THE HISTORY OF IMPERIALISM AND NEW IMPERIALISM
The thinkers realized the power of the people in a nation, that their rights must be given and the authorities should be chosen by them. (Moreno, 2019) “(…) Capitalism unleashes productive forces too large to dominate them. The Socialist Society is the Society of Development Maturity, while capitalist society is intrinsically developed (…) ”Hinkelammert, 1973, p.10
Capitalism in its origins in the industrial revolution until today, had various changes through its evolution, which were modified by socialist parties over time. In due time, their apogeus could be given for the good of capitalism and for socialism. However, they had their shortcomings and disadvantages in various European countries.
Due to the constant struggles of the workers so that they can perform their work more fairly, positive points were given, since the majority of the countries have a balanced management of socialism and capitalism. In other words, there is a direct connection of socialism and capitalism with respect to the current management of most developed countries and not developed in the world.
Imperialism represents a nation from the perspective of domination, socialism would be made up of a group of individuals who share the same ideology and want to exercise it for the State. While both are in various contexts, one from an entire nation and the other from one group of citizens. These manage to have a connection generated by capitalism, since both are promoted by financial power for their own assets. Imperialism is deeply rooted to achieve raw materials in the world market, while socialism seeks rights, especially so that there is equality not only specifically in rights, but that necessary income can be obtained so that citizens with less opportunityfinancial have a way to survive in society.
Imperialism in Europe during the nineteenth century caused a great economic crisis since according to Dos Santos (1986) “crises are due to exogenous factors to the system collides with broad refutations of the facts. The crises have tended to be periodic, presenting the form of cycles ". (p. 132). For this, the monetary explanation is an important issue to relate it to what happened in imperialism since the kingdoms of Europe when trying to colonize land generated an inflationary behavior that caused distortions in income distributions. This leads to a readjustment in the economy which leads to different problems such as unemployment, blockbusters, etc.
Because the economic crisis hits a country very strong, this problem leads to technological innovations. A clear example is the industrial revolution since there is an economic crisis and the main problem is unemployment, people get to have needs which require them to innovate and invent different forms of products for at least generate income and at the same timekeep their families. These classes of needs are a clear example of how people despite the problems have the ability of innovation.
During the economic crisis during imperialism, there were models that start from the relationship between investment and consumption. On the one hand, the relationship between investment and consumption can generate progress in the economy of a country since according to Dos Santos (1986) “the possibility of continuous economic growth will basically depend on the new investments being made in such a way that they finda growth rate living enough to be able to consume the new production ". (p. 138). This means that the need helps that the investment be a good option to be able. On the other hand, there were sometimes that the models explained previously could not occur in practice since having the economic crisis present, it prevented innovations that did not call their attention or were not necessary for them or they werethat there were many more innovations that overshadowed the rest. Therefore, there were people who became more affected at that time by the crisis.
Despite the existence of the economic crisis and thanks to the Industrial Revolution, Europe became financially between 1972 and 1973. There are statistical data of the economic recovery of Europe which dos Santos (1986) presents as follows:
“France, which was less affected by the recession of 1970-71, grew on 5.4% in 1972 and 6.7% in 1971. Italy, which came down its growth rate to 1.2% in the depressive year of 1971, it is recovered in part in 1972 (3.4%) and significantly in 1973 (5%). The United Kingdom, whose growth rates are the ones that most reflect the seriousness of the capitalist crisis, after having lowered the rhythm of increased PNB to 2.31% In 1971, it was partly recovered in 1972 (3.8%) and significantly in 1973 (5.8%). Federal Germany, which lowered its strong growth rate to 3.1% in 1971, presented a rhythm still low in 1972 (3.7%) but already presented clear recovery signs in 1973 with 5.3%.”(P. 188)
After recovering economically, the world trade that led Europe reached great growth in international purchases that allowed them to completely leave the economic crisis that lasted so many years.
During the nineteenth century, there was a belief of superiority due to liberalism and industrial revolution. An example of this is social Darwinism that according to Sandín (2000) is “(…) product of a deformation or a misinterpretation of Darwinian theory, because in short, it is the interpretation (and if applicable, application) literalunique totally clear and concrete of Darwin’s great work: the title ”(P. Four. Five). This definition means that during the imperialism of the time an erroneous definition of what is social Darwinism originated since each person had a class that is defined, so the mixture between them was prohibited. In addition, it was believed in a higher race, that is, a breed higher than all the others, so there were conflicts due to the practice of this. A clear example is the 2nd World War that Nazi Germany starred in the belief that they were those of the upper race.
Social Darwinism was not only present during World War II but also in England at the end of the S.XVIII and early S. XIX. On the one hand, the laws of that time caused cheap hands for industrialization in the city. This led to the sexes should be isolated which caused a struggle for survival. During the industrial revolution, there were cases of social superiority. A clear example are the relationship between the worker and the bourgeois. The latter was the owners of the factories who achieved cheap work who were the workers. In this case, "class superiority" was predominant at that time. Which required workers to work long days to only be able to survive since there was no free time, much less vacation. On the other hand, according to Sandín (2000) “in 1851, the philosopher and economist Herbert Spencer, in his book the social static coined the term of survival of the most suitable to define the engine of social relations”. This means that the beliefs of that time were favorable for the bourgeois since they were the surviving class instead those who did not "evolve" were those of the working class which have no benefit in society.
Said previously, social Darwinism was very present during World War II, exactly in Nazi Germany. In Germany of that time there was a belief that they were the upper race which should dominate the world. This caused an extremist nationalism that caused a genocide against the Jews. The Germans of that time looked with contempt to the Jews for their religious differences and by the wrong belief what is called social Darwinism. Sandín (2000) cites Konrad Lorenz as follows:
“« In the civilization process, we have lost certain innate liberation mechanisms that normally persist in order to maintain the purity of the race: some human institution must select the strength, heroism, social utility, (…) if thebut of humanity, lacking natural selective factors, will not be the destruction due to the degeneration that the domestication process carries with them. The idea of race as the basis of the State has already obtained good results in this regard ”” (P. Four. Five)
In summary, social Darwinism is an erroneous belief of Darwin’s book which caused discrimination within the society of the time and thus also cause a World War that almost ends more than half of the world population due to the “superiority of arace" .
The new phase of the development of the imperialist world economy called globalization is generated from the crisis of the Fordist regulation model of the 60s. This has as its central axis a substantial increase in the degree of globalization based on a higher level of financial, commercial, technological and productive exchange, as well as new and deepest forms of communication relationship. This accompanied by changes in economic policies with a hegemony based on opening and liberalization policies in dependent countries, for a greater insertion and expansion of central capitalism. According to Olesker (2001), regarding globalization:
Its central objective is to allow the rise in the rate of gain worldsay a combination of forms of relative and absolute surplus value. (Olesker, 2001, P. 3).
In this phase the most important changes in economic policies were the following. The promotion of free trade in the level of foreign trade, with the intention of promoting unilateral and unrestricted opening especially in dependent countries. Also, the State goes from participating strongly in the economy, to be a particular subsidiary and regulatory state, since it tries to regulate so that the markets work competitively. Finally, regulatory and control policy on foreign investment is replaced by a policy that promotes foreign investment, giving great freedom for the performance of transnational companies. This leaves international companies in better competitive conditions than nationals.
Regarding the modifications in relation to work, two aspects exposed by the first stand out. Competition in the conditions of current globalization accentuates the little ability to generate employment, additionally exacerbated by the processes of privatization, denationalization, concentration and centralization of capital
The second aspect to highlight are the proposals for labor flexibility, among which are: extensive possibilities of dismissal by companies, the decrease in the base salary and increase in variable salary, the replacement of old workers with young and cheaper workers, Increased work day, polyvante work, etc. (Olesker, 2001)
As Olesker (2001) concludes, the ideology of globalization argues the inevitability of it and its consequences. On the one hand, preach that salvation or advance of nations has only one way: to be competitive in the world market and, on the other hand,
The world economy is organized and administered by the most powerful states, since it is due to its great influence and economic power that this task assume;Not in the perspective of a free market, but to ensure the hegemony of its companies over the national and local markets of less powerful nations. think about it:
It is about preventing these nations from having defense mechanisms of their markets. The domain of national and local markets also depends on the control of the media and communication that achieve, through advertising and other more sophisticated mechanisms of cultural influence, determining behaviors and behaviors that translate into solvent consumption, that is,In market.
Imperialism is currently suffering a political crisis and the "technicians in economics" are aware of how it whips a good part of the imperialist states. Among which are the following cases presented by Gil (2017). Trump’s enmity towards all in his recent visits, except with his most masochistic servants;He has enabled a trade war with Germany and the French state, and has exacerbated tensions in NATO. In Germany, the most enriched states require reinforcing centralism so as not to have to pay more than the impoverished states. One more example is found in the next paragraph of Gil (2017):
The political crises that hit the bourgeoisies as an effect of the exhaustion of the imperialist order that the US imposed in the first instance in Bretton Wood and that was subsequently remodeling according to their needs. The synergy of problems of all kinds that weigh the expanded accumulation of capital in the last half century, synergy that definitely exploded in 2007, has ended up overflowing the very limited rationality of the bourgeois political caste as a whole as a whole
"The capital" of Marx is important in imperialism today for different reason among which the following stand out. Current imperialism is the decisive "criteria of practice" confirming the veracity of the General Law of Capitalist Accumulation, exposed by Marx in the Seventh Section, Chapter XXIII of Book I of Capital, which comes to say that;The more the emancipatory potential of science and technique develops, the more bourgeois controls that stop this potential, the more wealth develops in a few more increases the poverty of the majority and the more the capital develops the more capital developsAlienation. Current imperialism is also the reflection of the evolution of the contradictions analyzed especially in chapter XX on simple reproduction and to a lesser extent in the XXI on the extended book II of Capital. (Gil, 2017)
The new imperialism differs from the ancient due to three factors that Gil (2017) stands out. The first is that imperialism no longer exports capitals or explodes only with trade, but obtains surplus value directly with the factories that it has transferred or installed there, in the fields and mines of which it has been appropriate, in the servicesthat has mounted for its businesses, in the tourism industry, in sexual exploitation, etc. Also, current imperialism suffocates even more than then to peoples and continents that squeeze with financial dependence, external debt, scientific techno delay, sanitary and food blackmail, military threat, etc. Finally, Gil (2017), concludes the following:
Unlike the imperialism of a century ago, they have currently acquired great economic weight but above all political-cultural and alienator the business of the commercialization of the cultures and identities of the peoples. Real -time connectivity sharpens irresoluble contradiction between the emancipatory potential of popular cultures that resist capitalism, and the imperialist logic of the bourgeois cultural industry
Leave feedback