Re: [OPE] On Rereading Lenin's Imperialism: A Rejoinder [Cyrus Bina'sResponse to Paula Cerni's post]

From: Paula <Paula_cerni@msn.com>
Date: Thu Jan 21 2010 - 19:13:18 EST

In reply to John Millios' and Dimitris Sotiropoulos' contribution.

If I understand correctly, this perspective is quite close to my own. In
particular I wish to draw attention to the notion of a complex and unequal
'imperialist chain' that IMO extends to all present capitalist states -
though there seems to be some ambiguity on this issue in Millios' and
Sotiropulos' formulation, so I would appreciate their clarification.

Aside from this I raise only a few minor doubts and questions.

> Classical approaches to imperialism were based on a profound rejection
> of Marx’s conceptualization of ‘competition’.

Not sure how profound this rejection really was, since the classical
approaches understood monopoly capitalism as arising out of free
competition.

>The relationship of ‘interiority’
> between state and capital represents a twofold condition. On the one
> hand it precludes the self-diffusion of statist linkages into a global
> ‘empire’ that purportedly supervises homogeneously global economic
> structures. On the other hand it prevents capital that moves beyond
> the national borders from retaining a ‘certificate of origin’.

Not convinced that this 'certificate of origin' is really lost, or at least
completely lost. Consider for example the current dispute concerning
Google's operations in China.

> We find Bina’s reading of Marx’s concept of competition misleading. In
> fact, what he actually has in common with the classical Marxist
> theories is the rejection of the Marxian concept of social capital.
> This is an important differentiation from Marx’s analysis.

In my article I don't use of the concept of social capital either, but as
you describe it I do not see it as in any way contrary to the classical
theories of imperialism.

> In this sense, the only authentic ‘empire’
> is the imperialist chain in its entirety.

Is there a danger that this formulation concedes too much ground to the
notion of one global or transnational empire (in the Hardt and Negri sense,
etc)?

Paula

_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Thu Jan 21 19:15:20 2010

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Jan 31 2010 - 00:00:02 EST