Or this, a shock, perhaps, to those who believe Russia cannot be considered imperialist in any Leninist sense: “[Among] the six powers [that had divided the world], we see, firstly, young capitalist powers (America, Germany, Japan) which progressed very rapidly; secondly, countries with an old capitalist development (France and Great Britain), which, of late, have made slower progress than the previously mentioned countries, and, thirdly, a country (Russia) which is economically most backward, in which modern capitalist imperialism is enmeshed, so to speak, in a particularly close network of pre-capitalist relations.” (V.I. Lenin, Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism, International Publishers, 1939, p. 81) The essence of imperialism, wrote Lenin, is the “division of nations into oppressor and oppressed.” (V.I. Lenin, Declaration of Rights of The Working and Exploited People, 4 January, 1929 in Pravda No. 2 and Izvestia No. 2.)

What do you make of the point this article raises and the criticism that Lenin’s five points don’t apply to a individual countries but are rather characterizations a globe-girding economic system? Is the article a wrong reading of Lenin?

  • Lenins2ndCat
    link
    162 years ago

    Seems kind of ultra-left on China.

    Pre-conditions must be met before you can achieve other things. Multi-polarity is a precondition that must be returned to before the door for ML revolutions will reopen. That door closed in 1991 and it is no coincidence that not a single one has happened since and it’s not simply that the Soviet Union was providing support, that was not the case for many. The conditions for them to occur are simply wrong.

    A return to multi polarity might not be the only precondition we must achieve but it is certainly one.