>the problem is that this replacement simply introduces a new type of fuzzy
>thinking, because it doesn't distinguish the imperialism of the turn of the
>present century from that of 1945-80 or from that of the era between the
>World Wars or from that which Lenin, Bukharin, and Luxemburg discussed or
>from non-capitalist forms of imperialism. But such distinctions need to be
>made.
>
>Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
There is no such thing as non-capitalist forms of imperialism, unless you
want to use the word in a dictionary sense rather than a Marxist sense.
Even though Rome had an empire that ranged as far west as England and as
far east as Palestine, this was not imperialism in the sense that I use it.
Nor does it really describe in a scientific sense the kind of relationship
between the USSR and Eastern Europe. Imperialism at the turn of the century
and imperialism at the turn of the century we are living in now is almost
exactly the same. It is basically about capitalist super-exploitation. Let
me repeat that: capitalist super-exploitation.
Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org
