another of the conditions of the “economic moment” and before which their
political-military postures will relate [relativizarán] in different historical periods.
In the Eighteenth Brumaire Marx shows that in the case he studies, the bourgeoisie…
“in order to maintain intact its social power it has to weaken its political power; that
bourgeois individuals can only continue exploiting other classes and gently enjoying
property, family, religion, and order under the condition that its class be condemned with
the other classes to the same political worthlessness [nulidad].”23
The PROTAGONISTS that intervene in this struggle are “collective actors”24 that
occupy “places or positions within the social structure.”25
21
Gramsci, 1975a: 67; 71.
22
Gramsci, 1975a: 72.
23
Marx, 1980b: 447.
24
Cuellar, 1986: 104.
25
Gimenez, 1981: 23.
13
These PLACES refer to the different INSTANCES –that we already tackled in
Notebook number 4—of the SOCIAL TOTALITY.
It is necessary to locate the position of the protagonists (where are they?) in the spheres
of
↓production consumption
↓cultural relations
↓ cohabit
↓ ally themselves
↓confront eachother
We showed that the collective actors that are in confrontation are “traversed by social
classes.” With this we evade falling into a simplistic notion: each organized group is
always a direct and complete expression of a class.
CLASSES express themselves in the organizations and parties, but not every organization
is a direct and complete expression of a class:
2nd problem: Except for special historical situations, with difficulty an organization is the
true representative of class interests.
If we limit ourselves to what the organizations say, how many true representatives of the
working, campesino, popular class would there be in Mexico! This takes us to:
14
3rd problem: being representative is not an issue of mere will; it is necessary that the will
be effective, that it adequately interpret the interests that it says it defends and, in that
way conquers representation.
4th problem: Representations do not only refer to a single fraction or class; there are also
plural representations although one finds in them the leadership of one or several
fractions [faction].
5th problem: Only because of economism are classes considered only in reference to
production.
In the sphere of PRODUCTION material conditions for the existence of classes are
constituted, but:
Example
But → representation is not eternal → There are periods in which events separate
fractions of classes from their representations.28
26
Aziz, 1982: 25.
27
Gramsci, 1977: 81.
28
Gramsci, 1975a: 76.
15
Therefore: it is important to permanently analyze the nexus or the ruptures between an
organization and those it represents, and the scope of the program it wants to achieve.
What is the content of this interaction between ACTORS that commit resources?
To where does the “imminent[?] strategy in the relations of forces” point?29
But it takes this Weberian formulation and these aspects are stressed:
Not so much from the command (A) and the obedience (B) Æ
RATHER Æ
Even in colloquial speech, the word force has a sense of obligation and coercion: “by
force”. Therefore, the command of A will be effective only with the coercion of B.
CAREFUL!
This vision rules out other change mechanisms in the correlation of forces Æ
• Negotiation
• Pressure
• Dialogue
• Peaceful demonstrations
• Civil disobedience
• Etc.
29
Foucault, 1983: 178.
30
Weber, 1969: 43.
16
A position that is exceeded by the same Weber, who speaks of different types of
legitimacy.31
Would we obey power if it were only repressive, if all you had to do was say no?32
If “a nation’s dominant classes have not managed to surpass the stage of economic
corporation[?] that impels them to exploit the popular masses, to the extreme
conceit by the conditions of power, or, to reduce them to biological vegetation, it’s
evident that one can not talk about the power of the State, rather, only of a disguise
of power.”33
Gramsci concludes:
The POWER RELATION goes beyond mere COERCION (or pure domination).
Or in the combination:
Or in a certain equilibrium.
31
Ibid: 170-197.
32
Morey, 1983: 244.
33
Gramsci, 1977: 35.
17
COERCION-CONSENSUS OR DOMINATION-HEGEMONY.34
It includes, without negating the existence of the repression as an act of power, the
generation of a conception of the world and the acceptance of a social direction.
Because of that:
That can be
The capacity of a social actor to extract the excesses (appreciation) of others, thanks
to the dominion that it has from fundamental economic resources and the position
that it keeps in the social relations of production.
34
Here we use the contributions in relation to Gramsci de Aziz, Buici-G., Fossaert, Giménez, Macciocchi
and Portantiero.
35
Fossaert, 1981: 42.
36
Giménez, 1981: 21.
37
Ibid: 61.
18
Marx, on several occasions, refers explicitly to coercion or economic coercion. They
can be seen especially in the sections in which he speaks of the formal and real
subsunción of the work of capital.38
It is a “deaf coercion”39:
• The worker on many occasions does not feel it in that way rather as a natural
law, but it is present everyday in the work process.
• It takes place in a simple monetary relationship and from the buying and
selling of the labor force, without the need for political or extra-economic
coercion.
• A relative overpopulation (greater supply) maintains salaries within the lanes that
suit capital.40
• Because of the competition among workers, the price of their labor tends to
become cheaper.
• Along with the accumulation of capital appears the other side of the coin: “the
accumulation of misery”.41
“capital is converted into a coercive relation that imposes on the working class the
execution of more work prescribed by the narrow boundary of its own vital
necessities.”42
Distinguishing between political and economic domination does not mean that there
exists an absolute separation between them.
Example:
On occasions when in union struggle solidarity and unity increase among organized
workers, some fractions of capital can consider them an obstacle to the free play of
supply and demand, and promote coercive actions on the part of the State.
38
See Marx, 1981: 54-77.
39
Marx, 1980a: 922.
40
Ibid: 797-922.
41
Ibid: 805.
42
Ibid: 376.
19
Moreover, the role of the State in the social formation dominated by capitalist relations
implies an inter-relation between both dominations:
a. The capacity to drive (direct) in order to effectively interpret and represent the
interests of similar and allied groups.
A national hegemony:
Gramsci uses the word consensus not in the sense of unanimous assent. For example, he
speaks of the “consensus of the majority” (trust, adherence and assent).
43
Aziz, 1986: 28.
44
Ibid: 21.
45
See Gramsci, 1975a: 109.
46
A distinction of Gramsci, 1975a: 193 and 1975b: 18.
20
Let’s look at each one:
a. ACTIVE CONSENSUS
Supposes:
The work and the presence of the “new intellectual” as “permanently persuasive.”47
Whoever “consents”,
And PARTICIPATES,49
“adheres to a program”
and “intelligently elaborates” it50;
is identified as the “individual with everything”.
It is the place of the militant or “the active and responsible work vanguard”.
In ACTIVE CONSENSUS the “moment of the vote” is not the last phase, rather,
only a moment of political participation in a strategy.51
b. PASSIVE CONSENSUS
• This attitude is borne of the prestige and the relative trust held by the
hegemonic group.52
• It is the place of the simple, passive citizen, integrated in the masses and that
only “consents” to the initiatives that come from the leaders.53
47
Ibid: 15.
48
Gramsci, 1975a: 109.
49
Ibid: 193.
50
??
51
Ibid: 110.
52
Gramsci, 1975b: 18.
53
Gramsci, 1975a:193.
21
• It is “indirect” because it bestows consent not in a militancy in which an organic
militant/direction relationship is found, but in a simple conformist assent.
Expressions of this passive consensus can be as much the vote as abstentions, both
moved by conformity.
Relations of power are considered the sustenance of the State and, at the same time,
the State is conceived as the fundamental unlawful retainer of Power.
Without stopping to understand the importance of the State for relations of power, we
assume that the latter is bigger than the [power of ?] Leviathan. Foucault puts forward
that one “must study power from outside the model of Leviathan”54; Fossaert, that “the
State is far from being the only organized power of society”55.
Example
In civil society there is a permanent struggle to win the trust of different sectors, there is
an expression of social powers; of course, there exists the real power of the large
consortia.
However, we should not neglect, through a desire for “theoretical anti-statism”, the
fundamental question of the:
There is a struggle for control of the institutional supports (State apparatuses) of the
POWER OF THE STATE. Those that control them:
54
See Foucault, 1979:147.
55
See Fossaert, 1981:28.
56
Giménez, 1981:44.
22
Will have at hand the important resources to impress their character upon the State.
AND
CAREFUL!
A repressive sketch of the State will emerge with greater clarity in instrumentalist
conceptions.
If the framework that sustains a State were only co-action, it would have serious
weaknesses. It could be broken more easily in organic crises. On the contrary, with:
• The strength that provides the capacity of direction and the consensus conquered
by the masses is understood.60
• Hegemony is the cement and oil of the power of the State.
Without hegemony there is a disguise of POWER in as much that one of the fundamental
elements of this relation is missing.
“signifies, in particular, the conscious of the big national [multitudes]; then, what is
necessary is a sentimental and ideological “contact” with such [multitudes], and in
certain measure, sympathy and understanding of their needs and demands”.61
57
Weber, 1969:44.
58
Gramsci, 1975a:165.
59
Gramsci, 1977:92.
60
Gramsci, 1975a: 94.
23
That is:
A consolidated and strong State will be one that conquers the CONSENSUS and the
PARTICIPATION of the popular masses, one that achieves that the citizens are
“functionaries” that adhere enthusiastically to the program of the State.62
a. The leading fundamental class or class faction. A block formed by the leading faction
and…
b.The social groups (led) that are the social base of the hegemony. …its allies, that
exercises leadership from the State and that…
c. The excluded subaltern classes of the hegemonic system.63 …dominates the
subaltern groups (on occasion we can speak of the subaltern block).
Ð
WIDE CONSENSUS
61
Gramsci, 1976:34.
62
Gramsci, 1975a:201.
63
Portelli, 1987:89.
64
Buci-G., 1985:342.
65
Ibid.:347.
24
REPRODUCTION OF SOCIAL FORMATION:
Permits the functioning of the social totality (economic formation, political formation and
ideological formation):
Gramsci shows:
“The fact of the hegemony undeniably presupposes that the interests and tendencies of
the groups upon which hegemony is exerted are taken into account, that a certain balance
of compromise is formed, that is, the leading group makes sacrifices of an economic-
corporate order, but it is also undeniable that such sacrifices and such a compromise can
not pertain to the essential, since if the hegemony is ethical-political it can not stop being
economic, it can be nothing less than based on the decisive function that the leading
group exercises in the ruling nucleus of the economic activity.”66
According to:
AND
EXPLICIT OR IMPLICIT
Therefore:
66
Gramsci, 1975a:55.
67
Giménez, 1981:25.
68
Gramsci, 1975a:83.
25
• This strategic will to be efficient should begin with the real conditions of the
social formation.
• The contender relies on another factor of power.
• We do not postulate a strategic volunteerism, but the given practice/totality
relation.
If two quantitatively unbalanced forces (the number as resource) clash, the STRATEGIC
PREPARATION can be the deciding factor and that which reverts the confrontation in
favor of the one with less.
STRATEGIC PREPARATION.
“is the force permanently organized and long predisposed, that can be made to advance
when it is judged that a situation is favorable (and it is favorable only in the measure in
which such a force exists and is impregnated with combative ardor)”.70
17 STRUGGLE is ASYMMETRICAL
The correlation of forces in specific moments of a social formation is revealed under the
form of a “struggle”.
69
Gramsci, 1975a:83.
70
Ibid:75-76
71
.Giménez, 1981:24.
26
a. Those that attempt to reach the control of the APPARATUSES and POWER of
the STATE (wide) and obtain the monopoly on the LEGITIMATE COERCION,
among other questions.
b. Those whose PROTAGONISTS utilize RESOURCES in order to achieve
LEADERSHIP and therefore the most ACTIVE CONSENSUS possible.
c. Those that ACCUMULATE (potential) RESOURCES in order to use them in the
conflicts that will so deserve them.
for example, in the apparently most simple and bipolar case, that of COERCION.
Certainly a sector controls the so-called legitimate COERCION, but it confronts legal and
illegal impositions of the other PROTAGONISTS.
The laws:
Are not invented by the mere will of domination of one class faction (they are also
crossed by the struggle of classes and they are an expression of it).
So laws (juridical impositions) exist that the LEADING FACTION has to accept—
transfer in order to conserve its strategic predominance.
Even in many situations of armed struggle, the legal framework becomes the only
parameter to return to social and political “stability”, although it is lived in the context of
absolute impunity that provokes the rules of law.
27
In the same way, dictatorships have ended in order to return to the framework of the
State of Law. Consequently, legal struggle is also a recourse not at all despicable in
certain moments of conjuncture, but not determinant.
In that which respects CONSENSUS, there is a permanent battle (with its highs and
lows) to conquer the trust of different sectors of society.
Example
Political parties fight to continue amplifying their relative consensus that will be able to
express themselves in the number of votes.
One case: the struggle between the different conceptions of economic politics in the
country at a given moment are confrontations in that they lead to consensual movements,
that is, sectors that are conquered for one position or another.
18 DOMINATION is MULTIDIMENSIONAL
To summarize:
The relation
Dominant—dominated leading—led
Coaction—discipline driving—consensus
Conclusion:
72
See Weber, 1969:43.
28
consensus (it would “only be unlawfully detaining the single coercive force”73
and the control of the excesses).
b. For the ECONOMICALLY DOMINANT CLASS FACTION TO BE
HEGEMONIC, but not politically dominant; or that it be hegemonic and
dominant.74
This complex or multi-dimensional relation gives rise to diverse situations:
c. That BEING HEGEMONIC AND DOMINANT (economically and politically) IT
IS WEAK IN ITS STRATEGIC PREPARATION in a given moment.
Conclusion:
In this way what is needed is the concrete analysis of multiple relations of power that are
expressed in the coyuntura.
The answer exceeds the purposes of these Notebooks, we only affirm that:
From the point of view of a DEMOCRATIC and POPULAR STRATEGY, the following
is required:
The effective distribution (due not to the volunteerism of a few individuals, but to the
form of social organization) of the ECONOMIC, POLITICAL, AND IDEOLOGICAL
RESOURCES.
Truly the implicit, utopic horizon is the total elimination of social co-action.
73
Gramsci, 1977:52.
74
Cuellar, 1986:111.
29
This project of social organization with accent on the CONSENSUAL and on the
distribution of RESOURCES, does not mean leaving for the future the realization of
these aspects.
In the same action of the PRESENT, in its social demands and its way of organizing
itself, a democratic and popular project needs to go advancing in the indicated lines.
PREGUNTAS
1. Explain in your own words each one of the 19 elements indicative of the relations of
power. Explain their principal concepts.
6. Do you have another option for defining the proposed concepts? Which ones?
7. In the correlation of military forces, what other indicators make reference to its
imbalance? Conquered territory? Liberated zones?
8. Come up with a list of dictatorship that have developed lately in Latin America and
express why (using the elements and concepts seen here).
9. Can the interests dialogue and negotiate with a contradiction of the social system that
is excluding?
How to proceed with the coyuntural analysis to theoretically reproduce the very
correlation of forces of a certain period of a social formation?
We present schematically the following 6 CRITERIA, based above all on the theoretical
aspects reviewed in the preceding chapter.
We suppose that:
30
The CORRELATION OF FORCES is a confrontation of RESOURCES to conquer
more POWER (in its broad and complex sense: hegemony-domination), in the
context of a strategy.
RESOURCES
31
This distinction is necessary to comprehend:
Why in certain situations there exists an equilibrium between forces that are structurally
very imbalanced.
The root principle is that all the available resources are not employed in every coyuntura.
Nevertheless, the fact that an organization possesses greater potential resources given its
situation in the social structure, implies a threat or latent force that its counterpart
analyzes and takes into account.
This requires a permanent epistemological vigilance and in its proper measure about
the:
VALORIZATION OF RESOURCES
There are no magic potions to achieve this objectivity. However, the confrontation of the
analysis of forces with its practical results (the defined tactics) is an indispensable
element.
The “accounting” of resources crosses over the social totality (economic, political-
military, and political-cultural).
The analysis needs to include the resources of each block in the context of the totality and
with the condition of the economic moment:
a) For the control of the production process and of the surplus (knowing that the control
of the resources that reproduce the economic domination will be defended by capital).
b) By the control of the apparatus and the power, by the social direction, by consensus
and cultural unity.
32
Objective:
to diagnose the unequal disposition of resources in the productive sphere.
Objective:
to diagnose the unequal disposition of resources in relation to the political/hegemony
domination.
In the exercise of conyuntural analysis the fear of the analysis of this second factor often
presents itself. As if diagnosing it implied a guerrilla proposal in the short run.
None of that. This fear (obstacle) should be questioned to open the door to the diagnostic
of the disposition of unequal police-military resources.
Simply for prevention, it is a fundamental question for the analysis in social movements.
the form should be distinguished in which the available resources are articulated
actual and
potential
For example: does one make use of such resources only in a momentary way? Are they
a lasting articulation of resources or weak “casual groups”?
We can extend in this direction the description that Gramsci makes of the “casual
groups”:
“a multitude of people dominated by immediate interests or prisoner of the
passion stirred up by impression of the moment, transmitted without any critique
or ‘reunited’ as a ‘multitude during a rainstorm under a shed,’ made by men not
ground by responsibilities toward other men.”75
To explain the most significant variations of the correlation of forces between the blocks:
Was a potential resource used? Was a new and greater strength accumulated in the same
conjuncture? Were resources lost? Why?
75
Gramsci, 1985 a: 184.
33
(It will help to see the elements mentioned in the F Chapter, point 2, about the criteria of
“significance.” Included here are the distinctions between “organic” and “occasional”
movements, according to Gramsci’s76 nomenclature.)
and
including, on special occasions,
⇒ by a NEW STRATEGY
That is:
It deals with a NON-NEUTRAL criteria: the will to transform the relations of forces in
benefit of the block.
That is why:
34
PREGUNTAS
1. Explain in your own words each one of the 6 general criteria for the measuring of
forces.
5. Do you believe the State should play a role as arbiter, negotiator, facilitator, rector or
director?
For the coyuntural analysis we should construct a series of INDICATORS that permit us
to measure with the greatest precision possible the resources that are confronted in the
fields of the economic and political domination, and in that of the hegemony.
So, Gramsci:
“To identify with exactitude the fundamental and permanent elements of the process” so
as to respect the production and in relation to the political: reduce to zero the
imponderable factors.77
We can come up with an endless list but here we will present a series of indicators that
emerge from the criteria mentioned in the preceding chapter. As well as what was already
shown in Notebooks 5 and 6 (temporal and spatial delineation).
35
a the relative number
b its place in the economic structure
c form of conscience
d level of organization
e grade of strategic preparation
f alliances
g political-military resources
h economic resources
i judicial resources
In general terms, it requires an analysis of the actual situation of the process of:
⇒ With this analysis one can proceed to the diagnostic of the disposition of
ECONOMIC FORCES
Who are the principal capitalists? What corporations control in the different branches and
sectors? What is the importance of these corporations in the process of accumulation?
What are its relationships with other capital at the national-international level?
All of these questions refer more to the typically structural aspect, but they are required to
investigate:
36
How many workers are there? What enterprises sell their labor force? What are their
actual life conditions: real salary, employment-unemployment, health, education?
Situation of the trade organization? Inter-trade conflicts? How many campesinos are
there? What type of campesinos? What kind of land ownership? What and how much do
they produce? What are their actual life conditions? Situation of sector organization?
Inter-sector conflicts? Contradictions between popular sectors/capital factions; popular
sectors/state?
c Political economy:
What sectors are favored by the political economy? Which ones does it harm and why?
What are the fundamental elements? What variations are there in the political economy?
What type of contradiction is established between popular sectors/state, factions of
capital/state, in this political economy?
Given this identification, at least hypothetically, one can proceed to the coyuntural
analysis of the following indicators for COLLECTIVE ACTOR:
Basically we retake them from ARROYO.78 These indicators are one more of the little
developed aspects of coyuntural analysis despite its importance.
37
The LARGER the QUANTITY
of people bound together ⇒ the GREATER THE FORCE of an
organization or BLOCK
Every organization that seeks social leadership looks to conquer the confidence of the
largest part of the population.
However, the number is only one aspect. The case of a casual multitude can arise, as
we would see in Gramsci: the conjunction of a force (multitude) with a weakness
(casual).
For an electoral organization, the militants are those that promote the vote of others.
For an electoral organization they are those that permanently vote for it.
They participate in some of the organization’s actions but they do not totally agree with
the STRATEGY; among them are found doubtful elements that oscillate between
sympathy and apathy, between support and conformism.
In some special circumstances or amid a lot of great general political activity, they tend to
become more mobilized.
The GREATER NUMBER of militants ⇒ The GREATER the RESOURCES for the
construction of HEGEMONY
38
The GREATER NUMBER of mobilized ⇒ The GREATER the OCCASIONAL
FORCE and with a strong RECURRENCE
to the EBB
For these situations, electoral analyzes are of great usefulness but they could tend to be
completed with studies of the “quality” of the vote (militants, sympathizers and
mobilized).
Examples:
There are:
-votes of the caudillo: “this is the leader”
-punishment votes: “to see if the next time I’ll be fulfilled.”
-traditional votes: “here, we always vote for…”
-bought votes: “I’ll give you and you’ll give me…”
-coactioned votes: “if you don’t vote for me, I will not give you…”
-alienated votes: “there are no errors, it is the only one, the best”
-stolen votes: “two plus two equals three”
-alternate votes: “it’s now the other guy’s turn”
-tactical votes: “together we’ll destroy the enemy”
-cultural votes: “s/he’s of my land”
-fearful votes: “better a known evil than an unknown good”
-opportunistic votes: “I will achieve…”
-There is…abstaining
The militants, sympathizers and mobilized have a place in the social economic structure.
That’s why a place is a resource and provides one more element of force.
The consequence is: that if the number of those bound belong to a fundamental structural
place, they will have greater force.
Example
39
The militants can have a majority of mini landowning campesinos or workers of the most
important industrial branches of the country; or medium-sized entrepreneurs.
But it does not involve the falling, then, into a workerism at all costs.
There are cases in which, to continue with the example, the mini landowners of a
strategic petroleum region have an additional force.
c Form of Consciousness
The clarity in temrs of the INTERESTS that are attempted to defend and the
IDEOLOGICAL HOMOGENEITY of those bound to it.
4 Levels of Consciousness
The analysis of the FORMS OF CONSCIOUSNESS is one of the least developed aspects
for coyuntural analysis. We present here only a schematic that even the presentation of a
hypothesis would imply a much wider work. The advances in psychosocial and
psychoanalytical studies can be of great use.
Phase of economic
submission corporate
(or lack of phase
autonomy)
Arroyo
distinguishes
FOUR
LEVELS
Hegemonic
Labor union phase
phase
79
Gramsci, 1975 a: 71-72.
80
Arroyo, 1977: 20.
40
In light of the competition for the offer of a labor force, situations can arise in which
some people ideologically identified with other social actors do not even arrive at trade
union consciousness.
Absence of solidarity
Hegemonic solidarity
(with the group of
subaltern classes)
Each one of these goes on assuming and surpassing the one before, in such a way that a
disposition to a hegemonic solidarity implies a greater resource in the POLITICAL
STRUGGLE than that only in the labor union solidarity.
Through the demand that raises an organization or block and through the struggles81, the
levels of consciousness can detected in those that it moves.
We should especially provide ourselves with nominalism, above all in reference to the
valorization of “party” consciousness.
The fact of belonging to a political party does not automatically signify the phase of
hegemonic consciousness.
They impede analyzing which ones are the LEVELS OF CONSCIOUSNESS of those in
coalition:
41
The exclusive valorization The over valuing of
of organizing form of the the organization to
political party, in which it belons. We
detriment the other forms could extend the
of social organization expression and
(“only the party speak of
organization is PATRIOTISM of
authentically the movement, of
Revolutionary”) the union, the
cooperative, etc.
In the political proposal that tries to unify into one single authority every social
movement, every organization, and every group.
Only, to indicate the extreme, we show that a BLOCK that relies on:
will have :
a MULTIPLICATION OF FORCES!
(it does not suffice to use the mathematical sum).
Three separate individuals do not develop the same FORCE (we can identify their forces
as A, B and C, together D):
The FORCE that the reunited 3 develop implies an additional element (multiplication, we
call it here as unification, in such a way that A x B x C = D.
d Level of organization
The political confrontation is the geographic and sector reach of the group, organization
or block.
There can be
Organizations with reach:
Local regional national
Or with preferential presence in the field:
Rural urban rural and urban
42
Or with presence in strategic geopolitical zones (we have already spoken of the
economic, we add here the political).
EXAMPLE
A solid, regional organization (suggest the name) and only in the rural sector, will have
influence, to that which has consolidated nationally, in the rural and urban sectors, and in
the strategic geopolitical zones (like borders, the central zone in which the political and
the greater part of the industry are found). If besides this last one, it relies on militants its
forces are further multiplied.
It becomes concrete in 2 interrelated elements: the clarity of strategy and tactics and the
ability of the leadership that implements them.
Continuing with the extreme ideal case that we have been showing throughout:
A BLOCK with a great POTENTIAL would be that which has the RESOURCE of
excellent STRATEGIC PREPARATION, besides a national presence and in the principal
regions of the country and with HEGEMONIC CONSCIOUSNESS in a wide group of
militants.
f alliances
We can say that politics, among other questions, is the art of forming ALLIANCES.
ACTORS do not only develop in political struggles; they live a continuous game of
ALLIANCES in order to advance on the road indicated by STRATEGY and to confront
the PRINCIPAL ADVERSARY.
43
When an ALLIANCE is formed the RESOURCES of those ALLIED are interwoven to
achieve an OBJECTIVE. A BLOCK is formed based on them with the HEGEMONY of
a sector.
Strategic Alliances
(the organizations)
They can have differences in the nature by which it is sought to arrive at it or in the
characterizations or elaborated analyzes in the period or in the forms of action that are
considered most appropriate for the coyuntura.
They are companeros in struggle over the long run and tend to unify their forces in a
more solid manner; they can even become one organization easily.
They do not coincide in STRATEGY (not in the objective nor in the means)
Tactical Alliances
(the organizations)
Circumstantially they have the same objective in the short term.
They are a daily resource in the political struggle and companeros in struggle over the
short term.
They do not happen through the art of magic (with everything and that the coincidence of
objectives truly occurs).
It requires an analysis of possible allies: their strategies, their forms of action, their social
influence, their composition, and, in general, their STRENGTHS.
It presupposes the clarity in the coincidence in the strategic and tactical objectives.
It presupposes the capacity to show how necessary the alliance is (to generate
CONSENSUS among the members of the organization proper as well as others).
44
Alliances confront eachother at 2 Extremes:
SECTARIANISM
Absence of a politics of solid, agile and effective coalitions. Because of the fear of
“contamination”, of other strategies or of being absorbed by other organizations, the
sectarians lose a fundamental nature to ACCUMULATE FORCES and easily confuse
SECONDARY ADVESARIES with the FUNDAMENTAL CONTRADICTION.
OPPORTUNISM
Politics of undifferentiated alliances without taking into account the STRATEGY,
without analyzing the capabilities of the allies and on many occasions without it
mattering allying itself with PRINCIPAL ADVERSARIES in detriment to the pacts with
important STRATEGIC ALLIES.
So, a BLOCK with a politics of consolidated and able alliances and with the elements of
forces that we have already mentioned, will prepare important RESOURCES for
POLITICAL STRUGGLE. It will not mean a simple sum, but a MULTIPLICATION OF
FORCES.
g. POLITICAL-MILITARY RESOURCES82
Some propose that this indicator only should be studied in the final situations of open and
generalized confrontation, but the correlation of forces demands its permanent
consideration.
It does not involve postulating a militaristic strategy at all costs, in the style of the
provocative or naïve groups that promote useless or irresponsible confrontations.83
The objective is to take into account, in the characterization of forces, this indicator.
Technical Military
Is the measurement of military resources in the strict sense.
In the analysis of the state:
measurement
The level of development of military technology, type of arms, quantity of police and
military in its diverse bodies, paramilitary groups, effective action (legal and illegal) of
repressive bodies.
resources
In the point of view of opposition, the possibilities of repression are asked for.
82
Gramsci, 1975 a: 73-74; Arroyo, 1977: 23-24; Gallardo, 1988: 113-114; Lopez, 1979: 54-55.
83
Arroyo, 1977: 22.
84
Gramsci, 1975 a: 73-74.
45
At this level the distinction between ACTUAL RESOURCES and POTENTIAL
RESOURCES is fundamental for the coyuntura.
If we only propose the analysis from the potential (coercive-military forces on which the
state depends structurally and the factions of capital that have semi-militarized bodies)
and as if always current at every conjuncture, it would fall into political defeatism: there
is nothing to do before such a powerful enemy.
The key to conjunction is to measure which resources are being utilized effectively and
which will be used feasibly.
POLITICAL-MILITARY
The political actions that posses the “virtue to determine reflections of military
character.”85
Militaristic strategists easily forget this element. They prefer to underline the technical-
military from the popular opposition and they lose the ability to generate consensus.
§ the insurgent and counterinsurgent role of the victimized civil population by the armed
confrontation (displaced)
§ the dispersion of the dominant military force in all a great territory and on occasion,
unknown
§ the taking advantage of the correlation of forces at the international level
§ the personalities with special moral weight that impose themselves and balance public
opinion
§ a broad politics of alliances that imposes a dissuasion of the use of state military force
§ the denunciation in diverse forums and international media communication
(underestimating electronic media)
§ massive resistance
§ civil disobedience
85
Ibidem: 73.
46
A resource –political-military superiority– 86 is conquered in this way, that can be
fundamental for the significant displacement of the correlation of forces: the repressive
potential force is not actualized.
h. Economic Resources
The groups, organizations, parties or blocks have a potential differentiated to the financial
level.
The economic resources of one class, for example, the bourgeoisie, are directly from the
organizations that defend their interests.
The latter can have access to those (the former), but not necessarily.
Example:
The financial (powerful) of the PRI through its intimate relation with the State and its
apparatuses and the quantity of full time personnel that it counts on through the
secretary’s and the corporatized organizations, favors it in the electoral conjunctures.
Generally, here is found one of the weaknesses of the organized popular sectors,
conditional by its place in the social structure: its bases work with a fixed schedule or
they dedicate the majority of their to time to subsistence labor; with difficulty they have
important surpluses for the party or organizational “quotas”.
86
Arroyo 1977: 21.
87
Gramsci, 1975a: 91.
88
Ibídem: 172.
47
But they can partially replace these weaknesses, with creativity and with massive support.
Consensus also has its face of popular financing.
i. Legal resources
⇓
Legality
⇓
Illegality
What is demanded then, for political struggle and analysis of the correlation of forces, is
the study and permanent identification of these resources.
48
+LEVEL OF ORGANIZATION (GEOGRAPHIC & SECTOR REACH)
+LEVEL STRATEGIC PREPARATION (STRATEGY, TACTICS & ABILITY OF
LEADERSHIP)
+ALLIANCES (STRATEGIC & TACTICAL)
+POLITICAL-MILITARY RESOURCES (TECHNICAL & POLITICAL)
+ECONOMIC RESOURCES
+LEGAL RESOURCES
Questions
1. Explain in your own words what you understood of each one of the indicators of
the economic field and of hegemony-domination.
2. What would you add to or change of these indicators?
3. What other indicators do you consider to be important to take into account?
4. Are peaceful struggles (hunger strike, civil disobedience, marches,
demonstrations, non-cooperation, etc.) the only measures to modify the
correlation of forces and generate change?
5. Would you agree that these “peaceful struggles” are only “contestations [?] to
“state power” and its decisions and that they do not generate proposals of historic
projects?
6. Do you think that every struggle for power is violent (not necessarily physical)?
7. Do you think that physical violence understood as harm to another is inherent to
man[kind]? Is it a socio-historical product?
8. The resource of “dialogue” can resolve all the contradictions, conflicts, interests,
necessities, desires, and distinct values?
9. Within the vocabulary of human rights and “education for peace,” can we find
another concept different from “non-violence,” “enemy,” etc., but in a positive
sense?
10. Does the “contradiction” imply that there are “irreconcilable interests” that would
not be resolved by means of “dialogue” and “negotiation”? Is only winning or
losing the solution?
After having presented some theoretical proposals around the concept of the
CORRELATION OF FORCES, the criteria for its analysis and the indicators of forces,
we will express a possible technique to determine said correlation.
1. Correlation of Forces
2. Projects
3. Resources
49
4. Opportunities and Threats
5. Tactic and Strategy
6. Evaluation
7. Second Analysis
1. Correlation of Forces
2. Projects
the conjunction of implicit and unintentional interests materialized in the actions that
implicitly articulate a strategy and tactics
It is important to work with all the mentioned indicators in order to overcome unilateral
analysis (excessive optimism or paralyzing pessimism).
3. Resources
90
Zarco, 1988: 98. Gallardo, 1988: 80.
91
Souza, s/f: 36.
50
A symmetry Relative Equilibrium
It implies the presence of a CURRENT RELATION and its possibilities to remain in the
future.
To guard against:
OPTIMISM
(overestimation of the force itself, without its context)
the analysis in the comparison with other forces
PESSIMISM
(underestimation of the force itself, without its context)
Detect the significant movements of force in comparison with the earlier period.
a. characterize in the circumstances of the period which are the opportunities that are
opened in the conjectural (to accumulate more FORCE in the sense of the
STRATEGY of the BLOCK).
b. Characterize WHICH ARE THE PRINCIPAL THREATS (what impedes the
accumulation of FORCES or what signifies the accumulation of forces of the
ADVERSARIES.
This in the context of the confrontation of strategies and of the analyzed tendencies. This
group will permit the identifying, at the CONJUNCTURAL MOMENT, among other
characterizations, as the period of:
51
6. Evaluation
7. Second Analysis
It does not imply a linear sequence, independent of the order these would be the elements
to take into account.
Questions
52