Originally delivered at the Seminar for European Communist and Left Parties held by Communist Party of Britain October 14th 2004.

Even though they were originally described in 1916, are the basic features of Lenin's theory of imperialism still valid today, despite the fact that they have been imbued with a new content which has modified them? Or does the process of globalisation represent a qualitatively new element in capitalism's development, by which the concept of classical imperialism is abolished, even though some of its features persist? In practice does this mean that we need an anti-imperialist strategy and what form should it take today? Or do we need a completely new strategy which corresponds to a world capitalist economy which is globalising? I have compressed my thoughts into three theses so that I don't speak for longer than the permitted 15 minutes.

First thesis: The general features which Lenin used to describe the imperialist stage of capitalism are still valid today.

Production has grown hugely and it has rapidly concentrated. Such concentration of production into an increasingly smaller number of large enterprises has inevitably led to efforts to gain an increasingly larger place on the market, or to increase domination of regional markets. This represents a trend towards monopoly which negates the classical model of capitalism free competition between a large number of producers and elimination of the system of liberalism. The growth of the productive forces and the means of production acquires a degree of necessary investment which exceeds the material potential not only of small and medium-size producers but often also of the large enterprises. Without foreign capital only in exceptional cases can individual entrepreneurs or inventors can take part in this process. Based on this requirement, finance capital acquires its own special, leading role. Banks become the most powerful economic units.

It follows from this that 'banking capital is merged with industrial capital and banks are transformed into an institution of universal character.' The profits which accrue from production are increasingly transformed into finance capital, which, in relation to production and therefore to 'the creation of value,' behave indifferently and merely serve the accumulation of capital as quickly and as vigorously as possible. The aim of an undertaking is no longer to increase productivity but to increase 'shareholder value', which can also be achieved by the appropriate sale of enterprises or parts of them, mergers, the grouping of rival enterprises, the export of capital and in a great many other ways.

'The dominance of finance capital over all other forms of capital means the rise of a few states which are financially powerful.' These states become the political instruments of a strategy of the expansion of capital. Through their policies as great powers, they secure externally, for example, spheres of influence, commercial advantages, financial dependence and protection of collaborators in the dependent countries. Internally they secure local advantages (e.g. tax laws and infrastructure), grants and subsidies, the elimination of social benefits, the suppression of protests and opposition and through this the overthrow of democracy. The balance of power and the violence which is associated with it become typical of 'the present development of capitalism. As soon as monopoly emerges and begins to rule with the help of billions, absolute inevitability penetrates all areas of social life.' The role of the state is increasingly aimed at serving the interests of big capital. This is expressed by the term 'state monopoly capitalism'. During this process the boundaries of national economies are abolished. The expansion of capital means that other national economies are penetrated, transnational enterprises become interconnected and a merciless struggle for world markets or for territorial markets begins. On a world scale the competitive struggle requires stronger state support than national states can provide.

This is followed by the rise of economic and political metropolises which have their dominant centres in the most powerful financial and industrial states of a certain region. Today three such centers exist: the USA in its American sphere of influence (NAFTA), the EU with Germany as its centre of power, and Japan which aims to expand into eastern and southern Asia. The rivalry between these metropolises is bitter.

The totality of all these forms of capitalist world economy is covered by the concept of 'imperialism.' And imperialism is, as before, the appropriate formational-theoretical category which best describes the basic attributes of the social organization and forms of political conduct of the capitalist powers.

Second Thesis: What Is Today Called Globalisation Contains No Substantial Features Which Have Not Been Included In The Concept of Imperialism. There Are Only Found New Features Of Its Basic Structures.

If we look more closely, we will again find all the essential features of imperialism. Growth, concentration, technological rivalry, transnational mergers and the overthrow of democracy were of course all described by Lenin as tendencies in the imperialist stage of capitalism. And yet it would be wrong to conclude that, because of world-wide integration (through mergers), there are no longer any world wars. Firstly, it is possible, as the First and Second World Wars showed, to make a profit on both fronts at the same time. Secondly, however, – and this is more important the transnational corporations also have their own countries, where the state can be most favourable to their long-term interests.

Reduced costs and technological rationalisation lead to the running down of live work. The number of people needed in production (and therefore also in services) is constantly falling, and the smaller number of workers are required to have higher qualifications and work harder. Capitalism's basic contradiction is displayed for all to see. In order to make higher profits, more people must be 'freed' from production so that production costs can be reduced. The continuing pauperization of great parts of humanity in the developing countries, and now also in the former socialist countries, indicates in what direction development is going. This inner contradiction in the accumulation of capital cannot be overcome within the framework of the capitalist system.

There are numerous cases of people losing the perspective which enables them to adopt a militant class point of view based on their ordinary experiences at work. One of the most important ways of losing this perspective is the conceptual confusion which is encouraged by the mass media. The imperialist war to break up Yugoslavia is presented as 'the defence of human rights'. The occupation of Afghanistan as part of 'the struggle against terrorism' and the occupation of Iraq as 'liberation' and 'the protection of humanity against the danger of weapons of mass destruction.' Capital's unlimited power is sold as 'freedom,' monopolistic globalisation is referred to as 'the free market,' finance capital's domain in a globalised world, i.e. in a world subject to the interconnection of capital is glorified as 'a just world order.' So theoretical mastery of social relations is necessary because they have become abstract. One of the communists' main political tasks is to master this theoretical work and transform this mastery into a people's culture.

Third thesis: Imperialism's temporary victory means the growing danger of military conflicts starting and also the danger of wars between metropolitan states.

As far as Lenin's characterisation of imperialism is concerned (as I intend to show), it follows that the imperialist metropolitan states do not reject the deployment of military resources to further their interests. The expansion of capital creates a world in which there are no longer any empty places into which it can expand. Conflicts about the rivalry for markets, sources of raw materials and opportunities for investment are inevitable. Every day we can observe the struggle for oil. The war in Iraq is primarily about oil and anyone old enough to remember the 1950s can remember the nationalist Iranian prime minister Mossadeq who was overthrown in a putsch and jailed after he was bold enough to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. In the Balkans, nations have been played off against each other since the First World War in the interests of a German bank (Deutsche Bank). Since the start of the 20th century successive wars have been fought by the big capitalist powers and these also continued after the turn of the century. However, we should also learn from the historical experiences of two world wars. During the First World War, Lenin stated that war is an extreme means used in the competitive struggle of capital and that this very fact is a feature of imperialism. Today it has not yet been clearly established that a major conflict between the metropolitan states is being prepared. At present the world's public is unaware that the rearmament of Japan, which is associated with glorification of its militarist past, is underway. Military campaigns, like the ones in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo, provide chances to test new weapons. Why test anything if it is not necessary to fight against the ghost of a communist great power?

From the World Trade Organisation (WTO) statistics we can see to what lengths the competitive struggle has gone. Of the twenty world corporations which have the greatest foreign assets and therefore the most aggressive strategies, nine are based in the EU, including five from Germany alone, six more in the USA and two in Japan. The struggle to accumulate capital is waged with state support from regional centres. Daimler-Chrysler is, despite American participation, a German group and IBM an American group.

Evidence of this is the fact that we face a future in which military threats will again depend on mutual relations between the great powers.

The only answer to this can be international class struggle. But this means, firstly, the rise of a common theoretical grasp of the basic features of our age. Each and every one of us can and must contribute to this. And our communist parties are the organisational platform which can transform a theoretical understanding of our age into a political force.



--Prof., Hassan Charfo, DrSc. heads the Communist Party of the Czech Republic, Bohemia and Moravia’s Department of International Relations.