Globalization or Imperialism?
In: Latin American perspectives, Band 29, Heft 6, S. 80-84
ISSN: 1552-678X
In: Latin American perspectives, Band 29, Heft 6, S. 80-84
ISSN: 1552-678X
In: Political affairs: pa ; a Marxist monthly ; a publication of the Communist Party USA, Band 79, Heft 11, S. 23-25
ISSN: 0032-3128
Discusses anti-corporate sentiment, Lenin's theories of imperialism, corporate debt, and the problem of capitalism.
In: Monthly review: an independent socialist magazine, Band 54, Heft 6, S. 1-16
ISSN: 0027-0520
Discusses increasing acceptance of the concept of imperialism as used to describe US foreign policy and goals, in light of the George W. Bush administration war on terrorism. Originally written as the introduction to "Essays on imperialism and globalization" by Harry Magdoff, forthcoming from Cornerstone Publications in India. Covers US military action in Afghanistan in response to the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and possible military action in Iraq, economic imperialism and global capitalism, and global poverty.
In: Monthly review: an independent socialist magazine, Band 57, Heft 4, S. 1-11
ISSN: 0027-0520
The United States, since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has often been accused of exhibited a new imperialism or new militarism. However, the author argues that the United States has long had both imperialistic & militaristic designs on the rest of the world & that little actually changed with U.S. actions after 9/11. The most important change that he does see as having occurred is that the U.S. is more overt in its imperialistic actions & philosophy than it was before 9/11. A continuation of its current imperialism, & its current openness about this philosophy, will lead to "global barbarism or worse." However, while imperialism has long been the U.S. mode of action, the United States does not have to continue in this vein, for nothing in human history is inevitable. D. Knaff
In: Monthly review: an independent socialist magazine, Band 55, Heft 3, S. 1-144
ISSN: 0027-0520
Discusses US foreign policy, militarism, and geopolitics, focusing on the Middle East and Iraq War, and international activism in opposition to US global hegemony; 14 articles. Based mostly on papers presented at a conference organized in honor of Harry Magdoff's 90th birthday, held in Burlington, Vermont, May 3, 2003. Contents: The new age of imperialism, by John Bellamy Foster; Confronting the empire, by Samir Amin; U.S. weakness and the struggle for hegemony, by Immanuel Wallerstein; U.S. hegemony today, by Peter Gowan; The new geopolitics, by Michael Klare; The global minotaur, by Joseph Halevi and Yanis Varoufakis; The two wings of the eagle, by William K. Tabb; The grid of history: cowboys and Indians, by Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz; Can U.S. workers embrace anti-imperialism? by William Fletcher, Jr.; Notes on the antiwar movement, by Barbara Epstein; Prospects for anti-imperalism: coming to terms with our own bourgeoisie, by Sam Gindin; Construction of an enemy, by Eleanor Stein; Homeland imperialism: fear and resistance, by Bernardine Dohrin; The parameters of resistance, by Amiya Kumar Bagchi.
In: Thesis eleven: critical theory and historical sociology, Band 4, S. 124-163
ISSN: 0725-5136
A critical examination of the ideas of Bill Warren's Imperialism: Pioneer of Capitalism (publication information not given) is presented. Warren critiques V. I. Lenin's concept of imperialism as centered on capital export, showing that the empirical evidence & his views are inconsistent. However, Warren does not adequately examine the political corollaries of Lenin's views, or the implications of Third World socialist revolutions. Warren also proposes that colonialism can be viewed as progress because of its introduction of Western institutions to non-Western societies. He criticizes the post-WWII equation of imperialism with capitalism & the views of dependency theorists. This analysis invites rethinking of Marxist views on imperialism & Marxism itself, yet it lacks serious consideration of the implications for Marxism of major socialist revolutions in less developed countries, as well as the political & military aspects of imperialism. 44 References. W. H. Stoddard.
In: Millennium: journal of international studies, Band 31, Heft 2, S. 319-326
ISSN: 0305-8298
World Affairs Online
In: Security dialogue, Band 35, Heft 2, S. 237-242
ISSN: 1460-3640
In: The national interest, Heft 80, S. 74-80
ISSN: 0884-9382
In: Latin American perspectives, Band 29, Heft 6, S. 70-79
ISSN: 1552-678X
Exposes the underlying forces at work behind the shifts in US policies & politics & discusses the compulsions behind the projection of US power in the world as a "new imperialism." The author addresses the following questions: Why the US shift from a politics of consensus to one of coercion on the world stage? What was really at stake in the war on Iraq? What role does the economy play in pushing the US into foreign adventurism? What is the relationship between US militarism abroad & domestic politics? Adapted from the source document.
"How does control of media resources serve political and economic ends? What is the impact of media concentration and monopoly in the era of technology convergence, with not just traditional and 'new' media but also consumer electronics, telephony and computing industries? Revisiting the classic concept of media imperialism, Oliver Boyd-Barrett presents a thorough retake for the 21st century, arguing for the need to understand media and empires and how structures of power and control continue to regulate our access to and consumption of the media. It's no longer just Disney and Dallas--it's also now Alibaba, Apple, Facebook, Google, Samsung and Huawei. Examining the interplay between communications industries and the hierarchies and networks of political, corporate and plutocratic power in a globalized world, the book explains: the historical context of the relationship between media and imperialism; contestation and collaboration among new media empires; the passion for social justice that inspired the original theories of media and cultural imperialism, and how it has been embraced by a new generation. Digging deeply into the global landscape and emerging media markets to explore how media power works across transnational boundaries, this book gives a clear and sophisticated argument for why media imperialism still matters."--Publisher description
In: Monthly review: an independent socialist magazine, Band 53, Heft 7, S. 1-9
ISSN: 0027-0520
Explores the US role in globalization from the viewpoints of two books: Michael Hardt & Antonio Negri's Empire, & Istvan Meszaros's Socialism or Barbarism. Hardt & Negri see any effectual struggles against the Empire, global sovereignty, as only affecting the form that globalization will take. The question is whether the Empire will achieve "the global expansion of the internal US constitutional project." A less popular view is put forth by Meszaros's argument that capital is an incurably iniquitous system with multiple contradictions that can never be resolved. He sees globalization as "the potentially deadliest phase of imperialism," with the US using its hegemonic economic & military power to enforce capitalism's uncontrolled destructive forces. L. A. Hoffman
In: Monthly review: an independent socialist magazine, Band 67, Heft 3
ISSN: 0027-0520
Lenin, Bukharin, Stalin, and Trotsky in Russia, as well as Mao, Zhou Enlai, and Den Xiaoping in China, shaped the history of the two great revolutions of the twentieth century. As leaders of revolutionary communist parties and then later as leaders of revolutionary states, they were confronted with the problems faced by a triumphant revolution in countries of peripheral capitalism and forced to revise the theses inherited from the historical Marxism of the Second International. With the benefit of hindsight, the author will indicate the limitations of their analyses. Lenin and Bukharin considered imperialism to be a new stage of capitalism associated with the development of monopolies. The revolution, made in the name of socialism (and communism), was, in fact, something else: mainly a peasant revolution. In his opinion, Trotsky would certainly not have done better. His attitude towards the rebellion of the Kronstadt sailors and his later equivocations demonstrate that he was no different than the other Bolshevik leaders in government. Adapted from the source document.