They lament the human suffering caused by the sanctions, all the while supporting the imposition of the sanctions. Nor do they raise their voices against military intervention, perhaps the gravest of all crimes against humanity. Liberal establishments such as the advocacy group Washington Office on Latin America WOLA try to distinguish themselves from hardline imperialists by opposing a military invasion in Venezuela while calling for yet more effective and punishing sanctions. In effect, they play the role of the good cop, providing a liberal cover for interference in the internal affairs of Latin American nations.
But why do some organizations claiming to be leftist so unerringly echo the imperialists, taking such umbrage over Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua while ignoring far greater problems in, say, Mexico, Colombia, and Honduras, which are US client states? The Organization of American States officially observed and certified the vote. Polls indicated Ortega was perhaps the most popular head of state in the entire western hemisphere. These are reasons enough for a progressive alternative such as Nicaragua to curry the enmity of the US.
The enigma is why those claiming to be leftists would target a country that had:. In April of this year, all of this was threatened. Suddenly and unexpectedly, a cabal of the reactionary Catholic Church hierarchy, conservative business associations, remnants of the US-sponsored Contras, and students from private universities attempted a coup. Through inciting violence and the skillful use of disinformation in a concerted social media barrage, they attempted to achieve by extra-legal means what they could not achieve democratically.
Some leftish groups and individuals pick up these signals, amplify, and rebroadcast them.ciimandrotasoo.gq/property-rights-in-social-democracy-cato-unbound.php
While they may genuinely believe what they are promulgating, there are also rewards such as funding,media coverage, hobnobbing with prominent US politicians, and winning awards for abhorring the excesses of imperialism while accepting its premises. The political reality in Latin America is that a rightwing offensive is attacking standing left-leaning governments.
President George W. Each of us has to determine who are the real terrorists, as the juggernaut of US imperialism rolls out a neoliberal world order.
- The Manor House of De Villerai.
- Cookies and Privacy!
- Baran and Underdevelopment.
- The imperialist coup in Venezuela: a decolonial analysis | Decolonial International Network.
For now, the coup in Nicaragua has been averted. Had it succeeded, chaos would have reigned. As even the most ardent apologists for the opposition admit, the only organized force in the opposition was the US-sponsored rightwing which would have instigated a reign of terror against the Sandinista base. The US would prefer to install stable rightwing client states or even military dictatorships.
But if neither can be achieved, chaos is the preferred alternative. Libya, where rival warlords contest for power and slaves are openly bartered on the street, is the model coming to Latin America. The imperialists understand that the progressive social movements in Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba are too popular and entrenched to be eradicated by a mere change of personnel in the presidential palace. Much more drastic means are envisioned; means that would make the bloody aftermath of the US-backed Pinochet coup in in Chile pale by comparison. In Venezuela, for example, the opposition might well have won the May presidential election given the dire economic situation caused in large part by the US sanctions.
The opposition split between a moderate wing that was willing to engage in electoral struggle and a hard-right wing that advocated a violent takeover and jailing the chavistas. Within the same sphere this mutual guarantee might take many different forms. The role of state loans is especially important.
The more extensive the internal loan operations are, the more closely are all the branches of production tied economically to the state power. This tie originates and is accomplished in the sphere of circulation. The supreme regulator is the state bank. It is interesting that the structure of the latter institution is not the same in all countries.
As a joint-stock society it is directed by state officials, who are appointed by the Emperor on the advice of the Bundesrat. In this connection we should also remember the so-called regulation of consumption. In fact, this sphere belongs entirely to circulation. It is a process of distributing goods, not of consuming them, for the latter lies beyond the limits of any economic investigation. We have in mind as well the numerous ration cards and other measures: cards for bread, butter, meat, etc. In certain countries the intervention of state power has assumed enormous dimensions. Now let us summarize.
In total contrast to the state in the epoch of industrial capitalism, the imperialist state is characterized by an extraordinary increase in the complexity of its functions and by an impetuous incursion into the economic life of society. It reveals a tendency to take over the whole productive sphere and the whole sphere of commodity circulation. Intermediate types of mixed enterprises will be replaced by pure state regulation, for in this way the centralization process can advance further. All the members of the ruling classes or, more accurately, of the ruling class, for finance capitalism gradually eliminates the different subgroups of the ruling classes, uniting them in a single finance-capitalist clique become shareholders, or partners in a gigantic state-enterprise.
In the same way as market prices are determined by the state, the workers are assigned a ration sufficient for the preservation of labor power. A hierarchically constructed bureaucracy fulfils the organizing functions in complete accord with the military authorities, whose significance and power steadily grow. The national economy is absorbed into the state, which is constructed in a military fashion and has at its disposal an enormous, disciplined army and navy. In their struggle the workers must confront all the might of this monstrous apparatus, for their every advance will be aimed directly against the state: the economic and the political struggle cease to be two categories, and the revolt against exploitation will signify a direct revolt against the state organization of the bourgeoisie.
All of these developments lie in the near future, unless a social catastrophe occurs before the pure type of economic relations we have been describing can take shape. It is easy to qualify in socio-economic terms the mode of production whose undeveloped form is represented by the contemporary Kriegssozialismus , i.
Many bourgeois theorists speak of state socialism. Professor Krahmann, for example, whom we have cited previously, writes:. The powerful influence of all the means currently employed to support the state and defend the Fatherland, means that have been adopted by the state out of military considerations, will be to move us.
But this change will not occur in the way which some have dreaded and for which others have hoped. This is not a loose international, but a nationally consolidated, socialism that we are approaching. It is not a democratic communism; still less is it an aristocratic class government: it is a nationalism that reconciles classes . And the revisionist E. In the ideal type of imperialist state the process of exploitation is not hidden by any secondary forms: the mask of a supraclass institution that looks after everyone alike is torn away from the state.
This is the basic fact, and it thoroughly demolishes the arguments of the renegades. For socialism is regulated production, regulated by society, not by the state state socialism is about as useful as leaky boots ; it is the elimination of class contradictions, not their intensification. On its own, the regulation of production is far from signifying socialism: it occurs in every familial economy, among every slave-owning natural-economic group. What we in fact expect in the near future is state capitalism.
A single protest might be raised against such a designation, namely, that the logical extreme and pure type of the relations now emerging would entail the elimination of hired labor. Just as market prices are replaced by regulated distribution of the product, so the wage form would disappear and along with it hired labor as such. The worker would become a slave. And since hired labor represents one of the most characteristic features of capitalism, it is impossible to use the term capitalism to designate relations that involve the elimination of hired labor.
Nevertheless, we would accept this complaint as being correct and would introduce some new designation for the type of relations now being formed only in one event — that is, if a single world economy were in existence. Insofar as this is not the case for reasons we have discussed in Kommunist , a single world economy represents an impossible hope , and insofar as the anarchy of the world market remains, the categories of value and wages are also preserved — with the single difference that now the position of the separate enterprise has been taken by the state enterprise.
The labor market will become the world market for labor, and the movement of workers from one state to another will gather momentum. Likewise, we must not think that the state will be able to establish whatever prices it dreams up, or that the law of labor value loses its significance, for it would be absurd to imagine a closed state and economic autarky. The pressure of the world market remains.
Thus, state capitalism is the completed form of a state-capitalist trust. If we consider the capitalist state we see that during the epoch of commercial capitalism, at the dawn of its development, capitalism bore the mark of the state on its brow. State intervention flourished both externally and within the country, including the regulation of foreign trade, a system of premiums and every type of protectionism, the granting of privileges, etc. The ensuing stage of capitalist development represented a complete negation of the mercantilist epoch.
Industrial capitalism found its political expression in liberalism. In reality, we have entered a new stage of development. But we must not assume that the organizational process has embraced the economy alone: its significance is much more general and profound. One could even say with a certain legitimacy that the bourgeoisie has not left a single corner of social life completely unorganized. For spiritual cultivation of the masses there is the church organization, with its far-flung apparatus, the school and the organized press. The academies see to the organization of science, along with learned conferences, specialized publications, and an endless stream of specialized institutions of every type libraries, museums, experimental stations, laboratories, and observatories, which are genuine scientific factories, etc.
Bourgeois politics are also organized. Never before has there been such a close union of the bourgeois riffraff as there is today, in the epoch of finance capitalism. All of the formerly differentiated political organizations of the ruling classes are gradually losing their differentia specifica, being transformed into a single imperialist party.
The Imperialist backlash on Empire
All-embracing blocs of all the imperialist parties — particularly when it is a question of the common struggle against revolutionary social democracy — complete unity on questions of foreign policy, the disappearance of all the remnants of democracy and the former liberalism: all of these trends clearly illustrate the process. The degree to which this universal organizational process embraces all and sundry can be seen simply by listing the multitude of societies, circles, associations, and other organizations, no matter what the area. Take, for example, propaganda on behalf of colonial policy.
In other words, a multitude of various types of bourgeois organizations emerges we shall speak of proletarian organizations later , and they overlap one another in the most diverse realms. The separate representatives of the ruling classes take their seats in different cells, which grow within definite limits, work out the collective will, and pose and resolve common tasks.
Finally, the requirements of imperialist development compel bourgeois society to mobilize all of its forces, to extend its organization throughout the broadest possible context: the state absorbs into itself the whole multitude of bourgeois organizations. Here, too, the war provided an enormous stimulus. In the press it was announced that the capitalists had raised the question of producing nitroglycerine from the colossal number of corpses being produced by the war; all that was needed was to discover in a scientific manner the best method of doing so, a method that by virtue of the cheapness of the raw material would promise enormous profits.
We do not know how true this report is or whether such ingenious thoughts really did enter the head of some worthy bourgeois. But the report — in the form of a caricature, it is true — does express the real state of affairs. And just as the worn-out parts from machines or industrial experiments are utilized in some other productive process, so the energy locked up in human corpses can also be used.
From this viewpoint, which is unique to the imperialist state, the work of doctors, sisters of mercy, the Red Cross, and similar organizations represents a repair job done on those instruments of imperialist competition that are worn out, but are still suitable for further use.
As for the scholars, who are struggling with gum diseases, typhus, and cholera, their work is that of a lubricator who applies the oil and eliminates excessive friction in an enormous, death-dealing machine. That is how it is once state power becomes the center of attraction for these organizations and converts them into subordinate organs of the state giant.
Then other organizations begin to spring up, their numbers multiplying especially in the epoch of finance capitalism. The state is transformed from the sole organization of the ruling class into one of its organizations, its distinction being that it has the most general character of all such organizations. Finally, the third stage arrives, in which the state swallows up these organizations and once more becomes the sole universal organization of the ruling class, with an internal, technical division of labor. The once-independent organizational groupings become the divisions of a gigantic state mechanism, which pounces upon the visible and internal enemy with crushing force.
Thus emerges the finished type of the contemporary imperialist robber state, the iron organization, which with its tenacious, raking claws embraces the living body of society. Now we must turn to a perfectly natural question — the role played by the workers and proletarian organizations.
This process indicates that the second outcome is becoming increasingly probable and that the national-imperialist labor policy will be overcome by the international socialist revolution. The material basis for such an outcome is the differentiated influence of imperialist policy on the position of the bourgeoisie compared with that of the proletariat.
But now imperialism has displayed its aggressive side; and the more it does so, the greater is the burden it imposes on the international proletariat. Whereas the imperialist bourgeoisie sees vital necessity in continuation of the imperialist policy, the proletariat sees an equal necessity in the destruction of imperialism, and of capitalist production along with it.
Any further development of the state organisms — before the socialist revolution — is possible only in the form of militaristic state capitalism. Centralization is becoming the centralization of a barracks. In the upper stratum of society a vile military clique is inevitably growing in strength, resulting in brutal drilling and bloody repression of the proletariat. On the other hand, we have already seen that any activity by the proletariat, under these conditions, is inevitably directed against state power.
Hence, a definite tactical demand: Social democracy must forcefully underline its hostility, in principle, to state power. So far as parliaments are concerned, social democracy must vote against the introduction of all monopolies, all customs unions, etc. Certain adherents of the party center attempt in vain to demonstrate that such innovations signify economic regression. But that is not the reason for our tactic. The real point is that this progress is nothing more than reinforcement and support for militarism and imperialism. To support the contemporary state means to support militarism.
In our day the historical task is not to worry about further development of the productive forces they are perfectly adequate for the realization of socialism , but to prepare a universal attack upon the ruling gangsters. Having beaten back every counterattack of the reaction and cleared the way for the free development of socialist humanity, the proletariat, in the final analysis, abolishes its own dictatorship as well, once and for all driving an aspen stake.
This article was intended for Sbornik Sotsial-Demokrata, a periodical publication of the Central Committee that began to appear after Kommunist ceased to exist. The editors of the Sbornik did not consider it possible to include the article, suggesting that it developed incorrect views concerning the state. After I received the refusal from Sbornik S-D, I wrote a number of short articles, developing the same system of views. Ingerman in the New York paper Novyi Mir. Perhaps I should have further developed the theme of the dictatorship at that time.
But in my defense I can say that at that time there was such indiscriminate Social-Democratic glorification of the bourgeois state that it was natural to concentrate all attention on the question of the explosion of this machine. See Gumplowicz, Geschichte der Staatstheorien Innsbruck, , p. See also his Der Staat published by M. On the difference between economics and politics for this author, see Theorie der und politischen Oekonomie 2nd ed.
Berlin, See G. Schmoller Jahrbucher, , p. Interesting theoretical observations of a general character are found in E. But even if the state is viewed as a secret illness of the masses, it is incomprehensible why it was not cured by the pure air of America. The strain inherent in O. The Russian Empire exploited and suppressed Cossacks hosts during this period, before turning them into the special military estate Sosloviye in the late 18th century.
Cossacks were then used in Imperial Russian campaigns against other tribes. Bolshevik leaders had effectively reestablished a polity with roughly the same extent as that empire by , however with an internationalist ideology: Lenin in particular asserted the right to limited self-determination for national minorities within the new territory. Never formally revoked, it stopped being implemented after After World War II, the Soviet Union installed socialist regimes modeled on those it had installed in —20 in the old Russian Empire , in areas its forces occupied in Eastern Europe.
Trotsky , and others, believed that the revolution could only succeed in Russia as part of a world revolution. Lenin wrote extensively on the matter and famously declared that Imperialism was the highest stage of capitalism. However, after Lenin's death, Joseph Stalin established ' socialism in one country ' for the Soviet Union, creating the model for subsequent inward looking Stalinist states and purging the early Internationalist elements.
The internationalist tendencies of the early revolution would be abandoned until they returned in the framework of a client state in competition with the Americans during the Cold War. In the after Stalin period in the late s, the new political leader Nikita Khrushchev put pressure on the Soviet-American relations starting a new wave of anti-imperialist propaganda. In his speech on the UN conference in , he announced the continuation of the war on imperialism, stating that soon the people of different countries will come together and overthrow their imperialist leaders.
Although the Soviet Union declared itself anti-imperialist , critics argue that it exhibited traits common to historic empires. Some also argued that the USSR practiced colonialism as did other imperial powers and was carrying on the old Russian tradition of expansion and control. Moreover, the ideas of imperialism were widely spread in action on the higher levels of government. A former colony itself, the early United States expressed its opposition to Imperialism, at least in a form distinct from its own Manifest Destiny , through policies such as the Monroe Doctrine.
They were often backed by military force, but were more often effected from behind the scenes. This is consistent with the general notion of hegemony and imperium of historical empires. One year later, a war erupted in the Philippines causing business, labor and government leaders in the US to condemn America's occupation in the Philippines as they also denounced them for causing the deaths of many Filipinos. Roosevelt was opposed to European colonialism, especially in India.
He pulled back when Britain's Winston Churchill demanded that victory in the war be the first priority. Roosevelt expected that the United Nations would take up the problem of decolonization. Some have described the internal strife between various people groups as a form of imperialism or colonialism. This internal form is distinct from informal U. This internal form of empire has been referred to as "internal colonialism". The western world forgets during this process of converting the other that enlightenment and democracy are concepts that not all will agree upon".
Spanish imperialism in the colonial era corresponds with the rise and decline of the Spanish Empire , conventionally recognized as emerging in with the conquest of the Canary Islands. Following the successes of exploratory maritime voyages conducted during the Age of Discovery , such as those undertaken by Christopher Columbus , Spain committed considerable financial and military resources towards developing a robust navy capable of conducting large-scale, transatlantic expeditionary operations in order to establish and solidify a firm imperial presence across portions of North America, South America, and the geographic regions comprising the Caribbean basin.
Concomitant with Spanish endorsement and sponsorship of transatlantic expeditionary voyages was the deployment of Conquistadors , which further expanded Spanish imperial boundaries through the acquisition and development of territories and colonies. In congruence with the colonialist activities of competing European imperial powers throughout the 15th — 19th centuries, the Spanish were equally engrossed in extending geopolitical power.
The Caribbean basin functioned as a key geographic focal point for advancing Spanish imperialism. Similar to the strategic prioritization Spain placed towards achieving victory in the conquests of the Aztec Empire and Inca Empire , Spain placed equal strategic emphasis on expanding the nation's imperial footprint within the Caribbean basin.
Echoing the prevailing ideological perspectives regarding colonialism and imperialism embraced by Spain's European rivals during the colonial era, including the English, French, and the Dutch, the Spanish utilized colonialism as a means of expanding imperial geopolitical borders and securing the defense of maritime trade routes in the Caribbean basin. While leveraging colonialism in the same geographic operating theater as its imperial rivals, Spain maintained distinct imperial objectives and instituted a unique form of colonialism in support of its imperial agenda.
Spain placed significant strategic emphasis on the acquisition, extraction, and exportation of precious metals primarily gold and silver. A second objective was the evangelization of subjugated indigenous populations residing in mineral-rich and strategically favorable locations. Compulsory labor and slavery were widely institutionalized across Spanish-occupied territories and colonies, with an initial emphasis on directing labor towards mining activity and related methods of procuring semi-precious metals.
The emergence of the Encomienda system during the 16th—17th centuries in occupied colonies within the Caribbean basin reflects a gradual shift in imperial prioritization, increasingly focusing on large-scale production and exportation of agricultural commodities. The scope and scale of Spanish participation in imperialism within the Caribbean basin remains a subject of scholarly debate among historians. A fundamental source of contention stems from the inadvertent conflation of theoretical conceptions of imperialism and colonialism.
Furthermore, significant variation exists in the definition and interpretation of these terms as expounded by historians, anthropologists, philosophers, and political scientists. Among historians, there is substantial support in favor of approaching imperialism as a conceptual theory emerging during the 18th—19th centuries, particularly within Britain, propagated by key exponents such as Joseph Chamberlain and Benjamin Disraeli.
In accordance with this theoretical perspective, the activities of the Spanish in the Caribbean are not components of a preeminent, ideologically-driven form of imperialism. Rather, these activities are more accurately classified as representing a form of colonialism. Further divergence among historians can be attributed to varying theoretical perspectives regarding imperialism that are proposed by emerging academic schools of thought. Noteworthy examples include cultural imperialism , whereby proponents such as John Downing and Annabelle Sreberny-Modammadi define imperialism as " In spite of diverging perspectives and the absence of a unilateral scholarly consensus regarding imperialism among historians, within the context of Spanish expansion in the Caribbean basin during the colonial era, imperialism can be interpreted as an overarching ideological agenda that is perpetuated through the institution of colonialism.
The Imperialist by Sara Jeannette Duncan
In this context, colonialism functions as an instrument designed to achieve specific imperialist objectives. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Policy or ideology of extending a nation's rule over foreign nations. For other uses, see Imperialism disambiguation.
Primary topics. Index of politics articles Politics by country Politics by subdivision Political economy Political history Political history of the world Political philosophy. Political systems. Academic disciplines. Political science political scientists. International relations theory. Public administration. Bureaucracy street-level Adhocracy. Public policy doctrine Domestic and foreign policy Civil society Public interest. Organs of government. Separation of powers Legislature Executive Judiciary Election commission. Related topics. Sovereignty Theories of political behavior Political psychology Biology and political orientation Political organisations Foreign electoral intervention.
See also: Cartographic propaganda. Main articles: International relations, — and International relations of the Great Powers — Great Britain. Main article: Chinese imperialism. Main article: French colonial empire. See also: Criticism of communist party rule and Soviet Empire. Main article: American imperialism. Globalization Hegemony Historiography of the British Empire Imperialism in Leninist theory Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism International relations of the Great Powers — International relations, — List of empires List of largest empires Oil imperialism theories Pluricontinentalism Postcolonialism Scientific imperialism Super-imperialism Suzerainty Ultra-imperialism Uneven and combined development Western European colonialism and colonization.
Gertrude Millin , Rhodes , London: , p. Retrieved 22 February Lewis, An Elementary Latin Dictionary, imperium inp- ". Retrieved 11 September Teorier om imperialism in Swedish. Culture and Imperialism. Vintage Publishers, Empire, colony, postcolony. Key Concepts in Political Geography. London: SAGE. Political Geography 2nd ed. Empire: A Very Short Introduction.
Oxford University Press. Princeton University Press. Sage knowledge. Key Concepts in Human Geography. Modern Imperialism. Lexington, Massachusetts: D. Key Concepts in Political Geography : Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography : Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography : 7. Key Thinkers on Space and Place , 2nd. Los Angeles, Calif:Sage Publications. Geographies of Postcolonialism. Los Angeles:London:Sage Publications.
New York:Vintage. Los Angeles: London: Sage Publications. Los Angeles:London: Sage Publications. New York: Vintage. Sage Publications Ltd. Roger Louis, Imperialism p. The great illusion: — Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers. New Series. Stearns Pearson Education, Inc. Hobson and Alfred Zimmern Reconsidered," History 89 pp. How Europe underdeveloped Africa.
London: Bogle-L'Ouverture Publications. In Key concepts in political geography pp. London: SAGE: "[ Canada in the Making. Archived from the original on October 8, Retrieved February 3, Navies in Modern World History. London: Reaktion Books. BBC History. Retrieved 28 April Cambridge University Press.
Great Britain: a reference guide from the Renaissance to the present. New York: Facts on File. America at War. New York: Britannica Educational Publishing. Langer, The Diplomacy of Imperialism: — 2nd ed. Retrieved 13 April Cambridge UP. Lehigh University. Retrieved December 9, National University of Singapore. The History Place. New histories for the Empire : — Lenin Critical Remarks on the National Question. The U. Holocaust Memorial Museum. Retrieved December 30, Page Abingdon, New York: Routledge. Foreign Affairs. Archived from the original on May 1, Retrieved June 13, Needs to Walk Softly".
Council on Foreign Relations. Archived from the original on July 20, The Times.
Related The Imperialist
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved