friedrich list, PROPHET OF NATIONAL POWER - of LDCs - Less Developed Countries

[Charles Brown]

I think Louis is referring to Lenin's analysis
of a new phase of capitalist development
at the end of the 1800's , which he
called imperialism after Hobson or
someone else. Of course there was
capitalist colonialism before that (and
empires before that)  but
Marxism now reserves the term 
"imperialism" for  state-monopoly,
export of capital, financial oligarchy,
tendency to general war, and other
characterisitcs pinpointed by Lenin.

Charles Brown


>From the market to the Marxit 


>>> Rakesh Bhandari <bhandari at phoenix.Princeton.EDU> 09/26 3:03 PM >>>
In response to Louis P, I cite Roman Szporluk:

In List's analysis of the relations between the nations of the 'temperate
zone' (which included europe and norht america) and those of what he
called the 'torrid zone' of the globe, the idea of equality of nations was
absent...."the mfg power especially prospers, by means of which the nation
not merely attains to the highest degree of mental and social development
and of political power, but is also enabled to make the countries of
tropical climates and of interior civilization tributatry in a certain
measure to itelf. The countries of the temperate zone therefore are above
all others called upon to bring their own national division of labor to
the highest perfection,a nd to use the international division of labor for
their enrichment." (List)Upon this premise, List demanded that England
stop trying to exclude the large nations of Europe from joining in the
growing trade between the North and South. p.126 of Communism and
Nationalism. 

Louis writes:


> This is hopelessly ahistorical. List died in 1846, well before imperialism
> was understood in Marxist terms. Perhaps Rakesh wants to use a non-Marxist
> definition of imperialism to go along with his non-Marxist definition of
> fascism. Why not go all the way.

Proyect should refer himself to Marx's analysis of how the advanced
capitalist countries had already set up an international division  of
labor suited to themselves. Perhaps that's a historical too and a non
Marxist definition. Too bad it's in Vol I of Capital, circa 1867. 

L