It’s always amusing to me when someone “independently rediscovers” the exact same things that Marx and Lenin had already figured out over a hundred years ago, give it a fancy name and then act like it’s some great new revelation. In summary: it turns out that geopolitical policy is driven by the financial and economic interests of the ruling class, and not simply by the rational self-interest of states as the “realists” like to believe. It’s almost as if imperialism is the result of a certain monopoly stage of capitalist development. If only someone had written a book about this. If only someone had explained to the “realists” that states are not mystical self-actualizing entities but instruments of class rule.
That’s how you know Marx was onto something; he had reproducible theories with predictive power.
Parenti had his earlier works attributed to Marx.
I haven’t read the book but it’s probably about how Australia is a running dog for the US rather than rediscovering the concept of imperialism.
It probably is. I was commenting more on the way in which the post on MoA discusses it. However even the bit about how the UK and AUS are willing accomplices/junior partners is not new. And we already have the term vassal state which encapsulates that same concept. A vassal in the feudal system was after all a subordinate of the feudal overlord who was endowed with certain privileges in return for their fealty. I suppose if the target audience is Australian then it may be shocking news to some of them that they are in this position, but it’s not a new realization to anyone outside of the anglo sphere.
I agree. Just want to also note that the article is a republishing of a tweet of a Twitter user. It’s not a product of b or whatever the author calls themselves.
It is why we must continue studying dialectical materialism, it is such a revolutionary thought.
It will sound anti-dialectical, but at times i feel like dialectical materialism has solved philosophy.
I feel the same way, although rather I feel dialectical materialism has made all bourgeoise philosophy obsolete. Any philosophical endeavor that doesn’t take dialectical materialism as its basis is like a physics hypothesis that ignores general relativity. Like always, I will plug The Destruction of Reason, which shows how bourgeoise philosophy has only regressed for about 170 years since Hegel, and has no further purpose but to quiet the guilty conscience of capitalists or rouse their petit bourgeoise footsoldiers to defend capital.
What about philosophies that only apply on a small scale of your individual life, like Stoicism? There are no stoic politicians but ive found Stoicism to be really useful for balancing a job and activism.
This reminds me of one maoist writing lenghty posts on how countries can either be entirely colonized or entirely (and independently) imperialist.
Maoists when they see South Africa and how it as an arpethied crown colony colonized and subjugated Mozambique and Angola.
I wonder how this compares with Patrick Bond’s work.
Books like these are a gateway to marxism-leninism.
