[Marxism] Imperialism and the US working class (Was YADL)

milongonsinga milongonsinga at yahoo.com
Mon Apr 6 09:12:13 MDT 2009


The degree to which the advanced capitalist countries are the net beneficiaries of investment in the developing world is well documented. While the subordiante capitalist classes tend to benefit from foreign investment, the country as a whole becomes objectively poorer. In the meantime, the working class of the advanced capitalist countries is bought off by the crumbs from the exploitation of foreign workers. It's the reason workers in this country are so complacent, and see themselves as middle-class. This isn't even controversial. If you really want to find the data that will support this argument it shouldn't be very difficult. 

 
 
 A student asked Soen Nakagawa during a meditation retreat, "I am very discouraged. What should I do?" Soen replied, "Encourage others."



----- Original Message ----
From: S. Artesian <sartesian at earthlink.net>
To: milongonsinga at yahoo.com
Sent: Monday, April 6, 2009 7:57:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Imperialism and the US working class (Was YADL)

Sorry, you get no breaks.  You have failed to provide one shred of evidence 
to back your primary assertion:

" The wealth of the imperialist countries is based historically, has its 
origins in, the looting of the Third World and slavery."

Your secondary assertion, that this wealth has then been distributed to the 
workers of those imperialist countries, giving them a stake in maintaining 
the imperial order, is also unsupported by anything other than your 
vulgarization of  Lenin's Imperialism, a work that is itself quite seriously 
flawed in both its empirial and theoretical foundations.

As for your musings about the US military expenditures and what must be the 
reason and the benefit of those-- give us all a fucking break; military 
spending and wars have been part of developing capitalism, developed 
capitalism, overdeveloped capitalism; such spending, and such war, has been 
the important to advanced, imperial capitalist countries, and less advanced 
colonized, semi-colonized, non-colonized capitalist countries.

Do you really think the US invaded Iraq to plunder its resources?

Nobody, at least not I, is arguing that the US doesn't benefit from its 
position as top dog, that the advanced countries do not benefit from their 
penetrations, exploitation of less advanced, that empire and colony did not 
make capitalism what it is today-- capitalism-- but those are not the 
issues-- those are the diversions you are attempting to raise to cover the 
fact that you cannot, will not answer the questions to your most critical 
assertions:

How much wealth is being transferred, robbed from the less developed 
countries to bolster the advanced?

How is such wealth being transferred to the detriment of  all classes of 
less developed countries -- an assertion that you make sometimes more, 
sometimes less, explicitly?

Hiw is such wealth dispersed to the working classes of the advanced 
countries that makes them partners, stakeholders in maintaining the imperial 
transfers?

Regarding whites gaining from the exclusion, segregation, impoverishment of 
blacks--If you look historically at "benefits"-- even social benefits like 
education, percentage of children graduating high school; medical benefits--  
and wages-- when do those numbers begin to improve for white workers, the 
white poor in the South?




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joaquin Bustelo" <jbustelo at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Imperialism and the US working class (Was YADL)



________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/milongonsinga%40yahoo.com





More information about the Marxism mailing list