t-test

Ho
H1
Korelasi
Ada hubungan Antara iklim komunnikasi dan kinerja pgw Hr neg ,
71 ada korelsai yg negatif -- iklim kom neg thdp kinerja.
Kalau sdh ada korelasi ada pengaruh lih. Via linear regression
Keyano !7 g" m#
spss - Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. Among the most widely used
software for survey analysis. See our statistical software page for more about
such software.
$hat is %ultural &mperialism' (he )eelopment of a *edia (heory
Apr 1+, ,-11
.uke Arnott
*!)onaldi/ation an 0lement of %ultural &mperialism - Ian Muttoo
%ultural imperialism theory looks at media and !ore-periphery relations.
1ften !ontrasted with globali/ation, %& theory has been reied in the
,---s.
(he media theory of !ultural imperialism was 2rst deeloped in the mid-
twentieth !entury. 1riginally, it was a response to so!ietal !hanges after
the spread of adan!ed tele!ommuni!ations.
Although arious models of globali/ation displa!ed it during the 13#-s, %&
theory has been reied in the twenty-2rst !entury. Here is an outline of
the media theory4s deelopment and main ideas.
(he 5ost-$ar 6eginnings of %ultural &mperialism (heory
(he 2rst important insight of %& theory was that histori!al patterns of
7traditional7 imperialism 8 i.e., politi!al and military domination 8 !an be
applied to new patterns of ele!troni! !ommuni!ation.
9esponding to the situation in the two de!ades following $orld $ar &&,
Herbert :!hiller identi2ed the ;nited :tates as the preeminent imperial
power of the time. $hat gae Ameri!an as!endan!y a stru!ture di<erent
from preious imperial proje!ts, a!!ording to :!hiller, was its 7marriage of
e!onomi!s and ele!troni!s.7
(he self-denying aspe!t of Ameri!an imperialism was another noelty=
unlike the 6ritish, Ameri!an o>!ials downplayed their position of power.
1
?et :!hiller maintained in Mass Communications and American Empire that
7to less o>!ially-oriented obserers there !an be a di<erent reading whi!h
sees an aggressie and powerful industrial-ele!troni!s !omple@ working to
e@tend the Ameri!an so!io-e!onomi! system spatially and ideologi!ally.7
(hus for :!hiller neither the good intentions, nor the la!k of self-
awareness, of the imperial power negates the fa!t of empire.
%oming from a tradition of Ameri!an !ommuni!ations studies, %& theory
was parti!ularly !on!erned with broad!ast media and te!hnologi!al
infrastru!ture. %& theory also assumed a simplisti! model of audien!e
re!eption and a hierar!hi!al framework for understanding international
power relations.
9ead on
Alobali/ation and %ultural )iersity
%olonialism And &mperialism, Afri!a4s (win $oes
%olin :parks :peaks of Alobali/ation
Brom %ultural &mperialism to *edia &mperialism
(he pre!ise role of the media, beyond their role in military
!ommuni!ations networks or state propaganda, was undeeloped in early
%& theory formulations.
1lier 6oyd-6arrett sought to re!tify this in the 137-s with his !on!ept of
media imperialism. 6oyd-6arrett agreed that the Cow of media a!tiities
internationally was notable for its highly unidire!tional nature and the
limited sour!es from whi!h these a!tiities !ome. Dot only were most
media produ!ts disseminated from the ;nited :tates and a handful of
0uropean !ountries, but the ultimate sour!es were mostly Ameri!an media
!onglomerates.
6oyd-6arrett de2ned media imperialism as 7the pro!ess whereby the
ownership, stru!ture, distribution or !ontent of the media in any one
!ountry are singly or together subje!t to substantial e@ternal pressures
from the media interests of any other !ountry or !ountries without
proportionate re!ipro!ation of inCuen!e by the !ountry so a<e!ted.7
&n this formulation, 7imperialism7 is an appropriate label be!ause there is
an element of 7!ultural inasion7 as well as an 7imbalan!e of power
relations7 between the !ountries inoled. (he nation-state remained the
unit of measure, howeer, as media ownership was framed by nationality.
CI Theory and Core-Periphery Models
Another feature asso!iated with !ultural imperialism is the 7!ore-
periphery7 model. (he idea of power and !ultural Cow emanating from
metropolitan !enters or deeloped !ountries to the rest of the world
originated in the 13"-s, in relation to dis!ussions of e!onomi! power.
1ne ersion of this idea, and some of its !ultural impli!ations, had already
been deeloped by %anadian e!onomist and media theorist Harold &nnis.
6ut &nnis4s approa!h was far more nuan!ed than that of his fellow
e!onomists, and had little inCuen!e at the time 8 an early and ironi!
e@ample, perhaps, of !ultural imperialism at work.
9egardless, some ersion of the !ore-periphery model4s assumptions
about !ontrol is impli!it in %& theory formulations, whether the fo!us is on
e!onomi!, te!hnologi!al, or !ultural disparities.
Globalization and CI Theory Critiques
:!hiller and 6oyd-6arrett4s positions would be !ritiEued in the 13#-s and
133-s in light of deelopments in digital !ommuni!ations te!hnologies and
neoliberal e!onomi! poli!ies. &t was thought, broadly speaking, that faster,
!heaper, and more widespread !ommuni!ations, !oupled with free
2
markets, rendered the kind of !ontrol des!ribed and denoun!ed by %&
theory obsolete.
(hough many of these !ritiEues would !ome to be !ategori/ed as
7globali/ation7 arguments, the term itself remained problemati!. .ike %&
theory, globali/ation theory would hae di<erent bran!hes, whose
proponents fo!used on di<erent !ultural, e!onomi!, and politi!al
phenomena.
;nlike %& theory, howeer, globali/ation would be!ome a popular rubri!
amongst non-a!ademi!s, poli!y-makers, and un!riti!al s!holars. )aid
Harey has !alled globali/ation a 7seemingly neutral mask7 to gloss oer
troubling issues of power and disparity.
As these imbalan!es hae grown more pronoun!ed after the 133-s,
!ultural imperialism theory has been rehabilitated. Dow transnational
!orporations, rather than nation-states, are seen as the agents of !ultural
imperialism, amassing greater !ontrol oer the ownership and Cow of
!ultural produ!ts.
Sources
6oyd-6arrett, 1lier. ,-1-. 7*edia imperialism reformulated.7 &n
International communication: A reader, ed. )aya (hussu, 1+3-1"+.
.ondonF 9outledge.
GGG. 1377. 7*edia imperialismF (owards an international framework for
the analysis of media systems.7 &n Mass communication and society, ed.
Hames %urran, *i!hael Aureit!h, and Hanet $oolla!ott, 11I-1+". .ondonF
Arnold.
Harey, )aid. ,--". 7Brom globali/ation to the new imperialism.7 &n
Critical globalization studies, ed. 9i!hard Applebaum and $illiam
9obinson, 31-1--. Dew ?orkF 9outledge.
:!hiller, Herbert. ,--,. 7Dot yet the post-imperialist era.7 &n Media and
cultural studies: Keyworks, ed. *eenakshi Aigi )urham and )ouglas
Kellner, +13-+++. %ambridgeF 6la!kwell.
GGG. 13I3. Mass communications and American empire. Dew ?orkF
Augustus *. Kelly.
$atson, Ale@ander Hohn. ,--I. Marginal man: The dark vision o !arold
Innis. (orontoF ;niersity of (oronto 5ress.
9ead more at :uite1-1F $hat is %ultural &mperialism' (he )eelopment of
a *edia (heory J :uite1-1.!om httpFKKwww.suite1-1.!omK!ontentKwhat-is-
!ultural-imperialism-the-deelopment-of-a-media-theory-
a+I,L1"Mi@//1*7I("glh
%ultural imperialism

Brom $ikipedia .ast modi2ed on ,3 April ,-11, at
-1F"1
(his arti!le has multiple issues. 5lease help dis!uss these on the talk
page.
&t needs additional references or sources for verication. (agged sin!e
Bebruary ,-1-.
&t may reEuire general cleanup to meet $ikipedia4s Euality standards.
(agged sin!e Bebruary ,-1-.
3
%ultural imperialism is the domination of one !ulture oer another other by
a deliberate poli!y or by e!onomi! or te!hnologi!al superiority. Cultural
imperialism !an take the form of an a!tie, formal poli!y or a general
attitude. A metaphor of !olonialism is employedF the !ultural produ!ts of
the 2rst world 7inade7 the third-world and 7!onEuer7 lo!al !ulture.
N1O
&n the
stronger ariants of the term, world domination Pin a !ultural senseQ is the
e@pli!it goal of the nation-states or multinational !orporations that e@port
the !ulture.
N1O
(he term is usually used in a pejoratie sense, often in
!onjun!tion with a !all to reje!t su!h inCuen!e.

(able of %ontents
16a!kground and de2nitions
,(heory and debate

,.
1
%ultural diersity

,.
,
:aid and post-!olonial studies

,.
+
9othkopf on dealing with !ultural
dominan!e
+:ee also
LDotes
"9eferen!es
I0@ternal links
6a!kground and de2nitions
(he term appears to hae emerged in the 13I-s.
N,O
and has been a fo!us
of resear!h sin!e at least the 137-s.
N+O
(erms su!h as 7media imperialism7,
7stru!tural imperialism7, 7!ultural dependen!y and domination7, 7!ultural
syn!hroni/ation7, 7ele!troni! !olonialism7, 7ideologi!al imperialism7, and
7e!onomi! imperialism7 hae all been used to des!ribe the same basi!
notion of !ultural imperialism.
NLO
Various a!ademi!s gie arious de2nitions of the term. Ameri!an media
!riti! Herbert :!hiller wroteF 7(he !on!ept of !ultural imperialism today
N137"O best des!ribes the sum of the pro!esses by whi!h a so!iety is
brought into the modern world system and how its dominating stratum is
attra!ted, pressured, for!ed, and sometimes bribed into shaping so!ial
institutions to !orrespond to, or een promote, the alues and stru!tures
of the dominating !entre of the system. (he publi! media are the foremost
e@ample of operating enterprises that are used in the penetratie pro!ess.
Bor penetration on a signi2!ant s!ale the media themseles must be
!aptured by the dominatingKpenetrating power. (his o!!urs largely through
the !ommer!iali/ation of broad!asting.7
N"O
(om *!5hail de2ned 70le!troni! !olonialism as the dependen!y
relationship established by the importation of !ommuni!ation hardware,
foreign-produ!ed software, along with engineers, te!hni!ians, and related
information proto!ols, that i!ariously establish a set of foreign norms,
alues, and e@pe!tations whi!h, in arying degrees, may alter the
domesti! !ultures and so!iali/ation pro!esses.7
NIO
:ui-Dam .ee obsered
that 7!ommuni!ation imperialism !an be de2ned as the pro!ess in whi!h
the ownership and !ontrol oer the hardware and software of mass media
as well as other major forms of !ommuni!ation in one !ountry are singly or
together subjugated to the domination of another !ountry with deleterious
e<e!ts on the indigenous alues, norms and !ulture.7
N7O
1gan saw 7media

imperialism often des!ribed as a pro!ess whereby the ;nited :tates and

$estern 0urope produ!e most of the media produ!ts, make the 2rst pro2ts
from domesti! sales, and then market the produ!ts in (hird $orld
!ountries at !osts !onsiderably lower than those the !ountries would hae
to bear to produ!e similar produ!ts at home.7
N#O
)owning and :reberny-*ohammadi stateF 7&mperialism is the !onEuest
and !ontrol of one !ountry by a more powerful one. %ultural imperialism
signi2es the dimensions of the pro!ess that go beyond e!onomi!
e@ploitation or military for!e. &n the history of !olonialism, Pi.e., the form of
imperialism in whi!h the goernment of the !olony is run dire!tly by
foreignersQ, the edu!ational and media systems of many (hird $orld
!ountries hae been set up as repli!as of those in 6ritain, Bran!e, or the
;nited :tates and !arry their alues. $estern adertising has made further
inroads, as hae ar!hite!tural and fashion styles. :ubtly but powerfully,
the message has often been insinuated that $estern !ultures are superior
to the !ultures of the (hird $orld.7
N3O
(he issue of !ultural imperialism emerged largely from !ommuni!ation
studies.
N1-O
Howeer, !ultural imperialism has been used as a framework by
s!holars to e@plain phenomena in the areas of international relations,
anthropology, edu!ation, s!ien!e, history, literature, and sports.
NLO
(heory and debate
&t !an refer to either the for!ed a!!ulturation of a subje!t population, or to
the oluntary embra!ing of a foreign !ulture by indiiduals who do so of
their own free will. :in!e these are two ery di<erent referents, the alidity
of the term has been !alled into Euestion.
%ultural inCuen!e !an be seen by the 7re!eiing7 !ulture as either a threat
to or an enri!hment of its !ultural identity. &t seems therefore useful to
distinguish between !ultural imperialism as an Pa!tie or passieQ attitude
of superiority, and the position of a !ulture or group that seeks to
!omplement its own !ultural produ!tion, !onsidered partly de2!ient, with
imported produ!ts.
(he imported produ!ts or seri!es !an themseles represent, or be
asso!iated with, !ertain alues Psu!h as !onsumerismQ. A!!ording to one
argument, the 7re!eiing7 !ulture does not ne!essarily per!eie this link,
but instead absorbs the foreign !ulture passiely through the use of the
foreign goods and seri!es. )ue to its somewhat !on!ealed, but ery
potent nature, this hypotheti!al idea is des!ribed by some e@perts as
7banal imperialism.7 :ome beliee that the newly globalised e!onomy of
the late ,-th and early ,1st !entury has fa!ilitated this pro!ess through
the use of new information te!hnology. (his kind of !ultural imperialism is
deried from what is !alled 7soft power7. (he theory of ele!troni!
!olonialism e@tends the issue to global !ultural issues and the impa!t of
major multi-media !onglomerates, ranging from Via!om, (ime-$arner,
)isney, Dews %orp, :ony, to Aoogle and *i!rosoft with the fo!us on the
hegemoni! power of these mainly ;:-based !ommuni!ation giants.
%ultural diersity
1ne of the reasons often gien for opposing any form of !ultural
imperialism, oluntary or otherwise, is the preseration of !ultural
diersity, a goal seen by some as analogous to the preseration of
e!ologi!al diersity. 5roponents of this idea argue either that su!h
diersity is aluable in itself, or instrumentally aluable be!ause it makes
aailable more ways of soling problems and responding to !atastrophes,
natural or otherwise.
:aid and post-!olonial studies
!
5alestinian writer, philosopher, and literary theorist, 0dward :aid, who was
one of the founders of the 2eld of post-!olonial study, wrote e@tensiely on
the subje!t of !ultural imperialism. His work attempts to highlight the
ina!!ura!ies of many assumptions about !ultures and so!ieties, and is
largely informed by *i!hel Bou!ault4s !on!epts of dis!ourse and power.
(he relatiely new a!ademi! 2eld of post-!olonial theory has been the
sour!e for most of the in-depth work on the idea of dis!ursie and other
non-military me!hanisms of imperialism, and its alidity is disputed by
those who deny that these forms are genuinely imperialisti!.
9othkopf on dealing with !ultural dominan!e
)aid 9othkopf, managing dire!tor of Kissinger Asso!iates and an adjun!t
professor of international a<airs at %olumbia ;niersity Pwho also sered
as a senior ;: %ommer!e )epartment o>!ial in the %linton
AdministrationQ, wrote about !ultural imperialism in his proo!atiely titled
In "raise o Cultural Imperialism# in the summer 1337 issue of $oreign
"olicy maga/ine. 9othkopf says that the ;: should embra!e 7!ultural
imperialism7 as in its self interest. 6ut his de2nition of !ultural imperialism
stresses spreading the alues of toleran!e and openness to !ultural
!hange in order to aoid war and !onCi!t between !ultures as well as
e@panding a!!epted te!hnologi!al and legal standards to proide free
traders with enough se!urity to do business with more !ountries.
9othkopf4s de2nition almost e@!lusiely inoles allowing indiiduals in
other nations to a!!ept or reje!t foreign !ultural inCuen!es. He also
mentions, but only in passing, the use of the 0nglish language and
!onsumption of news and popular musi! and 2lm as !ultural dominan!e
that he supports. 9othkopf additionally makes the point that globali/ation
and the &nternet are a!!elerating the pro!ess of !ultural inCuen!e.
N11O
%ulture is sometimes used by the organi/ers of so!iety G politi!ians,
theologians, a!ademi!s, and families G to impose and ensure order, the
rudiments of whi!h !hange oer time as need di!tates. 1ne need only look
at the ,-th !entury4s geno!ides. &n ea!h one, leaders used !ulture as a
politi!al front to fuel the passions of their armies and other minions and to
justify their a!tions among their people.
9othkopf then !ites geno!ide and massa!res in Armenia, 9ussia, the
Holo!aust, %ambodia, 6osnia and Her/egoina, 9wanda and 0ast (imor as
e@amples of !ulture Pin some !ases e@pressed in the ideology of 7politi!al
!ulture7 or religionQ being misused to justify iolen!e. He also
a!knowledges that !ultural imperialism in the past has been guilty of
for!efully eliminating the !ultures of naties in the Ameri!as and in Afri!a,
or through use of the &nEuisition, %and during the e&pansion o virtually
every empire'%
P!itation neededQ
(he most important way to deal with !ultural inCuen!e in any nation,
a!!ording to 9othkopf, is to promote toleran!e and allow, or een promote,
!ultural diersities that are !ompatible with toleran!e and to eliminate
those !ultural di<eren!es that !ause iolent !onCi!tF
7*ulti!ultural so!ieties, be they nations, federations, or other
!onglomerations of !losely interrelated states, dis!ern those aspe!ts of
!ulture that do not threaten union, stability, or prosperity Psu!h as food,
holidays, rituals, and musi!Q and allow them to Courish. 6ut they
!ountera!t or eradi!ate the more subersie elements of !ulture
Pe@!lusionary aspe!ts of religion, language, and politi!alKideologi!al
beliefsQ. History shows that bridging !ultural gaps su!!essfully and sering
as a home to dierse peoples reEuires !ertain so!ial stru!tures, laws, and
institutions that trans!end !ulture. Burthermore, the history of a number of
"
ongoing e@periments in multi!ulturalism, su!h as in the 0uropean ;nion,
&ndia, :outh Afri!a, %anada and the ;nited :tates, suggests that workable,
if not perfe!ted, integratie models e@ist. 0a!h is built on the idea that
toleran!e is !ru!ial to so!ial well-being, and ea!h at times has been
threatened by both intoleran!e and a heightened emphasis on !ultural
distin!tions. (he greater publi! good warrants eliminating those !ultural
!hara!teristi!s that promote !onCi!t or preent harmony, een as less-
diisie, more personally obsered !ultural distin!tions are !elebrated and
presered.7
N1,O
:ee also
%o!a!oloni/ation
%olonialism
%ross-!ulturalism
%ultural appropriation
%ultural %ringe
%ultural geno!ide
%ultural hegemony
0thno!ide
Hegemony
.inguisti! imperialism
9ight to e@ist
:!ienti2! imperialism
(rans!ulturation
Dotes
R
1.-

1.1
Ale@ander, Vi!toria ). P,--+Q. 7(he %ultural )iamond - (he
5rodu!tion of %ulture7. (ociology o the arts: e&ploring )ne and popular
orms. $iley-6la!kwell,. pp. 1I,. &:6D -I+1,+-L-#, 37#-I+1,+-L-+.
R (omlinson P1331Q, p. +
R Hamm, P,--"Q, p. L
R
L.-

L.1
$hite P,--1Q
R :!hiller, Herbert &. P137IQ. Communication and cultural domination.
&nternational Arts and :!ien!es 5ress, 3-1 Dorth 6roadway, $hite 5lains,
Dew ?ork 1-I-+. pp. 381-. &:6D -#7++,-73L, 37#-#7++,-73".
R *!5hail, (homas .. P13#7Q. Electronic colonialism: the uture o
international broadcasting and communication. Volume 1,I of :age library
of so!ial resear!h. :age 5ubli!ations. pp. 1#. &:6D -#-+3,7+-L,
37#-#-+3,7+-#.
R .ee, :iu-Dam .ee P13##Q. 7%ommuni!ation imperialism and dependen!yF
A !on!eptual !lari2!ation7. International Communication *azette
PDetherlandsF Kiuwer A!ademi! 5ublishersQ PL1QF 7L.
R 1gan, %hristine P:pring 13##Q. 7*edia &mperialism and the
Video!assette 9e!orderF (he %ase of (urkey.7. +ournal o Communication,
!" P,QF p3L.
R )owning,, Hohn= Ali *ohammadi, Annabelle :reberny-*ohammadi
P133"Q. -uestioning the media: a critical introduction P,, illustrated ed.Q.
:AA0. pp. L#,. &:6D -#-+37137L, 37#-#-+37137L.
R :alwen, *i!hael 6. P*ar!h 1331Q. 7%ultural imperialismF A media e<e!ts
approa!h7. Critical (tudies in Media Communication " P1QF ,38+#.
R N1O 9othkopf, )aid, 7&n 5raise of %ultural &mperialism,7 $oreign A.airs,
:ummer 1337, Volume 1-7, pp. +#-"+= all des!riptions of 9othkopf4s points
and his Euotes are from this arti!le
R 14*eara, 5atri!k.= *ehlinger, Howard ).= Krain, *atthew. P,---Q.
*lobalization and the challenges o a new century : a reader. 6loomington,
&nd.F &ndiana ;niersity 5ress. pp. LL"8LLI. &:6D 37#---,"+-,1+""-I.
#
9eferen!es
(omlinson, Hohn P1331Q. Cultural imperialism: a critical introduction
Pillustrated, reprint ed.Q. %ontinuum &nternational 5ublishing Aroup.
&:6D -#,IL"-1+S, 37#-#,IL"-1+".
Hamm, 6ernd= 9ussell %harles :mandy!h P,--"Q. Cultural imperialism:
essays on the political economy o cultural domination.
9eferen!e,&nformation and &nterdis!iplinary :ubje!ts :eries. ;niersity of
(oronto 5ress. &:6D 1""1117-7S, 37#1""1117-7,.
$hite, .iingston A. P:pringK:ummer ,--1Q. 79e!onsidering !ultural
imperialism theory7. Transnational /roadcasting (tudies P(he %enter for
0le!troni! Hournalism at the Ameri!an ;niersity in %airo and the %entre
for *iddle 0ast :tudies, :t. AntonyTs %ollege, 1@fordQ PIQ.
0@ternal links
7&n 5raise of %ultural &mperialism'7, by )aid 9othkopf, $oreign "olicy no.
1-7, :ummer 1337, pp. +#8"+, whi!h argues that !ultural imperialism is a
positie thing.
79e!onsidering !ultural imperialism theory7 by .iingston A. $hite,
Transnational /roadcasting (tudies no. I, :pringK:ummer ,--1, whi!h
argues that the idea of media imperialism is outdated.
7$hat Ameri!an %ulture'7, by Ale@ander :. 5eak, 1L :eptember ,--L,
whi!h argues that what the world is witnessing is the gradual eolution of
a new, global !ulture.
A!ademi! $eb page from ,L Bebruary ,---, dis!ussing the idea of !ultural
imperialism
%ategoriesF Arti!les la!king reliable referen!es from Bebruary ,-1- J
Arti!les needing !leanup from Bebruary ,-1- J All pages needing !leanup J
&mperialism J %ultural studies J %ultural geography J 5oliti!al s!ien!e J
%ultural hegemony
(he !ontent on this page originates from $ikipedia and is li!ensed under
the AD; Bree )o!ument .i!ense or the %reatie %ommons %%-6?-:A
li!ense.
$hat is cultural i#perialis#
%ultural imperialism is the pra!ti!e of promoting the !ulture or language of
one nation in another.
$ill the 1bama Administration heed their !alls for cultural i#perialis#
$ashington, )%G)e!rying as Umissionaries of hateV ;.:. %hristians who
prea!h in Afri!a against homose@ual pra!ti!e, a former bishop of the
Angli!an %hur!h of ;ganda has !alled upon western !ountries t...
&s Cultural i#perialis# more insidious than dire!t i#perialis#
%ultural imperialism whi!h nowadays works in the pro!ess of globali/ation
- let me get !lear that globali/ation has always e@isted and is not utterly
negatie- also manipulates and !ontrols, in eery ...
&s Cultural i#perialis# more insidious than dire!t i#perialis# ''
%ultural imperialism whi!h nowadays works in the pro!ess of globali/ation
- let me get !lear that globali/ation has always e@isted and is not utterly
negatie- also manipulates and !ontrols, in eery way, and maims identity
and !ultural e@p...
httpFKKuk.answers.yahoo.!omKEuestionKinde@'EidW,--#-3,3...
$as eerything in the !onstru!tion of islam deliberately !al!ulat...'
All prays due to Allah the most mer!iful and pea!e be upon his prophet
*uhammad. 5rophet *uhammad pea!e be upon him, says in whi!h mean
$
7 (here are no di<erent between an Arab and no Arab e@!ept in
righteousness and fearing Aod7...
httpFKKuk.answers.yahoo.!omKEuestionKinde@'EidW,-1--3,-...
&s fast food the latest form of cultural i#perialis# to hit Afri!...'
$hen 6eatri!e Aya!ko left Kenya for a three-week stay in &taly, she was
not about to be impressed by the food of a !ountry that is !ommonly
!onsidered to hae one of the world4s 2nest !uisines. :he pa!ked her !ase
with mai/e Cour so that ...
httpFKKnews.bb!.!o.ukK,KlowKafri!aK+,,7#-I.stm
$hat4s wrong with 7 cultural i#perialis# 7'
$hy would Bren!hmen adopt foreign !ulture to the e@tent that, as you
suggest, it4s detrimental to their own well-being' & !an not speak for
Bran!e, but & !an spe!ulate. 1ne reason !ould be shortsightedness,
another sel2shness. do you th...
httpFKKwww.ma!addi!t.!omKforumsKtopi!K#-3-K,
%ould the long tail !hallenge the for!es of cultural i#perialis# ,...'
& think that globalisation is another drier of the long tail. After all, the
formula isF if you lower the !ost of distribution, you !an o<er more stu<. &f
you o<er more stu<, people will migrate from the few to the many.
Alobalisation ...
httpFKKentertainment.timesonline.!o.ukKtolKartsXandXent...
)o you agree or disagree with the following statementF 4*!)onald4...'
*ark submitted by AuthorF
httpFKKwww.!oursework.infoK;niersityK:o!ialXstudiesK:o...
)o Ameri!an teleision !hannels spread cultural i#perialis# ''
$hen the 6ritish goernment introdu!ed a bill last year to make it possible
for &(V, the !ountry4s top !ommer!ial broad!aster, to !ome under
Ameri!an ownership, it did not imagine that the bill would be going
through the House of .ords at a...
httpsFKKwww.friends.!aKnews-itemK,-#,
$hen )oes Appropriate Adi!e 6e!ome Cultural I#perialis# '
$hile & was !ondu!ting a seminar on the ;.:. system of higher edu!ation
for uniersity administrators in the former :oiet ;nion, a man of about I-
asked me, 7How many hours a week is an Ameri!an student in !lass'7 &
answered that...
httpFKKwww.transitionsabroad.!omKpubli!ationsKmaga/ineK
0. Aermain
(he *ar@ist (heory of &mperialism and its %riti!s
PAugust 13""Q
Brom T$o %ssays on I#perialis#, Dew ?ork 13II.
(rans!ribed by Hoseph Au!iello.
*arked up by 0inde 1T%allaghan for the Mar&ists' Internet (rchive.
&ntrodu!tion
(ince the spring o 0102 when 3enin wrote his pamphlet
Imperialism, that work has been a ocal point o discussion by
both Mar&ists and non4Mar&ist political economists' Many critics
have attempted to prove that 3enin5s analysis o contemporary
capitalism is essentially incorrect6 others that it is partially
incorrect, but not outdated' 3enin5s 7o8cial9 deenders in Moscow
have tried to prove that every word written in 0102 is still totally
%
valid today, while Mar&ists have taken into account the
developments and changes o the last :; years, modiying and
adding to 3enin5s theory in the light o these changes'
$or the students o 3enin5s Imperialism, the two essays contained
in this bulletin will serve as an introduction to the contemporary
debate, indicating the <uestions which are being discussed and
how they are being answered by both critics and deenders o the
Mar&ist concept o imperialism'
The author o the )rst article, E' *ermain, is one o the leading
theoreticians o the $ourth International and the author o
numerous essays on Mar&ist economics' (he (heory of &mperialism
and &ts %riti!s was a lecture originally given more than ten years
ago to a group o Mar&ist students already amiliar with 3enin5s
Imperialism' Ater discussing the historical development o the
theory, *ermain goes on to deal brie=y with the most important
contemporary critics'
Ernest Mandel, editor o the /elgian socialist weekly, La Gauche,
and a leader o the /elgian (ocialist >orkers Conederation, is one
o the world5s leading Mar&ist economists' !is two volume Trait
dEconomie Marxiste will soon be published in English by
Monthly ?eview "ress' The article reprinted here is a review o
Michael /arratt /rown5s work After Imperialism, and )rst
appeared in the +une 012@ issue o the /ritish periodical New Left
Review'
*ary-Ali!e :tyron
Huly 13II
(o *ar@ists, UimperialismV is not simply the Utrend towards e@pansionV or
the U!onEuest of foreign lands,V as it is de2ned by most politi!al s!ientists
and so!iologists. (he word is used in a mu!h more pre!ise sense to
des!ribe the general !hanges whi!h o!!urred in the politi!al, e!onomi!
and so!ial a!tiity of the big bourgeoisie of the adan!ed !apitalist
!ountries, beginning in the last Euarter of the 13th !entury. (hese !hanges
were !losely related to alterations in the basi! stru!ture of this
bourgeoisie.
*ar@ died too early to be able to analy/e these !hanges. He did not see
more than the preliminary signs. Deertheless, he left some profound
remarks in his last writings whi!h later *ar@ists used as starting points for
deeloping the theory of imperialism.
&n studying the rapid deelopment of limited liability !orporations, *ar@
underlined, in the (hird Volume of Capital P!hap.,+Q, that these
!ompanies represent a new form of the e@propriation of a mass of
!apitalists by a small handful of !apitalists. &n this e@propriation the legal
owner of !apital loses his fun!tion as entrepreneur and abandons his role
in the pro!ess of produ!tion and his position of !ommand oer the
produ!tie for!es and the labor for!e.
&n fa!t, priate property seems to be suppressed, says *ar@ elsewhere, it
is suppressed not in faor of !olle!tie ownership but in faor of priate
ownership by a ery small number.

%on!entration of %apital
*ar@ foresaw the modern stru!ture of !apitalism as the 2nal phase of
!apitalism resulting from the e@treme !on!entration of !apital. (his was
1&
also the starting point taken by most *ar@ists, espe!ially Hilferding and
.enin.
&n a paragraph deoted to !ountertenden!ies to the trend toward a falling
rate of pro2t PCapital, Volume &&&, !hap.1LQ, *ar@ also underlined the
importan!e of the e@port of !apital to ba!kward !ountries. A little further
on he generali/ed this idea by insisting that a !apitalist so!iety must
!ontinuously e@tend its base, its area of e@ploitation.
0ngels added a more detailed elu!idation to *ar@Ts !omments. &n his last
writings, espe!ially in his famous 1#3, introdu!tion to The Condition of
the )orking Class in %ngland, he underlined other stru!tural
phenomena to whi!h the theoreti!ians of imperialism atta!hed great
importan!e. 0ngels wrote that from the beginning of the industrial
reolution until the 1#7-Ts, 0ngland e@er!ised pra!ti!ally an industrial
monopoly oer the world market. (hanks to that monopoly, in the se!ond
half of the 13th !entury, at the time of the rise of !raft unions, 0nglish
!apitalism !ould grant important !on!essions to a se!tion of the working
!lass. 6ut, towards the end of the 13th !entury the Aerman, Bren!h, and
Ameri!an !ompetition made inroads into this 0nglish monopoly, and
inaugurated a period of sharp !lass struggle in Areat 6ritain.
(he !orre!tness of 0ngelsT analysis was borne out as early as the 2rst
years of the ,-th !entury. (he trade union moement grew not only
among the laborers and the masses of the unskilled, but also broke its
half-!entury long allian!e with petty-bourgeois radi!alism Pthe .iberal
5artyQ and founded the .abor 5arty, the mass workersT party.
&n two !omments on the (hird Volume of Capital, edited by 0ngels in 1#3L
P!omments on the +1st and +,nd !haptersQ, 0ngels emphasi/ed how
di>!ult it was going to be for !apitalism to 2nd a new basis for e@pansion
after the 2nal !onEuest of the world market. P0lsewhere he says Uafter the
!onEuest of the %hinese market.VQ %ompetition is limited internally by
!artels and trusts, and e@ternally by prote!tionism. All this he thought
represented Uthe preparations for a general industrial war for the
domination of the world market.V
.enin began with these remarks by 0ngels in deeloping his theory of the
imperialist struggle for the diision and re-diision of the world market, as
well as his theory of the workersT aristo!ra!y.

(he (heory of &mperialism by Karl Kautsky and 9osa .u@emburg
(he most UobiousV phenomenon of the new period in the history of
!apitalism, whi!h opened with the last Euarter of the 13th !entury, was
undoubtedly the series of wars and e@peditions, the !reation or the
e@pansion of !olonial empiresF the Bren!h e@peditions to (onkin Pnow
VietnamQ, (unisia and *oro!!o= the !onEuest of the %ongo by .eopold &&=
the 6ritish e@pansion to the boundaries of &ndia, 0gypt and the :udan,
0ast and :outh Afri!a= the Aerman and &talian e@pansions in Afri!a, et!.
(his !olonial e@pansion stimulated the 2rst e<orts by *ar@ists to interpret
the deelopment of this period of !apitalism. Karl Kautsky emphasi/ed the
!ommer!ial reasons for imperialist e@pansion. A!!ording to him, industrial
!apital !annot sell the whole of its produ!tion within an industriali/ed
!ountry. &n order to reali/e surplus alue, it must proide itself with
markets made up of non-industriali/ed !ountries, essentially agri!ultural
!ountries. (his was the purpose of the !olonial wars of e@pansion and the
reason for the !reation of !olonial empires.
5arus, in the beginning of the ,-th !entury, while underlining this
phenomenon emphasi/ed the role of heay industry Paboe all the iron
11
industryQ in the transformation whi!h was about to take pla!e in the
politi!s of the international !apitalist !lass. He pointed out how iron played
a more and more preponderant role in !apitalist industry, and
demonstrated that goernment orders, dire!t Parmaments ra!eQ and
indire!t P!ompetition in naal !onstru!tion, building of railways and harbor
installations in !olonial !ountries, et!.Q, represented the main outlet for
this industry.
&t was 9osa .u@emburg who drew together in a !omplete theory all these
!on!epts of an imperialism e@panding to !ompensate for inadeEuate
markets for the produ!ts of the biggest !apitalist industries. Her theory is
mainly one of !rises, or to e@press it more !orre!tly, a theory of the
!onditions of reali/ation surplus alue and of a!!umulation of !apital. &t is
!onsistent with the theories of under-!onsumption worked out oer the
!ourse of a !entury by numerous opponents of the !apitalist system to
show the ineitability of e!onomi! !rises.
A!!ording to 9osa .u@emburg, the !ontinual e@pansion of the !apitalist
mode of produ!tion is impossible within the bounds of a purely !apitalist
so!iety. (he e@pansion of the produ!tion of the means of produ!tion within
!apitalist so!iety is only possible if it goes hand in hand with the
e@pansion of the demand for !onsumer goods. $ithout this e@pansion of
the latter demand, the !apitalists will not buy any new ma!hines, et!. &t is
not the e@pansion of the pur!hasing power of the working !lass whi!h
allows an adeEuate e@pansion of the demand for !onsumer goods. 1n the
!ontrary, the more the !apitalist system progresses, the more does the
pur!hasing power of the workers represent a relatiely smaller proportion
of the national in!ome.
&n order for !apitalist e@pansion to !ontinue it is ne!essary to hae non-
!apitalist !lasses whi!h, with an in!ome obtained outside the !apitalist
system, would be endowed with the additional pur!hasing power to buy
industrial !onsumer goods. (hese non-!apitalist !lasses originally are the
landowners and farmers. &n the !ountries where the industrial reolution
2rst o!!urred, the !apitalist mode of produ!tion deeloped and triumphed
in a non-!apitalist milieu, !onEuering the market whi!h !onsisted aboe all
of the mass of peasants.
9osa .u@emburg !on!luded that after the !onEuest of the national non-
!apitalist markets, and the not yet industriali/ed markets the 0uropean
and Dorth Ameri!an !ontinents, !apital had to throw itself into the
!onEuest of a new non-!apitalist sphere, that of the agri!ultural !ountries
of Asia and Afri!a.
:he tied this theory of imperialism to the importan!e of U!ompensating
outletsV for the !apitalist system, outlets presented aboe all by
goernment pur!hases of armaments. :he foresaw the me!hanism whi!h
did not reeal its full fun!tioning until the ee of the :e!ond $orld $ar.
(oday, without this U!ompensating outlet,V whi!h is !reated by the
armaments and war e!onomy, the !apitalist system would be in danger of
falling periodi!ally into e!onomi! !rises of the same graity as that of
13,3-++.

(he Blaws in .u@emburgTs Views
&t is beyond doubt that historically the deelopment of !apitalist industry
!ame about in e<e!t in a non-!apitalist milieu and that the e@isten!e of
the great agri!ultural markets, national and international, represented the
essential safety-ale of the !apitalist system during the entire 13th
!entury and the beginning of the ,-th.
12
Howeer, from the point of iew of e!onomi! theory, the .u@emburgian
!on!eption of imperialism has !ertain Caws. &t is important to underline
them be!ause they obs!ure !ertain long run trends in the deelopment of
!apitalism as a whole.
Bor instan!e, .u@emburg argued that the !apitalist !lass !ould not enri!h
itself by passing its own money from one po!ket to another. Howeer, this
ignores the fa!t, illuminated by *ar@, that the !apitalist !lass taken as a
whole represents a useful abstra!tion to uneil the laws of motion of
!apital, but that the phenomenon of periodi! !rises is understandable only
in the framework of the competition o antagonistic capitals and the
!on!entration resulting from that !ompetition.
&n su!h a framework it is Euite logi!al that Uthe !apitalist !lassV enri!hes
itself Uby itself,V that is, that !ertain layers of the !apitalist !lass enri!h
themseles through the impoerishment of other !apitalist layers. (his is
what has o!!urred for the last forty years in the ;nited :tates, at 2rst in
relation to the Ameri!an !apitalists, then parti!ularly in relation to the
international !apitalist !lasses P2rst of all the 0uropeanQ. (his will o!!ur
more and more as the purely agri!ultural markets disappear.
$ithin todayTs !apitalist world, e@ports are dire!ted to a large e@tent to
other industriali/ed !ountries, and only to a small e@tent to the markets of
Unon-!apitalistV !ountries.
(he fundamental weakness of 9osa .u@emburgTs theory is that it is based
simply on the !apitalist !lassTs need for markets to reali/e surplus alue,
and ignores the basi! !hanges whi!h hae taken pla!e in !apitalist
property and produ!tion.
(hese were the stru!tural problems whi!h 9udolf Hilferding and .enin
ta!kled.

The Theory of I#perialis# by *ilferding and +enin
:tarting with the remarks made on this subje!t in the later works of *ar@
and 0ngels, Hilferding studied the stru!tural !hanges of !apitalism in the
last Euarter of the 13th !entury. He began with !apitalist !on!entration,
the !on!entration of banking and the preponderant part played by the
banks in the laun!hing of sto!k !ompanies and the mergers of enterprises.
Brom this Hilferding de2ned what he !alled )nance capital, that is, banking
!apital inested in industry and !ontrolling it either dire!tly Pby the
pur!hase of shares, the presen!e of bank representaties on the boards of
dire!tors, et!.Q, or indire!tly Pby the establishment of holding !ompanies,
!on!erns and UinCuen!e groupsVQ.
Hilferding dis!oered the preponderant role played by banks in the
deelopment of heay industry, espe!ially in Aermany, Bran!e, the ;nited
:tates, 6elgium, &taly and %/arist 9ussia. He showed that these banks
represented the most UaggressieV for!e in politi!al matters, partly
be!ause of the risks inoled in inestments rea!hing billions of dollars.
&n a brilliant !on!lusion to his work on 2nan!e !apital, Hilferding predi!ted
the rise of fas!ism, that is, a mer!iless and absolute politi!al di!tatorship,
e@er!ised in faor of big !apital, !orresponding to the new stage of
!apitalism as politi!al liberalism !orresponded to early !ompetitie
!apitalism. %onfronted with the threat of su!h a di!tatorship, Hilferding
!on!luded, the proletariat must engage in the struggle for its own
di!tatorship.
.enin drew substantially on HilferdingTs work as well as on the works of
some liberal e!onomists like Hobson to produ!e his work on imperialism at
the beginning of the Birst $orld $ar. .ike Hilferding, he started from
13
!apitalist !on!entration 8 the establishment of trusts, !artels, holding
!ompanies, et!. 8 banking !on!entration, and the appearan!e of 2nan!e
!apital to !hara!teri/e what is stru!turally new in this stage of !apitalism.
.enin e@tended and generali/ed this stru!tural analysis, naming it
monopoly !apitalism, in !ontrast to 13th !entury !ompetitie !apitalism.
He analy/ed monopoly and monopoly pro2ts, e@panding a series of
thoughts already begun in HilferdingTs idea that the e@pansionism of
monopoly !apitalism takes pla!e primarily through the e@port of !apital.
&n !ontrast to !ompetitie !apitalism, whi!h !on!entrated on the e@port of
!ommodities and whi!h was not interested in its !lients, monopoly
!apitalism, e@porter of !apital, !annot be without interest in its debtors. &t
must assure UnormalV !onditions of solen!y, without whi!h its loans
would transform themseles into lossesF hen!e the tenden!y toward some
form of politi!al-e!onomi! !ontrol oer the !ountries in whi!h this !apital is
inested.
.eninTs analysis of imperialism is !ompleted with a ery profound essay on
the !ontradi!tory, diale!ti!al nature of !apitalist monopoly, whi!h
suppresses !ompetition at one stage to reprodu!e it again on a higher
leel. Applying the law of uneen deelopment both to the relations
between the imperialist powers, .enin showed that the diision of the
world among the imperialist powers !an only be a temporary one, and is
ineitably followed by struggles 8 imperialist war 8 to obtain a new diision
as the relationship of for!es among these powers !hanges.
.enin also integrated into his theory of imperialism 0ngelsT !on!ept of the
workersT aristo!ra!y. (he !olonial super pro2ts, brought in by the !apital
e@ported to ba!kward !ountries, permit the !orruption of part of the
working !lass, aboe all a reformist bureau!ra!y whi!h !ooperates with
the bourgeois demo!rati! regime and obtains great bene2ts from it.

The Theory of I#perialis# (dapted to the Present Ti#e
%ombined with (rotskyTs theory of the permanent reolution 8 espe!ially
his analysis of the !ombined e!onomi! and so!ial deelopment of the
!olonial and semi-!olonial !ountries under the impa!t of !apital e@port and
imperialist domination 8 .eninTs theory has brilliantly withstood the test of
time.
Do so!ial and e!onomi! analysis of bourgeois or reformist origin dating
from before the Birst $orld $ar has retained today any alidity
whatsoeer, while .eninTs !on!eption of monopoly !apitalism, !ombined
with the theory of the permanent reolution, remains the essential key for
understanding present-day reality 8 the su!!ession of world wars, the
opening of an epo!h of reolutions and !ounterreolutions, the
appearan!e of fas!ism, the triumph of the proletarian reolution in 9ussia,
?ugoslaia and %hina, the in!reasing role of the armament and war
industry in the !apitalist world, and the importan!e of !olonial reolutions,
to name the more obious.
(his does not mean that eery part of .eninTs theory retains 1-- per!ent
alidity and that, as in the :talinist manner, *ar@ist theoreti!ian and
reolutionary leaders should !ontent themseles today with paraphrasing
or interpreting .eninTs I#perialis# to e@plain !ontemporary reality.
Histori!al e@perien!e of the last 2fty years has proen thatF
An epoch o monopoly capitalism has followed the !apitalism of free
!ompetition. *onopoly !apitalism results from te!hni!al reolutions
Pinternal !ombustion engine and ele!tri!ity repla!ing steam as the
essential motie powerQ and from stru!tural !hanges in !apitalism
1
P!on!entration of !apital resulting in giant enterprises predominating in
heay industry, establishment of !artels, trusts, holding !ompanies, et!.Q.
*onopoly !apitalism does not oer!ome the fundamental !ontradi!tions of
!apitalism. &t does not oer!ome !ompetition but merely raises it to a
higher leel en!ompassing new and bigger !ompetitors. &t does not
oer!ome !rises but gies them a more !onulsie !hara!ter. (wo rates of
pro2t are substituted for the aerage rate of pro2t of the preious periodF
the aerage rate of monopolist pro2t= and the aerage rate of pro2t of the
non-monopoli/ed se!tors.
(he suppression of free !ompetition within !ertain bounds is essentially a
rea!tion against the threats to monopolist rates of pro2t. Bor this reason it
is tied up not only with the arti2!ial limitation of produ!tion in !ertain
se!tors, but also with the franti! sear!h for new 2elds of !apital
inestment Pnew industries and new !ountriesQ. Hen!e imperialist wars.
&n this respe!t .eninTs remarks on the tenden!y of monopoly !apitalism to
arrest te!hni!al progress should be slightly modi2ed. &t is true that the
monopolies strie to monopoli/e resear!h and suppress or retard the
appli!ation of many te!hni!al dis!oeries= but it is eEually true that
monopoly !apitalism also !alls forth an in!rease in these te!hni!al
dis!oeries. 1ne reason for this is the monopolies themseles need to
open new se!tors of e@ploitation in order to hae an outlet for their e@!ess
!apital.
0@perien!e has shown, espe!ially in the !hemi!al, iron, ele!troni!s and
nu!lear domains, that the last 2fty years hae at least been as fertile in
te!hni!al progress as the pre!eding 2fty years.
6eside these fundamental !hara!teristi!s whi!h remain alid, some
se!ondary !hara!teristi!s should be modi2edF
Binan!e !apitalF (he !ontrol and domination of industrial !apital by 2nan!e
!apital has proed to be a passing phenomenon in numerous !ountries
P;nited :tates, Areat 6ritain, Hapan, 6elgium, Detherlands, et!.Q. (hanks to
the a!!umulation of enormous super pro2ts, the trusts are e@panding
more and more by self-2nan!ing and are freeing themseles of bank
tutelage. 1nly in the weaker or more ba!kward !apitalist !ountries does
2nan!e !apital remain predominant.
apital e@portF (he e@port of !apital !ontinues to represent a safety ale
for the oer-!apitali/ed monopolist trusts, but this is no longer the main
safety ale, at least in the ;nited :tates Pe@!ept in the oil industryQ.
Aoernment orders are the main safety ale. (he in!reasing role of the
:tate as guarantor of monopolist pro2t, and the in!reasing fusion of the
monopolists with the :tate are today the main !hara!teristi!s of de!lining
!apitalism. (hey spring as mu!h from so!ial and politi!al as from e!onomi!
!auses P!olonial reolution, industriali/ation of ba!kward !ountries,
narrowing of operational 2eld of !apital in the world, et!.Q.
(he layer of !oupon-!lippers uniEue to parasiti! imperialism has been
redu!ed rather than e@tended following the stru!tural transformations
mentioned aboe. (he big trusts 2nan!e their inestments more by self-
2nan!ing than by issuing negotiable shares. (here is a bureau!rati/ation
of monopolist !apital, and the stru!ture rests more and more on a
hierar!hy of big administrators Pe@e!utiesQ, who are most often
themseles big or medium share-holders. (he parasiti! !hara!ter of
de!lining !apitalism appears aboe all in the enormous e@tent of
unprodu!tie e@penditures Pin the 2rst pla!e armaments, but also the
maintenan!e of the state apparatusQ, and in the enormous !osts of
1!
distribution Palued at more than +- per!ent of the national in!ome in the
;nited :tatesQ.
(oday, politi!al fa!tors 8 su!h as the rising !olonial reolution 8 are
in!reasingly !ombined with fundamental e!onomi! !hara!teristi!s to gie
!apitalism its parti!ular outlines and behaior.

The Critics
6ourgeois Pand reformistQ theoreti!ians hae generally been ery tardy in
!ontesting the *ar@ist !on!eption of the new phenomena whi!h appeared
in the !apitalist world of the ,-th !entury. &n fa!t, they hae seemed
hardly aware of the e@isten!e of these phenomena.
(o be !onin!ed of this it is su>!ient to run through the main subje!ts with
whi!h they were preo!!upied and whi!h they dis!ussed in the years
pre!eding the Birst $orld $ar. $hile Kautsky, Hilferding, .u@emburg, .enin
(rotsky, 5arus, the )ut!h *ar@ists grouped around ,e -ieu$e Ti.d, and
the Austro-*ar@ists around the young 1tto 6auer deoted their e!onomi!
resear!h to the phenomena !onne!ted with monopolist imperialism, the
bourgeois e!onomists, apart from a few outsiders, were dis!ussing
monetary phenomena, prolonging the polemi! of the marginal utility
s!hool against the labor theory of alue s!hool, and !on!entrating on the
deelopment of the theory of market eEuilibrium under !onditions of
perfe!t !ompetition.
(wenty years later bourgeois politi!al e!onomy be!ame aware of the Ufa!tV
of monopoly, and began to seriously deelop a theory of e!onomi! !rises
and !y!les.
(his lag !ontinues to preailF until about 13+" the !apitalist theories of
e!onomi! !rises fed on !rumbs falling from the table of the *ar@ists= the
!apitalist theories of the :oiet e!onomy are een today e@!lusiely
inspired by old *ar@ists or pseudo-*ar@ists. All this !on2rms on!e again
the !orre!tness of the !omment made by *ar@ some #- years agoF after
9i!ardo bourgeois thought in e!onomi! matters be!ame fundamentally
sterile be!ause apologeti!.
(he majority, if not all, the bourgeois !on!eptions of imperialism and
monopoly !apitalism possess this pronoun!ed apologeti! !hara!ter. (hey
!onstitute an ideology in the *ar@ist sense of the wordF they are not
theories elaborated to e@plain reality. (hey are !on!eptions formulated to
justify Pand partly !on!ealQ the e@isting reality.

The Theory of /Super0-I#perialis#
(his apologeti! !hara!ter appeared most !learly in the reformist
!on!eptions of monopoly !apitalism as they were deeloped in the last
years before the Birst $orld $ar Pparti!ularly by KautskyQ and put forward
in the twenties Pespe!ially by Kautsky, Hilferding and VandereldeQ. (he
barrenness of these !on!eptions is the most striking manifestation of the
lamentable theoreti!al breakdown of Kautsky and Hilferding, a breakdown
whi!h followed their politi!al betrayal.
:tarting from the ineitability of a supreme !on!entration of !apital, the
reformist theoreti!ians approve this deelopment and dis!oer in it
surprising irtues of e!onomi! and so!ial harmony. Hust as the !artels and
trusts suppress !ompetition to a ery large e@tent, so also the anar!hy of
produ!tion and the !rises whi!h it prookes !an be abolished by the
monopolies. (he latter are interested in !ompletely reorgani/ing e!onomi!
1"
and so!ial life to aoid needless e@penses whi!h !ostly !onCi!ts in!ur
P!rashes, strikes, et!.Q.
Hust as the great !aptains of industry learn to rea!h an understanding
among themseles, so also they learn to rea!h an understanding with the
labor unions. (he labor moement should neither oppose the !arteli/ation
of industry nor defend small industry against big. 1n the !ontrary, they
say, the labor moement should support all tenden!ies towards a
ma@imum !on!entration of industry, towards the leadership of the trusts,
towards the organi/ed e!onomy. (hus, the stage of monopoly !apitalism
!an represent a transitional stage between !apitalism and so!ialism during
whi!h the !ontradi!tions and !onCi!ts !an gradually be lessened.
(he deelopment of the last forty years has !ompletely !ontradi!ted this
analysis and these fore!asts. &mperialism and KautskyTs UsuperV-
imperialism P!omplete predominan!e of one imperialist power be!ause of
the supreme !on!entration of !apitalQ, far from assuring uniersal pea!e,
hae !aused the outbreak of two bloody world wars and are preparing a
third one. Bar from being able to aoid !rises, monopolies pre!ipitated the
most iolent !risis eer known by !apitalism, that of 13,3-13++. Bar from
lessening so!ial !onCi!ts, the trusts hae opened an almost uninterrupted
period of reolutions and !ounterreolutions on a world s!ale.
(he fundamental methodologi!al error of these reformist !on!eptions is
their blindness to the contradictory, dialectical !hara!ter of !apitalist
eolution, to the !on!entration of !apital. (hey draw !ompletely
me!hani!al !on!lusions.
&t is true that modern !apitalismTs tenden!y to set up trusts, !artels, and
monopolies !annot be reersed. &t would be !ompletely utopian to want to
return to the free !ompetition of the 13th !entury. 6ut there are two
methods of 2ghting trustsF to substitute for them the small, s!attered
industry of the past= or to substitute for them the so!iali/ed industry of the
future.
1n the prete@t that the 2rst form of struggle is impossible, the reformists
!oneniently forget that the se!ond one e@ists, and they !on!lude that it is
ne!essary to defend the monopolies. $hen the 0uropean steel !artel was
established, Vanderelde published an arti!le !elebrating the eent as the
guarantee of pea!e in 0uropeY 1n the prete@t of not wanting to turn ba!k,
the reformists accept the e&isting reality and !on!eal the deep
!ontradi!tions whi!h periodi!ally rend this reality asunder, !ontradi!tions
whi!h impose upon *ar@ists the duty to support the only for!es whi!h !an
prepare the future.
(he reformistsT inability to !omprehend the !ontradi!tory !hara!ter of
monopoly !apitalism is aboe all an ignoran!e of uneen deelopment.
(he simpli2ed formulaF U(he more monopolies there are, the less
!ompetition there is, and the less !onCi!t there is,V does not stand up to
the test of fa!ts. &n reality, the more monopolies there are, the more a new
orm of !ompetition 8 !ompetition among monopolies, imperialist wars 8
repla!es the old form of !ompetition.
6eginning with the great 13,3-13++ !risis, the majority of the reformist
parties ta!itly abandoned these propositions of me!hani!al, reformist
*ar@ism. 6ut this UprogressV was a!!ompanied by an een more
pronoun!ed theoreti!al retreatF the abandonment 8 in general eEually ta!it
8 of *ar@ism as a whole, and the adoption of the Keynesian e!onomi!
theories. (oday, in the reformist ranks, one no longer en!ounters
tenden!ies whi!h are openly apologeti! of monopolies. &nstead, the
1#
reformists now defend the dire!ting role of the !apitalist :tate.

Monopolies1 /,uopolies0 and /2ligopolies0
(he apologeti! !hara!ter of bourgeois !on!eptions of !ontemporary
!apitalism is eEually !lear. (he majority of e!onomists and so!iologists,
des!ribing the stru!ture of !apitalism, Euestion the ery e@isten!e of
monopolies. Howeer, only the most partial Por the most ignorantQ, lean on
se!ondary features like the periodi! in!rease in the number of retail shops,
seri!e stations and repair shops to defend the thesis that there is no
!onsiderable !on!entration of !apital.
(he more intelligent bourgeois ideologists no longer deny the
preponderant part played by trusts, !artels, holding !ompanies, et!., in
!ontemporary !apitalism. 6ut they deny that we are dealing with
monopolies here, for, so they say, in the majority of the great industrial
se!tors Psteel, !hemi!als, motor !ars, ele!tri!al eEuipment, air!raft,
aluminum and non-ferrous metals are the main onesQ there is not one
!ompany predominating in ea!h !ountry, but seeral PUduopoliesVF
predominan!e of two !ompanies= UoligopoliesVF predominan!e of a small
number of !ompaniesQ.
Birst of all, this restri!tie proposition is only partly true. (here are
important se!tors in the big !apitalist !ountries where two-thirds of the
produ!tion, and een more, is !arried on by one !ompany whi!h possesses
a monopoly position in the literal sense of the wordF !hemi!als in Areat
6ritain= petroleum in Areat 6ritain= aluminum in the ;nited :tates= motor
!ars in &taly= before 13L", !hemi!als and steel in Aermany= !opper in the
%ongo= ele!tri!al eEuipment in Holland, et!.
Burthermore, this restri!tie proposition is only a terminologi!al arti2!e. &n
!alling the stru!ture of !ontemporary !apitalism monopolist, *ar@ists hae
neer pretended that there was only one 2rm produ!ing all Por almost allQ
produ!ts in ea!h industry. (hey hae simply stated that the relationship of
for!es between the small 2rms, and one, two or three giant 2rms is su!h
that the latter impose their law in the industry, that is, eliminate pri!e
!ompetition.
(his analysis !onforms s!rupulously with reality, and it is !omi!al to see
the great opponents of *ar@ism, the most enthusiasti! ado!ates of Ufree
!ompetition,V state solemnly that !ompetition holds sway in todayTs
!apitalist e!onomy 8 notwithstanding the absen!e of pri!e !ompetition.
A!tually, o>!ial statisti!s published by goernmental seri!es Pespe!ially
the ;: Bederal (rade %ommissionQ !on2rm not only the absen!e of pri!e
!ompetition, but also the denomination of the majority of the industrial
se!tors of all !apitalist !ountries by one, two or three !ompanies,
!on!entrating within their hands II-3- per!ent of produ!tion.

/,e#ocratization of Capital0
A faorite argument or apologists of monopoly !apitalism is that the
!on!entration of !apital in the giant enterprises PUnatural out!ome of
te!hni!al deelopmentV as they sayQ is more than neutrali/ed by the
di<usion of ownership due to the growth of share ownership.
(hey Euote the e@amples of large trusts whi!h hae issued hundreds of
thousands of shares PAeneral *otors, the most powerful trust in the world,
has issued more than one millionQ, only a small number of whi!h are in the
hands of one family. %onseEuently, there must be hundreds of thousands,
or at least thousands of UownersV of these trusts, and Ueerybody is on the
road to be!oming a !apitalist.V
1$
9e!ently this argument has been igorously renewed in the ;nited :tates,
in :wit/erland, in 6elgium, in Aermany and elsewhere, where the
bourgeoisie has !ampaigned for the distribution of shares among the
workers of the large enterprises.
.etTs begin by putting things ba!k into pla!e. *any trusts are e<e!tiely
dominated by one single familyF the :tandard 1il petroleum trust by the
9o!kefeller family= the Aeneral *otors trust by the )u5ont deDemours
family= the steel trust of the .orraine by the $endel family, et!. &t is true
that in the majority of !ases these families do not possess "- per!ent of
the shares of the !ompanies in Euestion. 6ut this only proes that the
Cotation of large numbers of shares permits the !ontrol of these giant
!ompanies by minority shareholdings. (heir dispersal e<e!tiely preents
the mass of the small shareholders from establishing their rights at the
general meetings and in the daily administration of the !ompany.
Burther, it is false that the ownership of industrial shares is spread oer
large layers of the population. An enEuiry made in the ;nited :tates in
13"1 by the 6rookings &nstitute proed that -.1 per!ent of the population
possessed "" per!ent of all the shares. (o the e@tent that the monopolist
trusts be!ome more and more powerful and aoid the possibility of being
!ontrolled by a single family, it is !hara!teristi! that they progressiely
be!ome collectively owned by the big capitalists.
(he interpenetration of the interests of some do/ens or hundreds of big
!apitalist families is su!h that it be!omes impossible to say that su!h and
su!h family U!ontrolsV su!h and su!h !ompany. 6ut the whole of these
families !ontrol the whole of big industry whi!h is dire!ted by a kind of
Uadministratie !oun!il of the !apitalist !lass,V on whi!h the
representaties of all these families o!!upy key positions and su!!eed one
another periodi!ally in the positions of !ommand.

The Theory of /Countervailing Po$er0 and the State as
%qualizer
(he more intelligent bourgeois e!onomists !annot deny these fa!ts.
Deertheless, in order to justify !apitalism they take refuge behind the
:tate, the deus e& machina whi!h is !apable of neutrali/ing the bad
e<e!ts of this e@traordinary !on!entration of e!onomi! power. Among the
prin!ipal representaties of this theory are the Ameri!an professors Hohn
Kenneth Aalbraith and Adolphe A. 6erle, and the UKeynesianV group of the
.ondon :!hool of 0!onomi!s. (here are numerous ariations of this theory=
it is su>!ient to enumerate and refute some of them.
Aalbraith and the adepts of the .ondon :!hool of 0!onomi!s adan!e the
theory that the demo!rati! :tate of today is not the instrument of the
domination of one !lass but a more or less independent apparatus,
subje!ted to the mutually neutrali/ing inCuen!e of arious Upressure
groups.V (hese authors, by the way, neer use the work U!lassV and
always prefer to use Upressure group,V Use!tions of opinion,V Uorgani/ed
inCuen!e,V et!.
&t is true, they say, that the UoligopolistV trusts e@er!ise a ery strong
inCuen!e on e!onomi! life. 6ut this inCuen!e is Uneutrali/edV Pheld in
!he!kQ by the no less formidable power of the mass trade unions, of
farmersT asso!iations, of small and middle !apitalists organi/ed in
%hambers of %ommer!e, et!. (he intera!tion of these for!es produ!es an
e!onomi! eEuilibrium faorable to the !ommunity as a whole, a more or
less proportional diision of the Ue!onomi! !akeV among the di<erent
Upressure groups.V
1%
(hese authors may be simply theori/ing on the pra!ti!e of UlobbyingV
prealent in $ashington, but their !on!lusions are absolutely unreal. 0en
a super2!ial study of the deelopment of the e!onomi! and so!ial poli!ies
of the ;nited :tates makes !lear that the Usi@ty familiesV e@ert an
inCuen!e Peen in the absen!e of parti!ular UlobbiesVQ Euite di<erent from
that e@erted by the great trade unions with their 1I million members.
Bor nearly twenty years Ameri!an !apitalism has been passing through a
period of in!reased pro2ts and prosperity. Brom time to time the ruling
layers of the bourgeoisie !an permit themseles the lu@ury of diiding a
!onsiderably redu!ed portion of the !ake among di<erent so!ial !lasses
and di<erent so!ial layers of the !apitalist !lass itself. &n the interests of
maintaining e!onomi! stability and Uso!ial pea!e,V the big !apitalists hae
learned that it is more e<e!tie to aoid the destru!tion of !ertain layers
whi!h are parti!ularly e@posed to !ompetition and the bad e<e!ts of the
!onjun!tural swings of e!onomi! !y!les Pfarmers and mer!hants, for
e@ampleQ.
(he goernment, a!ting as the Uadministratie !oun!il of the !apitalist
!lassV in its entirety, has at its disposal powerful means with whi!h to
satisfy, at any gien time, this or that parti!ularly dissatis2ed layer of
so!iety. 6ut all this takes pla!e within the framework of a more and more
absolute and open rule of the monopolist trusts within the e!onomy and
the :tate itself.
0@amination of the 2gures on the !on!entration of !apital whi!h pro!eeds
more rapidly than eer, on the di<eren!e between the rate of pro2t in the
monopolist se!tor and that in the non-monopoli/ed se!tors, and on the
greater and greater proportion of the total national in!ome whi!h these
pro2ts represent make strikingly !lear that alidity of *ar@ and .eninTs
analysis of monopoly !apitalism.

The /Mi&ed %cono#y0
A UreformistV ariety of the theories of U!ounterailing powerV is the
theory of the so-!alled Umi@ed e!onomy,V represented by the so!ial
demo!rati! followers of the Keynes s!hool, su!h as .erner. A!!ording to
them, todayTs e!onomy lost its stri!tly !apitalist !hara!ter when the :tate,
through huge ta@es, !on!entrated within its hands an important part of the
national in!ome Pfrom ,"-+- per!ent in Areat 6ritain and the ;nited
:tatesQ by its ownership of the publi! se!tor of the e!onomy. (hey !onsider
this the Uobje!tieV e!onomi! basis for a degree of independen!e and
autonomy by the :tate apparatus in relation to the monopolist trusts. (he
Ameri!an professors :umner :li!hter and 5aul :amuelson defend a similar
thesis, what they !all a UlaborV e!onomy.
(hese reformists forget to answer the Euestion, who dire!ts, who !ontrols
the :tate' $ho !ondu!ts this Upubli!V se!tor of the e!onomy' A !on!rete
analysis of the Euestion will !on2rm in ea!h !ase that the nationali/ations
of se!tions of industry !arried out in !ountries like Areat 6ritain and Bran!e
were nationali/ations of basi! industries running at a de2!it, through whi!h
the industries of the key manufa!turers hae greatly pro2ted, een though
many of these had temporarily fought against nationali/ation for politi!al
reasons.
(he same thing is true of publi! enterprises in the ;nited :tates, for
e@ample the ele!tri!al industry and highway re!onstru!tion. (he
redistribution of national in!ome by really progressie rates of dire!t
ta@ation in $estern 0urope and Dorth Ameri!a is to a large e@tent
neutrali/ed by no less e@orbitant indire!t ta@ation, borne aboe all by the
2&
workers. As already indi!ated, the :tate whi!h dire!ts the Upubli! se!torV
of the e!onomy is a :tate !ompletely in the hands of the monopolists, and
whose personnel is usually !omposed dire!tly of the monopolists
themseles.
;nder these !onditions, the appearan!e of a powerful Upubli! se!torV in
the e!onomy does not proe that the e!onomy has lost its !apitalist
!hara!ter. &t merely !on2rms that fa!t that, in the period of a!!elerated
de!line, monopoly !apitalism !annot surie on the basis of laissez aire,
but needs growing interention of the :tate in order to guarantee its
monopoly pro2ts.
(here remains 2nally the more intelligent ersion of this theory,
e@pounded by A.A. 6erle in The (#erican 3evolution Pa remarkable
work on the distribution of shares of the big Ameri!an !ompaniesQ, and by
the publishers of 4ortune maga/ine under the surprising title of The
"ermanent ?evolution.
(hese authors a!knowledge that one hundred monopolist trusts dire!tly
!ontrol almost half the industrial produ!tion of the ;nited :tates, and
indire!tly determine the !onditions of a large part of the other half. 6ut, so
they say, these trusts are like the great feudal lords of the *iddle Ages. :o
great is their power, whi!h !an de!ide the fate of so many thousands of
people, that the trusts !annot allow themseles to be guided in their
de!isions e@!lusiely by e!onomi! imperaties, by the Euest for pro2t.
&f they de!ide to !lose their fa!tories in one !ity and !ondemn a lo!al
!ommunity of +--,--- inhabitants to mass unemployment, this will hae
so!ial and politi!al as well as e!onomi! !onseEuen!es. (he ery power of
the trusts thus imposes a limit to their power, and represents the sour!e of
a U!ounter-balan!eV whi!h is !reated in the form of a Upubli!
responsibility,V a Upubli! right,V a Uright to !onsider the publi!,V a Ugrowing
interention of the publi! authorities,V et!. &n order to aoid a dire!t atta!k
upon them, the trusts hae transformed themseles into some sort of
Ubeneolent lords,V into Uenlightened despots.V 6erle himself uses this
formulationY
(heir great dis!oery is the deelopment of a higher standard of liing for
the Unew Ameri!an middle !lassV of tens of millions of te!hni!ians,
mer!hants, !lerks, and skilled workers whose fate is intimately tied up with
that of the trusts for whom they work.
(his same theory is at present fashionable in Areat 6ritain where the
.abor right wing e@plains, for e@ample, that the demand for the
nationali/ation of the &%& !hemi!al trust has run up against the resistan!e
of the workers at this plant. &n $est Aermany the trusts hae !reated
priileged !onditions of work for their permanent employees, in
!omparison with the !onditions of work in the small and middle
enterprises.
6ut there is nothing surprising in this. &t is nothing but a repetition of the
phenomenon of a workersT aristo!ra!y, made possible by temporary super
pro2ts. (o see in this a stru!tural transformation of the !apitalist regime is
to mistake the shadow for the substan!e.

The (geing and Stagnation of Capitalis#
&t is among the supporters of Keynes and his !ontinuers that some of the
more serious non-*ar@ist !on!eptions of the nature of !ontemporary
!apitalism are found. (hus, the main Ameri!an dis!iple of Keynes,
5rofessor Alin Hansen, has deeloped the notion of Uageing !apitalism,V
whose maturity is !hara!teri/ed by the fa!t that the already a!Euired
21
sto!k of 2@ed !apital takes on su!h huge proportions as to be!ome more
and more an obsta!le to new produ!tie inestments.
(his is simply the *ar@ist !on!eption of the tenden!y of the rate of pro2t
to fall, !aused by the in!rease in the organi! !omposition of !apital. &n
Areat 6ritain, Hoan 9obinson, who os!illates between Keynes and *ar@, has
thrown light on the same phenomenon and has at the same time made
sound studies of what she !alls Umonopolisti! !ompetitionV P!ompetition
among monopoliesQ.
Howeer, these bourgeois authors following een this road arrie at
reformist and apologeti! !on!lusionsF UageingV !apitalism is a !apitalism
whi!h grows Uwiser,V whi!h has greater and greater re!ourse to Pand need
ofYQ a more eEual redistribution of the national in!ome to assure the
satisfa!tory fun!tioning of the e!onomy, whi!h permits a more and more
e>!ient running of the e!onomy by the :tate, et!.
:ome of these dis!iples of Keynes state that, thanks to these tenden!ies,
it is possible to eliminate Por to restrain to the utmostQ the !apitalist !rises
through the use of goernment e@penditure whi!h !ould be produ!tie as
mu!h as unprodu!tie. &n the last analysis, all this represents nothing but
a rationali/ation of the behaior of the Ameri!an !apitalist !lass in the
9ooseelt era, a rationali/ation of the role of the armaments and war
industry in todayTs !apitalist e!onomy.
6e!ause, in the long run, only goernment e@penditure in the armament
se!tor !an absorb surplus produ!tion that threatens the e!onomy.
U5rodu!tieV e@penditure ineitably absorbs pur!hasing power that would
be used to buy the produ!ts of other produ!tie se!tors and does not
!onstitute a !ompensating outlet.
(he 6ritish e!onomist %olin %lark has deeloped the idea of UageingV
so!iety in a parti!ular sense. A!!ording to him, the more !apitalist so!iety
matures, the more labor power and e!onomi! resour!es are swit!hed from
the produ!tie industries, in the true sense of the word, towards the
Useri!eV industries Pessentially the se!tor of distributionQ.
(here is in this idea a parti!le of truth. (he huge in!rease in the !ost of
distribution is in e<e!t a !hara!teristi! of de!lining !apitalism. (his does
not alter the fa!t that %olin %larkTs UlawV has not in the least the absolute
alue whi!h he wants to gie it. (he growth of the so-!alled UtertiaryV
industries largely reCe!ts the histori!al delay in the me!hani/ation and
automation of the distributie, banking and insuran!e trades, a delay
whi!h !ould be rapidly oer!ome, with striking !onseEuen!es for the
stru!ture of the working population.

Industrialization of 5nderdeveloped Countries
(here remains a last aspe!t of *ar@ and .eninTs theory of imperialism,
whi!h is often !riti!i/ed by !apitalist, and parti!ularly reformist
e!onomistsF this is our !on!eption of the impossibility of a serious
industriali/ation of the !olonial and semi-!olonial !ountries under the aegis
of imperialism and the UnationalV !apitalist !lass.
As far as the past is !on!erned, no serious author dares to doubt the
alidity of this thesis for the fa!ts speak far too eloEuently. 6ut, so they
say, after 13L", and espe!ially after the i!tory of the %hinese 9eolution,
!apitalism, in parti!ular Ameri!an !apitalism, has Uthought things oer.V &t
has understood that the misery of the underdeeloped !ountries faors
the Ugrowth of %ommunism.V
&t is prepared to grant them ery great help to build a Ubarrier against the
9eds.V &mperialism is interested from another angle, sin!e !apital e@ports
22
and new outlets thus !reated furnish it with the famous U!ompensating
outletsV whi!h it la!ks. :ome go so far as to speak of the possibility of
Ude!adesV of pea!eful deelopment based on the industriali/ation of
ba!kward !ountries thanks to foreign inestments.
;nfortunately for them, the fa!ts paint another pi!ture. :in!e the end of
the :e!ond $orld $ar priate e@ports are, to the majority of these
!ountries, lower than they were in the period following the Birst $orld $ar.
5arti!ular e@!eptions Pnotably as far as the Ameri!an oil industry is
!on!ernedQ immediately indi!ate the limits of the phenomenon.
9esponsible !apitalist asso!iations 8 notably the world !onferen!e of the
%hambers of %ommer!e 8 hae repeatedly e@plained Euite frankly the
reason for this state of a<airsF the inse!urity whi!h reigns in the !olonial
and semi-!olonial !ountries, and threat of reolutions, of !on2s!ations, of
nationali/ations without !ompensation, et!. Bor the alluring prospe!ts to
be reali/ed, it would be ne!essary to !hange !ompletely the politi!al and
so!ial !limate in the ba!kward !ountries= and as su!h a transformation is
not at all foreseen.
0en where ery faorable politi!al !onditions for imperialism e@ist, !apital
inestments are !on!entrated in the e@tra!tion of raw materials, trade,
transport, and banks, and not in the !reation of an indigenous se!ondary
industry. &n !onne!tion with this subje!t the e!onomi! deelopment of
!ountries like the 5hilippines, :outh Korea, Bormosa, (hailand, (urkey and
the %entral Ameri!an republi!s in the !lut!hes of $ashington should be
parti!ularly studied.
&n order to show the la!k of realism of the partisans of these UharmoniousV
!on!eptions, let us Euote two 2gures. &n the midst of $orld $ar &&, %olin
%lark wrote a book entitled The %cono#y of 6789 in whi!h he foresaw
that the industriali/ation of &ndia would absorb, between the end of the
war and 13I-, I- billion dollars of 6ritish and Ameri!an !apital.
(hese are in e<e!t the needs of this huge !ountry if it is to be!ome an
industriali/ed so!iety. Dow, sin!e the end of the war, that is, during the ten
years 13L"-"L, &ndia has re!eied in all only 1." billion dollars of
U$esternV !apital. 0en if eerything should pro!eed UnormallyV for
!apitalism, this !ountry will not hae re!eied 1- per!ent of the !apital
foreseen by the optimisti! e!onomist by 13I-.
(his underlines the impoten!e of bourgeois e!onomi! and so!iologi!al
thought to !ounterpose to *ar@ism anything but myths, illusions, or lies.
August 01::

23