Suchergebnisse

This item is part of the Political & Rights Issues & Social Movements (PRISM) digital collection, a collaborative initiative between Florida Atlantic University and University of Central Florida in the Publication of Archival, Library & Museum Materials (PALMM).

pt. I. The economics of imperialism.--pt. II. The politics of imperialism. ; Mode of access: Internet.

International audience ; The clear thrust of Percy Bysshe Shelley's radical politics has generally been considered as stopping short of questioning Britain's imperial policies, and the poet has frequently been accused of latent, if not overt, imperialism. This paper on Shelley and imperialism attempts to 'clarify' Shelley's thoughts in the context of British imperialism. Shelley, as a second generation Romantic poet, was witness to the birth of Britain's imperialism, and although he did not live long enough to experience the heyday of the British Empire, his time was a period of transition. The philosophy of the Enlightenment had begun its gradual transformation into the rhetoric of imperialism, and as Europe moved into the nineteenth century, the cosmopolitanism of the philosophers was eroding into nationalism. Thus, if Britain's great imperialistic project was still in the future in Shelley's time, the forces that were to underpin it were very much in the air-that curious blend of orientalism, evangelism, utilitarianism and nationalism. Yet the question remains as to whether he subscribed to these movements. It has been argued that he did. In this paper I suggest that, on the contrary, Shelley's radical refutation of tyranny in every form and his commitment to humanity are transparently visible in every line he wrote. I propose to begin with an analysis of 'The Assassins' (1814), then to look at A Philosophical View of Reform, and to conclude with Shelley's deconstruction of imperialism in Prometheus Unbound.

International audience ; The clear thrust of Percy Bysshe Shelley's radical politics has generally been considered as stopping short of questioning Britain's imperial policies, and the poet has frequently been accused of latent, if not overt, imperialism. This paper on Shelley and imperialism attempts to 'clarify' Shelley's thoughts in the context of British imperialism. Shelley, as a second generation Romantic poet, was witness to the birth of Britain's imperialism, and although he did not live long enough to experience the heyday of the British Empire, his time was a period of transition. The philosophy of the Enlightenment had begun its gradual transformation into the rhetoric of imperialism, and as Europe moved into the nineteenth century, the cosmopolitanism of the philosophers was eroding into nationalism. Thus, if Britain's great imperialistic project was still in the future in Shelley's time, the forces that were to underpin it were very much in the air-that curious blend of orientalism, evangelism, utilitarianism and nationalism. Yet the question remains as to whether he subscribed to these movements. It has been argued that he did. In this paper I suggest that, on the contrary, Shelley's radical refutation of tyranny in every form and his commitment to humanity are transparently visible in every line he wrote. I propose to begin with an analysis of 'The Assassins' (1814), then to look at A Philosophical View of Reform, and to conclude with Shelley's deconstruction of imperialism in Prometheus Unbound.

This thesis analyzes how Multatuli shows anti-imperialism through the characters of Max Havelaar and Stern in Max Havelaar. The aim of the thesis is to prove that Max Havelaar and Stern embodies anti-imperialism from their author, Multatuli through their actions, ideas, and commentaries. The analysis of the characters uses theory of imperialism and anti-imperialism. The analysis of the characters is then connected to the real-world perspective of social, culture, and economy that happened around 1850s, by using the theory of new historicism. The results of the analysis show that Max Havelaar and Stern proved their anti-imperialism by fighting against economic, cultural, and political imperialism.

Blank pages for "Notes" (155-162) ; "Published . for the use of classes run in connection with the Amalgamated union of building trade workers' educational scheme, and the National council of labour colleges." ; "Foreword" signed: George Hicks. ; "The author of the first draft of this book is Thomas Ashcroft."--p. ii. ; Bibliography: p. 149-150. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Over the past century, Marxism has been radically transformed in line with circumstances and fashion. Theses that once looked solid have depreciated and fallen by the sideline; concepts that once were deemed crucial have been abandoned; slogans that once sounded clear and meaningful have become fuzzy and ineffectual. But two key words seem to have survived the attrition and withstood the test of time: imperialism and financialism. Talk of imperialism and financialism – and particularly of the nexus between them – remains as catchy as ever. Marxists of different colours – from classical, to neo to post – find the two terms expedient, if not indispensable. Radical anarchists, conservative Stalinists and distinguished academics of various denominations all continue to use and debate them. The views of course differ greatly, but there is a common thread: for most Marxists, imperialism and financialism are prime causes of our worldly ills. Their nexus is said to explain capitalist development and underdevelopment; it underlies capitalist power and contradictions; and it drives capitalist globalization, its regional realignment and local dynamics. It is a fit-all logo for street demonstrators and a generic battle cry for armchair analysts. The secret behind this staying power is flexibility. Over the years, the concepts of imperialism and financialism have changed more or less beyond recognition, as a result of which the link between them nowadays connotes something totally different from what it meant a century ago. The purpose of this article is to outline this chameleon-like transformation, to assess what is left of the nexus and to ask whether this nexus is still worth keeping.

An exchange of letters between Joe Francis and Shimshon Bichler and Jonathan Nitzan. The exchange concerns 'Imperialism and Financialism: A Story of a Nexus', an article that Bichler and Nitzan posted in September 2009.

The old theories of imperialism attempted to explain the phenomenon of the militarization of the industrial nations and their conflict over colonies that led to World War I. It was the rise of monopoly capitalism, the emergence of finance capital and the control over the state that led inter-capitalist rivalry and finally to War. In the 1960s a new version of imperialism was related to the ideas of the dependency school, while there is a gap during the 1980s and the 1990s. Recently, new theories of imperialism emerged, that discuss globalization and militarization from a different perspective. They undermine inter-capitalist rivalry and focus on American hegemony and capitalist accumulation on a world scale. The work of three representative writers (Harvey, Amin and Panitch) is critically discussed here indicating the limits and some merits of their approach.

In spite of substantial exertion by the government, school and language purists to refine Dzongkha, one still hears locutions such as: "Taxi thopchi-ga?" (Got a taxi?), "Party minjo - ga?" (Are you not going to party?) or "Sha kg chi" (a kilogram of meat). The interlocutors barely realize that they are employing lexical items that are borrowed from foreign languages to communicate in Dzongkha. Language purists are concerned with this threat of linguistic imperialism, but the relentless pursuit of speaking pure Dzongkha seems to be problematic with many speakers. One of the main factors that trigger this trend is change—social and cultural change. As David Crystal (1987) rightly says, "Language would stand still only if society did." Languages are always in a state of flux, because societies are, and society entails one's customs and practices, beliefs, attitude, way of life and the way people organize themselves as a group. In this paper the author examines the influence of cultural change on Dzongkha language and the inflow of foreign words in Dzongkha language.

The article charts and discuss the historical use of the concept of imperialism in the Communist International (Comintern; Third International, 1919–43). By analyzing first, the establishment and framework of the Comintern's understanding and use of imperialism as a political and instrumental tool, the aim of the article is to look beyond the official and sanctioned policy of the Comintern on imperialism between the wars. In doing so, the author examines and discuss internal discussions as they evolved over time at Comintern headquarters in Moscow by analyzing documents filed in the Comintern Archive (RGASPI) in Moscow. Key concepts focus on the Leninist perception of imperialism; the periodization debate, and contextual explanations linked to the frequent policy shifts of the Comintern and its relation to Bolshevization and Stalinization. In conclusion, the article highlights the historical trajectory of imperialism and anti-imperialism as a constituent source of Bolshevik policy making in its interpretation of global society.

Globalization has removed the boundaries of communication systems between one region and another region that is transferred very fast through various media such as television, magazines, and internet. National culture in a country is rapidly becoming a global culture and becoming a capable industry in influencing national culture in other countries. Cultural In the era of reform, imperialism appears to be more prominent than the previous regime era that influenced all the joints of economic, political and cultural life. Cultural imperialism today, not only from the West but also from non-Westerners like India, Korea, China, Japan and Turkey. In response to this, an open cultural strategy is needed to take the universal values in all areas of science, technology, economics and culture without losing the identity as a sovereign and dignified nation in the midst of other nations. Traditional culture is a valuable national treasure and does not bother the process of development and modernization.Keywords: globalization, imperialism, identity

This thesis has examined the contemporary Sino-African relationship in the light of the Chinese political economic structure. In a changing global political economic landscape, it has become necessary to look beyond classic discourses of North-South interaction defined by neo-imperial structures and neoliberal mechanisms. By investigating the Chinese political economic structure and its mechanisms, the specifics of the Sino-African interaction, taking neo- imperialism as a comparative frame, a new framework was created in search of a means to accurately delineate a South-South relationship in a modern, globalized international structure. It was shown that the Sino-African interaction is indeed not of a classic neo-imperial nature, although similarities can be observed. Instead, it is a sinicized, mutually beneficial process of cooperative interaction. Based on these factors and characteristics, the resulting framework has been dubbed Sino-imperialism, and is based on the embeddedness of the Chinese identity, the prevalence of the Chinese State, and the goal of realizing Xi Jinping's Chinese Dream. ; submittedVersion ; M-DS

Over the past century, the institution of capital and the process of its accumulation have been fundamentally transformed. By contrast, the theories that explain this institution and process have remained largely unchanged. The purpose of this paper is to address this mismatch. Using a broad brush, we outline a new, power theory of capital and accumulation. We use this theory to assess the changing meaning of the corporation and the capitalist state, the new ways in which capital gets accumulated and the specific historical trajectory of twentieth-century capitalism up to the present.

Over the past century, the institution of 'capital' and the process of its 'accumulation' have been fundamentally transformed. By contrast, the theories that explain this institution and process have remained largely unchanged. The purpose of this mimeograph is to address this mismatch. Using a broad brush, we outline a new, power theory of capital and accumulation. We use this theory to assess the changing meaning of the corporation and the capitalist state, the new ways in which capital gets accumulated and the specific historical trajectory of twentieth-century capitalism up to the present.