A Modest Proposal for The Empire

Greg Schofield g_schofield at dingoblue.net.au
Fri Dec 28 07:53:11 PST 2001


--- Message Received --- From: "Charles Brown" <CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 09:52:37 -0500 Subject: A Modest Proposal for The Empire

Charles as I have been peddling the same stuff for some time now, perhaps I should change tack. You make several important points.

1) Truly today is a modified imperialism. 2)So, today's "globalization" is an affirmation of the general direction of Lenin's analysis, not a deviation from it. Lenin's is a theory of the internationalization of capital, imperialism. 3)Today we have potentially a qualitatively new type of World War initiated by Bush.

My particular problem has been that of periodization, when a qualitative change in the contradictions of capital leads to a new dominant arrangement. If I simply leave aside this, then I can fully agree with your points above.

The trick is to understand the modification and the qualitative change this brings about.

The problem however remains, if we simply add to Lenin at a certian point we break with his logic - that is we loose the particulars of the period he described and end up with a generalisied theory which appears to fit the facts but misses the all important qualitative changes.

For the sake of argument lets leave Imperialism intact as merely the logical end product of classic imperialism (ie competition between imperial powers leads to a single winner).

Just in this simple extension we need to address the contradictions which specifically emerge from this development and these cannot be the same old contradictions. For instance your point 3 is all important we are looking at a World War of a different type and one which does not derive from competition between imperial powers, nor is it strictly speaking a war to create colonies, semi-colonies or dependencies.

I would add a point 4, National Liberation struggles as we have known them literally have no place to go - the impetus that would have previously lead to them as progressive struggles has, for the most part, taken on a darker aspect of intense communal civil wars ( at least a great many seem deflected from any direct opposition to US imperialism).

A point 5, might be the direct competition between workers of different countries, a relatively new aspect, or a least a more intense form of such competition.

Just these points alone demand a thorough rethink - what does not cut any ice is simply labling things Imperialistic when there is no current theory which takes these new aspects on board. You mentioned the export of capital, no doubt it happens to some degree, but what I can work out the massive and crippling loans which reduced countries to neo-colonies took place decades ago and the major exports now are in the form of loan extensions (I am not quite sure how much actual capital moves in this case).

My last point is that Lenin saw the motion towards the internationalization of capital, in fact one way of reading Imperialism is as a recipe for just such a development. But then the problem immediately arises that the logic which brings forth such a development has to be different (modified) once it is achieved.

Lenin is a sound starting point, in fact I can imagine no other foundation on which to build, but whichever way we turn Imperialism we cannot escape the need for some great extension of the theory in order to understand the present period (something which 30 years ago was not an issue).

Essentially we get back to some form of periodization, is this Bourgeois Socialism? Super-Imperialism? Mature Imperialism? (I am open to suggestions), one thing is certain, it is not Classic Imperialism.

The problem is so long as we simply fish out the bits that seem to fit, arbitarily modify the theory, or just simply chant orthodoxy we will not get closer to understanding our period.

Lenin's Imperialism ushered in a period of struggle precisely because as a theory it made the period understandable and suggested by its logic the general direction of political struggle. I place this as being more important than the Russian Revolution itself - the idea of Imperialism as a then new period in capital's development was the touch stone of so much class struggle.

My optimism is that if we can get this period straight, if we can clearly understand its particular contradictions (the very essence of what has been in fact modified) then we stand a goiod chance of refounding a direction for political class struggle. Without it I fear we remain at sea.

Greg Schofield Perth Australia g_schofield at dingoblue.net.au _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________

Use LesTecML Mailer (http://www.lestec.com.au/) * Powerful filters. * Create you own headers. * Have email types launch scripts. * Use emails to automat your work. * Add comments on recieve. * Use scripts to extract and check emails. * Use MAID to create taylor-made solutions. * LesTecML Mailer is fully controlled by REXX. * A REXX interpreter is freely available. _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list