REGIONAL ECONOMIES VERSUS GLOBAL CAPITALISM

The French study and discussion group Nouvelle Marx Confrontation developed, during the years 2000 to 2010, the analysis of the new global development cycle led by the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - not necessarily in this order), articulated to the capital management modalities promoted by the financial and shareholder systems of global capitalism (^{CHESNAIS et all, 2003}). The reversal of economic and state policies that emerged since the turn of the millennium, required by the political debacle of yuppie neoliberalism and the social exhaustion generated by the misery resulting from its policies throughout the world in the 1990s, did not necessarily lead to attempts at deeper change in the economy and social models.

We saw the emergence, in the first decade of the new century, of another world order, economic and political, and with a (relative) diversification of social configurations and cultural references that began to point, if not to new paths, to "new ways of walking. Effectively, it is necessary to recognize that there is no rupture with the capitalist order, with the fundamental logic of capital, nor is it even proposed, but it is also necessary to recognize the establishment of new paths for capitalism, especially in sectors peripheral to the old centers of the triad (USA-EURO-Japan). These "new paths" reflect different aspects of international power relations, influenced by political and economic transformations, including the fact that the centers of globalized capitalism have suffered from crises, previously restricted to dependent economies. These crises, with their epicenter in the USA and Europe, reflect a process of qualitative transformation of the globalized structure of capital, leading to a reordering of the economic polarities with the emergence of a plurality of dynamic "middle" centers in world production, although still articulated by the dynamics of financial flows, influences of exchange rate mechanisms, etc. As an example of this new scenario, the political reorganization of Latin America, since the Lula government in Brazil (who headed this process in South America and in the articulation with Africa, China, Korea and Russia), together with Hugo Chavez (Venezuela), Evo Morales (Bolivia), José Mujica (Uruguay), with the support of the Kirchners (Argentina), allowed for the rupture with the FTAA project (of interest to the USA and its representatives in the national elites of these countries), reinforcing MERCOSUR. This reorganization of economic production, political articulation and regional markets in the South American subcontinent, together with the creation of other grouping formats (BRICS, G20, among others) and even the new stage of the Chinese, Indian, Brazilian and Russian economies, led to the resizing of the possibilities of insertion of these national and regional economies into the capitalist world framework.

In each of these geo-economic or geopolitical and economic regions, the division of labor directs the activities that produce greater aggregate value to the central countries and regions, the even more powerful and also real poles of the system, transferring the labor- and energy-intensive activities, or the sectors with a high polluting content, to the aggregate or politically subordinate areas. In this division of labor that is not only international, but already globalized and regionalized, the role played by education in the relative positioning of each country has become more important. It is worth highlighting here the fact that Education is thought of, in this format, as an activity reduced to schooling, thus taking a broad and complex social process, which involves diverse existential experiences in various relational groups and multiple cultural modalities, into just one of its social expressions - the school. This reductionism already shows itself as a deleterious principle for global and educational policy definitions, specifically. When understood economically, based on the same common-sense logic, mainly as a level of schooling, a range of educational aspects that are fundamental to the development of the personality of each worker, each citizen, each person, after all, becomes an element of restriction and not of expansion of their capabilities and potentials. This point, in itself, already leads to many questions regarding the proposition of this type of approach that despises the centrality of the human, restoring a reified centrality under the reason of capital.

The central aspect in doubt, even in this approach, is to what extent the level of schooling has really become a decisive factor or, at least, a very relevant determinant of those processes of economic development and technological leadership, in the sense that it is normally attributed to it - schooling? The combination of cheap labor, technological and productive innovations and access to markets still seems to be the core of the formula defended by liberal conceptions. Assuming that high technology would develop within the most important economies, which would be, next to the new conditions of subjective and cognitive development, the great role of the portion of highly qualified technicians within the productive system, the elevation in intermediate levels (elementary and middle schooling, and even higher education of low scientific level), only raises the level of execution and absorption of imported technology.

^{Chesnais (2003}) makes clear the role of education-schooling, both as part of the structure of conditions for the development of production as a whole, or as a "place" of exploitation of cheap and highly qualified labor, used for subcontracting (outsourcing) of services, as is the case of the transfer of banking and financial ancillary services in general, and data processing, to regions in India and Scotland, since the early 1990s, in search of qualified and cheap labor. This exemplary case and the ensuing observation suggest the determinations of the movement in which the educational standard does not necessarily determine the development or establishment of economic sectors of high added value in a country or region. That being said, it is important to recognize the idea that schooling is an important element (even among others) in the distribution of better paid jobs within the productive processes.

There are, however, more direct critics to the potentiality of the educational process, expressing the notion that better training and a higher educational level do not ensure employment, do not have the ability to create jobs, but only increase the chances of cyclical inclusion as preferential labor for capital exploitation, in a process in which others (other individuals, other regions, other countries) will be excluded or excluded (^{CHESNAIS, 1996}). Having historically become a vehicle for individual ascension, or class distinction, education would assume it’s 'perfect' role as a "ladder" of social ascent only within dual schemes, where there is "good education" for some, and worse, little or no schooling for others. The perfect allegory for this process is that of the seesaw or the balance of plates: the greater the imbalance, the ascension of one side depends on the descent of the opposite - competing - side. Finally, the ultimate question is: -what would happen if we achieved a high and universal level of professional qualification? In this case, of course, education and qualification could not determine the "best jobs" for everyone, even if we consider the argument to be true.

This extreme picture of generalized high qualification would only determine the best of all worlds for capital, which could choose the cheapest among the well qualified workers, who would be competing fiercely to occupy the same jobs necessary for the permanence of the capitalist productive structure. It is necessary to redirect the meaning of formal education represented by the school system, in the deeper sense that Marx advocated for the term 'overcoming', the emergence of something new that 'twists' the meaning of something, negating it, but, at the same time, partially incorporating it and going beyond.

The idea we postulate here is not the disqualification of education-schooling or the denial of its social importance. First, we defend the view that the real role played by the educational-school system and by education as a phenomenon in general, in globalized capitalism and in each national historical bloc articulated with it, must be properly understood if we want to intervene in order to consciously act upon these realities.

THE NEW CONTINENTAL POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC FRAMEWORK AND THE POSSIBILITY OF PROGRESSIVE SOCIAL POLICIES

In recent years, the emergence of the Chinese, Indian, Brazilian and Russian economies has assumed an important role in the relative repositioning of regional groupings, opening important perspectives and new historical possibilities for the economic and social development of countries peripheral to the great historical centers of world capital, and alternative to the hegemonic political, economic and social processes.

In the process, still in course, of the financial crisis initiated in the largest global economic center, and whose course is still open, the dispute for world hegemony articulates financial capital, productive structures and social and political organization, in diverse scopes, scales and levels - national, regional and inter-regional. One should not forget the role played by the military industrial sector of the USA and NATO (Germany, France, England, Italy, Sweden, Belgium, Holland et alii) in the contribution of R&D resources (research and development of processes and products) and cutting-edge technological development. (^{ARRAIS NETO, 2008}).

The still dominant position of the United States in the international economic organization agencies (IMF, World Bank, WTO, GATT etc.), together with its condition as the system's political and military hegemonic power, still manages to powerfully influence the world economy. It has succeeded in changing the rules of international trade in many respects, redirecting production, determining new modalities and contents of consumption and, above all, directing international financial flows to its benefit, establishing financial capital and technological development as axes of world capitalism. Localized wars (Gulf War, Afghanistan, Iraq) and regional conflicts are major markets for the arms industry and laboratories for the development of new military technologies at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives, considered irrelevant in the morbid accounting of these business sectors and their lobbies in congresses and central governments, especially that of the United States of America.

This "American" hegemony, which articulates economic military interventions, political retaliations and varied mechanisms of international intervention, has come under the shadow of the development of the Chinese, Russian, South American and Indian economies, mainly, and of the magnitude of the internal crisis of the American productive system, without it being possible, even at this moment, to measure the influence of this process on the modes of reproduction and hegemony of global financial capital. Note that the distancing of the US military apparatus in relation to the rest of the world, both in quantitative and qualitative terms, erected it, in the short term, into a "single" military superpower and world gendarme (^{BERTONHA, 2013}). The BRICS meeting brought a new perspective on this scenario; we will develop a brief consideration on this later. The constant threat hanging over any non-submissive country or region is considerable, and the 'adventurous' incursions of the marines, the air force and the Yankee army permanently remind the world of the risks of opting for paths of confrontation with the dictates of the center of the current capitalist economy. Returning to the theme of the deflection point in US military power, one must consider the latest serious clashes that took place in Syria in 2018. On April 13 of that year, NATO decided to bomb Syria, claiming humanitarian aid for the region - as if humanitarian aid was possible by bombing a country - unlike the bombing of Baghdad, which we watched as a media spectacle, there was no image, no news about such bombing in the news, not even the next day, even today on the internet almost nothing can be found. Trying to understand and find an answer, only one piece of information seemed relevant to us.

According to the Russians, 71 of the 103 missiles were shot down by Assad's defense system, which over the past 18 months has been completely redone by Moscow. Early indications are that there were no casualties from the attack and that the military unit that the bombing targeted suffered only minor damage. Videos that emerged after the Western attack show the Syrian defense system in full operation. (^{DWb, 2018}, p.1)

From a military point of view, the attack was a failure, the major newspapers did not report it! Another fact that occurred in that scenario was the Russian response in missile development, presenting a hypersonic one in March 2018, considered an unbeatable weapon so far (^{BBC, 2018}). Allied to Russian development, the Chinese and Indians work together, already representing a military force capable of barring US threats in this near-war scenario.

In recent years (2012-2019), another modality of 'underground' intervention emerges, based on previous forms, but compounded by the use of new instruments of social mobilization: hybrid warfare (^{ESCOBAR, 2017}). Political intervention mobilizing petit-bourgeois social sectors towards the ousting of democratizing center-left governments in Latin America and, more recently, in Europe, has become the unbalancing aspect of the continuity of progressive economic and social policies, as well as the consequent rise of options to US power (^{ARRAIS NETO, 2014}). The processes of impeachment of Latin American governments in Argentina, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador, and attempts in several other countries of this geopolitical macro-region, point to new means of ideological manipulation, in addition to the massive use of the internet and its expressions of media and virtual networks. The 'cultivation' of new forms of the now religious and furious right wing points to educational processes, no longer centered on schooling (which these ideologized groups of the right try to strictly control again), but on the use of 'churches', of 'fundamentalist Christianity of 'Christian Pentecostalism', associated with explicit discourses of xenophobic violence against immigrants, regional xenophobia (against Northeasterners, in Brazil), misogyny, machismo, racism, sexism and, not less important or central - organized working class (unions, central unions, MST, MTST, Via Campesina).

Let us return, however, to the problem of the direct relation school-production, after this historicizing digression. It is fundamental to understand the character of capitalism centered and directed by finance, which has already assumed a virtual format. First of all, in the panorama of maintenance of the hegemony of finance capital in conditions similar to its current form, the separation of production-appropriation of surplus value and the emergence of money capital as a parasitic sector of capital had already been clearly exposed by ^{Marx (Capital, book III, chapter XXV, 1984}). Alongside all the social implications of this process, which includes exorbitant public debts, digital fortunes, fiat economy, transnational sovereignty of stock and exchange markets, among others, a strategic shift has occurred in the relative position of industry and finance, with important consequences for the division of labor.

The displacement of the industrial sector to a subordinate position, within the structure of globalized capitalism, also determined its global subordinate position, in the context of the social model engendered with the support of capital relations. This whole movement, with its displacements of the gravitational axis of production and greater financial volatility, led, in the first moment, to the weakening of political definitions, including State public policies. This was a very clear and explainable movement, to the extent that the State is also a participant and constituent of the general capitalist relations of society, having lost or seriously reduced, in the 1980s and 1990s, the possibility of guiding medium and long-term economic strategies, defining its action, instead, based on the need for return and profitability, in the short term and with permanent liquidity, of monetary capital (^{ARRAIS NETO, 2008}).

In the ebb of this moment of absolute and unquestionable hegemony of the financial capital (characteristic of the 1980s and 1990s), the beginning of the 21st century pointed to a somewhat more critical conjuncture of the financial markets (even though criticism is still incipient and objective submission to global financial markets is maintained). The return of agricultural and industrial production as an element of central importance in the intersectoral dispute of capital (^{ARRAIS NETO, 2008}). On the one hand, the international crisis triggered by the financial and exchange markets in 1997-98 revealed the fragility of national economic policies and even their productive structures, in the face of monetary flows that demand high profitability and absolute liquidity applications (^{ARRAIS NETO 2008}). The most recent Yankee crisis in the financial and stock markets, triggered by the bursting of the so-called "bubble" in the US real estate market (2008), which infected the world with the credit speculation of the American banking system is a symptom of the possibility of the largest capitalist economy in the world entering a recessionary cycle and sinking part of the world (the other countries under the influence of its economy) under the weight of dollarized inflation, redirections of capital funds, or stagnation processes resulting from the modes of financial "rescue" of their national economies adopted by central states (^{ARRAIS NETO, 2008}).

The retraction of state social programs, of public policies in general, as well as the worsening of class inequality in these central regions of capitalism, are symptomatic of the price that falls primarily on the working class of these countries, with the gravamen incident on nations and regions of less political and economic power in their areas of influence (^{BRAZ, 2017}). The dependence of the Brazilian economy on the constant contribution of foreign capital, linked to the submission of social and economic policies to liberal dictates, prevented the establishment (at least in the Brazilian case, during the 1980s and 1990s) of long-term policies to reverse the external dependence and the worsening of domestic social conditions. The regional political and economic reorientation of Latin America since the first decade of the new century (2001-2010), particularly in South America - MERCOSUR, and the particularity of the Brazilian path in search of options to the liberal project, since the Lula administration, opened possibilities for a more autochthonous development, contributing even more to the complexity of the analysis to be developed nowadays, in the first decades of this millennium.

THE POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REGRESSION LED BY PETTY-BOURGEOIS REACTIONARISM: PREJUDICES, FUNDAMENTALISM, AND FASCISM UNITE TO PREVENT LEFT-WING PROGRESSIVISM

This alternative, which was in force for a decade (generally and with blurred borders, in the period encompassed by the years 2004-2014), has encountered, since 2013, a conservative ebb, financed by sectors of the US right and by the internal reactionaries in each South American national society. This ebb, articulating financial groups, sectors of industrial and commercial capital, mobilized by the large corporate business media in the various countries, easily co-opted the middle social sectors, whose social prejudice, latent in the petit-bourgeois culture and ideology, was fed with the fear of social dilution by coexistence with the emerging working class, arising from the expansion of social spaces of common living (malls, airports, stores, clubs, universities, schools etc.) (^{MANCEBO, 2017}).

On the other hand, the emerging sectors of the popular classes (known in the official vocabulary as classes "C" and "D"), although not assuming political protagonism, saw themselves (were projected by the media discourse) as the "new middle class", losing the opportunity to develop their own social and political projects and being "fitted" into the great "petit bourgeois dream of consumerism". In fact, a considerable portion of the former social groups of poor and hungry, classically excluded from the participation in the mechanisms of access to minimum consumption, schooling, health, housing and use of public and private services to ease the effort of social reproduction, effectively occupied a prominent place in the reproductive dynamics of capital in these countries, especially in Brazil, through its newly installed consumer power (even if of basic goods) that became the deflagrating axis of high economic growth rates and steadily falling unemployment rates, even in the midst of the greatest capitalist crisis of the last seventy years (^{KOPPER; DAMO, 2018}).

The picture we face is still hazy. The constitution of a new Historical Bloc is a process that takes decades, even when consciously pursued with clarity and tenacity. The national (and South American regional) panorama does not demonstrate clarity, at least not in a hegemonic way. On the contrary, what is socially and politically demonstrated is the emergence of a 'historical moment' of dispute, in which the old leaders of the continental elites and the new political and social characters, still uncoordinated and confused, are struggling, which suggests the inexistence, until this moment, of a clear hegemonic option and direction. In the void of a clear project of the capitalist elites themselves, orphans of the neoliberal discourse, worn out throughout the Continent, a right-wing, Christian neofascist, eugenicist, sexist, homophobic, reactionary discourse emerges in political, economic and social terms (^{ALMEIDA, 2019}).

The plural debate and the divergence of projects and political and social paths end up, contradictorily, weighing against the forwarding of the change it intends. Added to this point of analysis is the necessary recognition of the role played by the information management and dissemination structure, controlled by sectors of the capital elite in our class societies. The media - spoken, written, televised, and more recently the hegemonic controller of the 'virtual social networks' via the Internet - is effectively an element of construction of meanings and interpretations conservative to capital and reactionary to any alternative social, political and economic project. Effectively, the political action of reaction to changes, even if minimal, in concepts and political and economic directions, has turned this informational system into the biggest 'political party' of the national elites of Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador and Chile, just to name a few countries involved in this context of social changes (^{ARRAIS NETO, 2020}).

In effect, the motivation for the attack on the public institutions of basic education and the federal network of higher education, represented by the Universities and Federal Institutes of Education, Science and Technology, becomes clearer. In fact, it is crystal clear to us that the institutions repositories of the scientific perspective became the focus of the harmful action of fundamentalist and fascist governments and groups, and the picture resulting from this element demonstrates the emergence of a crucial moment for democracy and social progress in Brazil and Latin America (^{ARRAIS NETO, 2020}).

In fact, if we observe the already traditional corporate control exercised over the "mainstream media" system (television, radio and newspaper networks), associated with the diffuse (but effective) control exercised over the new "digital media" or "virtual networks", we will see that ideological control and its political use by the "right" is a recognized fact, having had an influence on the election of candidates with fascist or reactionary profiles in several countries. The other major "institutional spaces" of ideological formation are the churches and the school system, and what can be perceived in an analysis that seeks a comprehensive perspective is that an articulation of all these elements is demonstrated.

The churches, the institutionalized form of manifestation of the religious phenomenon in Latin America, are here basically made up of the Catholic Church, still officially the majority among the population but no longer the preponderant one, and the self-denominated evangelical churches. The latter, it is necessary to clarify, make up a heterogeneous group that includes from Protestant or Reformed churches (Lutherans, Calvinists, Anglicans) and their developments from the USA (Baptists, Methodists, Adventists and others) and more recent churches created in Brazil (Universal and several others) called neo-Pentecostals, based on the theology of prosperity and with a strong relationship with Zionism (^{ALMEIDA, 2019}).

The statements of the great leaders of the largest of these churches, regarding the election of Jair Bolsonaro, in Brazil, as well as regarding all progressive governments on the Continent, had apotheosis in the episode of the coup d'état that occurred in Bolivia, in which the occupants of the presidential palace took office exposing a Bible as a guarantee and justification to tear up the constitutional definitions (^{DANIELLE, 2019}).

Fundamentalism is spreading, both among the more traditional Reformed churches and in Catholicism itself, prey to the upstream tide of reactionary Pentecostalism with which fundamentalism is associated and upon which it erects its counterforts and ideological walls. The situation of the Catholic Church is particularly complex because of the tradition of papal authority. With a humanist and progressive pope, both religiously and socially, economically and politically, the quantitatively majority groups of Catholic Pentecostalism and the bourgeois segments sheltered in some sectors are balanced on a tightrope of pretended obedience, while politically they undermine the effects of the determinations, encyclicals, national councils and episcopal conferences with a progressive content. The reactionary social and political position of these majority sectors of Catholics has stimulated the rise of a fascist Catholic right, which has emerged from the tomb in which it imagined itself buried by the advance of technical and scientific culture, associated with the popularization of secularizing public policies (^{DWa, 2018}). It must be added, in such circumstances, the fact that even the armed forces are articulated with this fundamentalist reactionary wave, failing even to fulfill its constitutional role of ensuring the sovereignty of the country, allowing the delivery of the heritage of nations, in the Brazilian case, the Pre-Salt oil, strategic companies such as Embraer, among others. In the case of Bolivia articulating the coup d'état, and, as in Brazil, Chile and Ecuador, acting with extreme violence against the population (^{SOUZA, 2019}).

The framework of what Althusser would call Ideological State Apparatuses (^{ALTHUSSER, 2009}), then, demonstrates a proposition of power dispute. Controlling the fundamental apparatuses (physical media, digital media, family-churches), there remains as a Gramscian "trench" (^{GRAMSCI, 2011}) in the battle for social and political hegemony the world of schooling, more susceptible to the concepts and perspectives of science, secularism, history, critical philosophy, and free thought. It becomes obvious to any analyst or social observer why these groups attack when they assume state power, in the sense of ideologically controlling the basic education school system, and repressing, with cuts, threats and administrative interventions, the public system of higher education - Universities and Federal Institutes (in the Brazilian case) (^{GALINDO, 2019}). The displacement of the ideological struggle to the institutions of formal education only reflects the importance of this space or trench of civil society as a decisive axis of the counter-hegemonic struggle moved by progressive social sectors.

Behind and underlying the pulverization of particular objects and aspects of struggle (gender freedom, antiracism, feminism, citizenship, self-determination of original peoples, class consciousness, student movement, and youth protagonism), the unity of anti-fundamentalism resistance is the axis of a movement that opposes the political and ideological determinations emanating from the religious right groups that politically control the coup governments throughout South America.

CONCLUSION: THE CURRENT CHALLENGES FOR EDUCATION AND ORGANIZED SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

More clearly, in the last three years (2016-2019), we have concretely seen the sharp dismantling of social rights and economic policies that favored Latin American autochthonous development begin. The victory of the right in Argentina - albeit associated with its collapse - and the return of the left, but we do not know how it will result, associated with the legal-media-military coup in Brazil, with the deposition of President Dilma Rousseff, the harassment of the government of Venezuela, manifested through multiple coup attempts, the most recent coup in Bolivia - and the also return of the left that we do not know what will result, the electoral result in Uruguay, with strong evidence of the criminal use of diffuse structures of falsified information, of misleading propaganda through digital and traditional media, just as it has been in Brazil, have resulted in the destruction of the progressive consensus and the establishment of a reactionary cultural tide, prejudiced against the people themselves, leading to a marked regression of the social security structure. In Brazil, we have collected, since 2017, loss of rights and changes with retrogression in education, widespread cuts in social areas, destruction of labor rights, attempt to destroy the public pension system damaged with considerable social losses, cuts in scientific and academic investments, direct attack on universities, widespread burning throughout the country, especially in the Amazon and Midwest, the total disregard of the federal government in relation to the oil spilled on the Brazilian coast, among other reactionary policies regarding the conquest of social and economic rights.

The picture is very similar in the anti-popular project throughout the Continent, leading us to have to start thinking more deeply, especially us in Brazil, traditionally with our backs turned to the neighboring countries and kneeling before the imperial power of the North. The moment in which we achieved a progressive construction of resistance resulted from the unity of political action of governments that opted for overcoming minor divergences and erecting what was possible based on convergences. The same needs, from now on, to be articulated by the social movements, and by the conscious and mobilized educators, towards a greater unity of political consciousness that favors the action of resistance against the dismantling. The transformation that all Latin American peoples are undergoing, at the end of this second decade, requires the development of these two elements - common consciousness and common struggle.

This general framework of transformations affects the form of capitalist society, Latin American and Brazilian as a specific model, in all its aspects, whether productive and political, as we have been emphasizing, or the collective cultural and subjective aspects of the masses of workers, with a determining influence on the current situation of human formation and the specific processes of worker qualification. The search for a broad understanding that takes into account the complexity, the contradictions and the transformations, both at the global level and in their continental, regional and local expressions, in the case of Brazil, of the several regions and of each State, in particular, dialectically articulated as a whole and as constitutive parts, is the open question of which we have just started to expose through this essay reflection.

We point to the need to combine the efforts of an empirical understanding and of the consequent theoretical formulation that allows to concretely explain and clarify the current development of capitalist society in its totality and in its specific aspects that cover the productive restructuring, its impact and determinations on the qualification and training of workers, the restructuring of the Brazilian State and its policies for professional education and the transformations in the profile of social and workers' subjectivity.

This 'conjugated' effort should not mean uniform thinking, but seems to demand a 'unitary' perspective in the plurality of possibilities, positions and projects. Amidst the diversity of objects of analysis, of social processes evaluated, of possible political and economic directions, the establishment of a unity of direction is fundamental. This unity, starting from the congregation of all progressive groups and sectors against the social, political and religious reactionaryism, must seek a propositional direction. Here also lies the greatest degree of difficulty: the weaving of unitary projects and programs of action, in the midst of the daily needs of resistance and even survival.

In this text, we advocate the central role, not only preponderant, but also determinant, that a critical school education process will have, from basic to higher education, based on full humanistic values, integral development of the human being, and political formation for a universal citizenship. Only this radical and full humanizing construction can keep us congregated in a unity of struggle that becomes a project of reconstruction. Unity, clearly, of direction, meaning the overcoming of the reifying and dehumanizing sociability of capital and its civilization, after all, as expressed by ^{Marx and Engels (2017}), "all that is solid crumbles in air.