Imperialism as the highest stage of capitalism

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
French edition from 1925

Imperialism as the highest stage of capitalism (actually: "Imperialism as the youngest stage of capitalism") is a work that W. I. Lenin wrote in Zurich in 1916 and which was published in 1917 after the fall of Tsarism in Russia . Its main task was to present “on the eve of the first imperialist world war , the overall picture of the capitalist world economy in its international interrelations”. The work is considered an important and powerful contribution to the Marxist theories of imperialism .

To the work history

The book wants to be based on undisputed statistical data and testimonials from bourgeois economists and was written in such a way that the tsarist censors could pass it as legal. For this reason it was originally limited to purely economic analysis. Lenin only supplemented politically controversial statements with the preface of July 6, 1920; they are directed primarily against " Kautskyism " (see also ultra-imperialism ) within social democracy .

Lenin's preparatory work began in Switzerland in the second half of 1915 . The reading of 148 books and 232 articles from 49 different periodicals were processed into the “Notebooks on Imperialism”. Lenin named John Atkinson Hobson's Imperialism (1902) and The Finance Capital by Rudolf Hilferding of works that served as models .

The work was written between January and June 1916. It was first published in mid-1917 as a brochure in Petrograd by the publishing house “Shisn i Snanije”. The foreword to the French and German edition of 1921 was first published in the journal "Kommunistitscheski Internazional" (No. 18). Originally the German title of the text was "Imperialism as the youngest stage of capitalism", which corresponds to a more precise translation of the original Russian title "Империализм, как новейший этап капитализма". The work was published under this name in Germany until 1926. It was not until 1929 that the work was given the title commonly used today, in line with Stalinist doctrine.

The concept of imperialism

Following Marx's materialist conception of history , Lenin's analysis focused on the question of the “economic nature of imperialism” .

Lenin gave as a short definition that imperialism was the monopoly final stage of capitalism . Such a definition contains the main thing, because on the one hand finance capital is the banking capital of a few monopoly big banks, which is merged with the capital of monopoly industrial associations, and on the other hand the division of the world is the transition from a colonial policy that is unhindered to the territories not yet conquered by any capitalist power, to a colonial policy of complete monopoly control of the entire territory of the earth, which is then divided among a few.

In his extensive definition, which Lenin still did not consider the complete theory, he cited five main features:

  1. Concentration of production and capital , which has reached such a high stage of development that it creates monopolies , which play the decisive role in economic life
  2. Merging of bank capital with industrial capital and the emergence of a financial oligarchy based on finance capital
  3. the increase in importance of the export of capital in relation to the export of goods
  4. the formation of international monopoly capitalist associations that divide the world market among themselves
  5. the complete territorial division of the earth among the capitalist great powers

“Imperialism is capitalism at the stage of development where the rule of monopolies and finance capital is taking shape, the export of capital has gained outstanding importance, the division of the world by the international trusts has begun, and the division of the entire territory of the world by the largest capitalist countries is completed."

The direct cause of the imperialist wars is the law of unevenness in the economic and political development of the capitalist countries , also first formulated by Lenin .

I. Concentration of production and monopolies

For Lenin the tremendous growth of industry and the rapid process of concentration of production in large-scale enterprises are characteristic features of capitalism. The concentration of production is much greater than that of the workers; because the work in the large companies is far more productive than in the smaller production units. Free competition creates a concentration of production, and this then passes into monopoly at a certain stage of development. "The result is a gigantic advance in the socialization of production", which also includes the "process of technical invention and perfection". “Production is socialized, but appropriation remains private.” The socially created and used productive forces would remain in the hands of a few capitalists and the surplus value produced is appropriated by them.

The cartels are becoming a basic feature of economic life. As a result, large parts of it are permanently withdrawn from competition. The cartels then agree sales conditions, payment conditions, divide sales areas among each other, set sales volumes and prices for the products and thus also distribute the profit among the providers. Free competition is only formally recognized; In reality, there is a compulsion to submit to the monopoly associations, which step by step seek to secure raw material sources and sales markets for themselves. Measures such as material blocking are then used for this purpose; Lockdown of workers; Lock the feed; Lock the paragraph; Exclusive contracts with customers; systematic undercutting to ruin outsiders; Blocking of credit; Disavowal.

II. The banks and their new role

"Capitalism is so developed that the production of goods, although it still 'rules' and is the basis of the entire economy, is in fact already undermined and the main profits go to the 'geniuses' of financial machinations."

The original function of the banking system, however, was to collect idle funds and make them available to the capitalist class for investment in productive capital. A “handful of monopolists” are given the opportunity to obtain precise information about the business situation of the individual capitalists and ultimately to control and determine their business policy through the granting of loans. The concentration in banking narrows the circle of possible lenders and thereby intensifies the dependency of the borrowers. There is a “personal union” of the banks with the largest industrial and trading companies through share ownership and supervisory board mandates. On the one hand, the banks gain a universal character in their importance for the economy; on the other hand, the tendency towards specialization based on the division of labor is increasing. "The old struggle between small and big capital is repeated at an incomparably higher level of development."

III. Finance capital and finance oligarchy

“The old capitalism has outlived itself.” In an expansion of Hilferding's concept, Lenin writes:

"Concentration of production, the resulting monopolies or the growing together of banks with industry - that is the genesis of finance capital and the content of this term."

The so-called “democratization” of stock ownership is really just one of the means of increasing the power of the financial oligarchy; because it is only sufficient to own a controlling stake to determine the decisions as the majority shareholder. The “participation system” also enables the public to be scooped with impunity, because it is the easiest way to evade legal responsibility for dark or dirty business practices or to shift business risks or losses.

“The separation of capital ownership from the use of capital in production, the separation of money capital from industrial or productive capital, the separation of the pensioner, who lives exclusively on the return of money capital, from the entrepreneur and all persons who have access to capital to participate directly is inherent in capitalism in general. Imperialism, or the rule of finance capital, is that highest stage of capitalism where this division reaches enormous dimensions. The preponderance of finance capital over all forms of capital means the predominance of the pensioner and the financial oligarchy, means the segregation of a few states that have financial 'power'. "

IV. The export of capital

Free competition capitalism was characterized by the export of goods; the export of capital is characteristic of capitalism under the rule of monopolies. It serves to relieve the advanced countries of their "capital surplus", which pours into the colonies and / or backward countries, where it ultimately serves to promote the export of goods.

“The necessity of exporting capital is created by the fact that in some countries capitalism has become 'overripe' and capital lacks scope for 'profitable' activity (assuming the underdevelopment of agriculture and the poverty of the masses)."

V. The division of the world among the capitalist organizations

The world market has long been created; agreements on a world scale, the division of spheres of influence and the formation of international cartels are “quite natural”. This is compelled by the profit motive and the advanced level of concentration; there is no other criterion than power.

Lenin quotes the Berlin magazine Die Bank :

“May our state socialists, who let themselves be blinded by a beautiful principle, finally see that in Germany monopolies never had the purpose or the success of benefiting consumption or even granting the state a share in entrepreneurial profits, but always only have served to rehabilitate run-down private industries with state aid. "

VI. The division of the world among the great powers

Colonial policy ended the occupation of unoccupied land on this planet; therefore only reallocation is possible. Imperialism has always existed; For the monopolies, however, it has to be a matter of pooling raw material sources in one hand. The imperialist primacy becomes decisive for the international balance of power between the European and non-European states.

VII. Imperialism as a special stage of capitalism

For Lenin, imperialism is the further development of capitalism as a social formation and its basic properties. The replacement of free competition by capitalist monopolies is economically fundamental for this. Lenin deals here with the definitions of imperialism by Kautsky and Hobson, both of which fall short of the mark.

VIII. Parasitism and putrefaction of capitalism

Any monopoly "inevitably creates a tendency to stagnation and rot"; because to a certain extent it dwindles the drive to technical and any other progress. The monopoly even has the power to stop it artificially. The reindeer layer is growing enormously; Lenin is referring to people who make a living from “ coupon cutting ” and whose job is idleness.

"The world is divided into a handful of usury states and a vast majority of debtor states."

The “pensioner state” is reflected in the socio-political conditions of these countries as well as in the division of the labor movement into two main currents. The achievement of monopoly profits enables the "bribery" of the lower classes in the pensioner states. Opportunism and imperialist ideology penetrate the working class as well.

The exploitation of the entire world by imperialist states such as Great Britain at the time favors the bourgeoisisation of part of the proletariat there by benefiting from the extra profit based on imperialist supremacy . The labor aristocracy and labor leaders would be bought or at least paid for by the bourgeoisie , which would lead to phenomena like opportunism in the labor movement . Combined with the imperialist foreign and military policy, “ social chauvinism ” arises in politics , which would make armed conflicts over the implementation of the respective national power politics more likely.

IX. Criticism of imperialism

The balance of power between the imperialist powers cannot be stable in the long run. So times of peace are only respite between wars.

In the fight against national oppression, forces are being mobilized in the newly developed countries.

X. The place of imperialism in history

Monopoly capitalism has exacerbated all the contradictions of capitalism. Phases of rapid growth are not excluded; however, the development becomes more and more uneven. The putrefaction is affecting the previous centers such as England. Hence Lenin believes he is more correctly labeling imperialism as “transitional capitalism” or “dying capitalism”.

reception

Lenin's distinction between core countries and periphery within a global system of capitalism was taken up in the Latin American dependence theory. For example by Raúl Prebisch , who claimed that the periphery was suffering from a deterioration in the exchange conditions ( Prebisch-Singer thesis ), as well as by André Gunder Frank and Fernando Henrique Cardoso . Likewise, as a continuation of the can world-systems theory of Wallerstein Immanuel be considered.

In 1926, the German Marxist theorist Fritz Sternberg (1895–1963) criticized Lenin's concept of a labor aristocracy . Empirically it can be shown that the working class does differentiate itself economically, but this goes hand in hand with an increase in the wage level for all workers and a decrease in unemployment. It is therefore wrong to denounce the social democracy as “bribed” (a thesis on which the Comintern's thesis of social fascism was later based), but the objectively favorable development in capitalism represents the economic basis for the majority of the working class in Germany to continue to have a majority the (after Lenin: " revisionist ") SPD and not the KPD voted.

The political scientist Iring Fetscher sees Lenin's thesis that wars are caused by the interests of finance capital falsified by the Second World War : Neither the Japanese expansion policy nor the cooperation between the USA and the Soviet Union in the anti-Hitler coalition can be explained by Lenin's theory of imperialism. Also makes Fetscherplatz points out that the distribution of income , predicts unlike Lenin, after the Second World War in the United States and other Western countries less unequal was: The incomes were spread more widely held increasingly concentrated, the emergence of a middle-class society had not foreseen Lenin.

According to the political scientist Hartmut Elsenhans , Lenin's theory of imperialism loses its logical consistency if the law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall , on which it is based, turns out to be false. No empirical evidence has been found for this law up to the present.

The historian Wolfgang J. Mommsen calls the theoretical level on which Lenin argues low. Despite its character as "canonical writing", to which it was hyped up in the Eastern Bloc , it is essentially a polemic against Kautsky and revisionism in German social democracy, as well as an attempt to answer the question of why the revolution in the most advanced capitalist states failed to materialize.

The historian Gerd Koenen sees several logical contradictions that Lenin should have noticed himself: He put the beginning of modern imperialism in 1900, while imperialist colonial acquisition had its climax in the decades before. The export of capital, which he regarded as a decisive cause of the rivalry between the imperialist powers, by no means affected all of them: Russia, for example, was not an exporter of capital, but an importer. Moreover, Lenin's economic arguments could not explain why the war was raging in Europe instead of in the colonial areas. His theory of the economic rivalry between the imperialist powers as the most important cause of war would also have led one to expect a military conflict between Great Britain and France , which in reality were allied with one another in the Entente cordiale.

literature

See also

Late capitalism , criticism of globalization

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Lenin: Foreword to the French and German editions. July 6, 1920 (first published under Imperialism and Capitalism in No. 18 of the magazine Die Kommunistische Internationale , published October 1921). In: VI Lenin: Imperialism as the highest stage of capitalism. Common outline. 6th edition Dietz Verlag, Berlin 1962, p. 7
  2. ↑ See WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, pp. 5–7
  3. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 94f.
  4. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 18
  5. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 22.
  6. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 27
  7. ↑ a b W. I. Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 28
  8. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 24
  9. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 29
  10. ↑ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 29f.
  11. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 33
  12. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 38
  13. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 43
  14. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 44
  15. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, pp. 45, 47
  16. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 48
  17. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 49
  18. ^ Rudolf Hilferding: The finance capital. 1912. pp. 335f
  19. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 51
  20. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 52
  21. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 53f
  22. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 64
  23. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, pp. 66, 68, 70
  24. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 67
  25. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 72
  26. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 80
  27. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 77
  28. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 81
  29. ↑ a b W. I. Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 93
  30. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, pp. 105f
  31. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 107
  32. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 108f
  33. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 114f.
  34. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 127
  35. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 129
  36. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 132
  37. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 133
  38. ^ WI Lenin, Berlin 1962, p. 135
  39. ↑ Stephen Hobden, Richard Wyn Jones: Marxist Theories of International Relations. In: John Baylis, Steve Smith (Eds.): The Globalization of World Politics. An introduction to international relations. 3rd ed. Oxford University Press, New York 2005, ISBN 0-19-927118-6 , pp. 231f.
  40. ↑ Fritz Sternberg: The Imperialism . Malik, Berlin, 1926. Helga Grebing : History of ideas of socialism in Germany, part II. In: the same (ed.): History of social ideas in Germany: Socialism - Catholic social teaching - Protestant social ethics. A manual . VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden 2015, p. 268 ff.
  41. ^ Iring Fetscher : From Marx to the Soviet ideology. Presentation, criticism and documentation of Soviet, Yugoslav and Chinese Marxism . Diesterweg, Frankfurt am Main / Berlin / Munich 1972, p. 84 f.
  42. ↑ Hartmut Elsenhans: Imperialism . In: Dieter Nohlen (Ed.): Lexicon of Politics, Volume 1: Political Theories. Directmedia, Berlin 2004, p. 486.
  43. ↑ Wolfgang J. Mommsen: Theories of Imperialism. An overview of the more recent interpretations of imperialism. Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, Göttingen 1987, p. 41.
  44. ↑ Gerd Koenen : The color red. Origins and history of communism . Beck, Munich 2017, p. 675.