[Marxism] Lenin's definition of imperialism

Einde O'Callaghan einde at gmx.de
Thu Oct 25 18:42:29 MDT 2007

Steve Palmer schrieb:
> I really can't agree, Einde. Kidron took a snapshot of what British
> imperialism, just recovered from second world war, was like half-a-century ago.
> It was just embarking on constructing a neo-colonial solution to the problem of
> 'decolonisation', had the Labour governments rebuild finance capital and crush
> revolutionary national liberation movements, preparing for Thatcher era
> deregulation which allowed resurgent British finance capital occupy the
> position it does today.
> Whatever merits Kidron's view might have had then, it is woefully out of date
> and any attempt to pretend that Kidron's arguments hold up today is refuted by
> the facts. Lenin was and is completely correct in his characterisation of the
> essentials of imperialism and Kidron completely wrong
I haven't had a chance to reply to you in any detail - and probably 
won't for several days - but briefly: I wasn't trying to suggest that 
Kidron's piece was an adequate description of imperialism today - indeed 
that was what I wanted to suggest by referring to its age - rather I 
think that Kidron did point to some problems with Lenin's analysis that 
I feel are still valid. Indeed I've always felt that - despite 
Bukharin's theoretical weaknesses -  his more theoretical work, 
Imperialism and World Economy, gave a better description of imperialism 
than lenin's "Popular Outline". However I don't have time to go into 
that now - perhaps after the weekend.

Einde O'Callaghan

More information about the Marxism mailing list