The main features of imperialism as decaying, dying capitalism. The main features of the era of imperialism at the end of the XIX-beginning of the XX in International cartels - a real threat of world war
Exactly 100 years ago, in the book "Imperialism as the Highest Stage of Capitalism", which was studied in the Soviet Union in all universities, V.I. Lenin identified five basic economic features of imperialism as the "highest" and "last" stage of capitalism.
1) The concentration of production and capital, which has reached such a high stage of development that it has created monopolies that play a decisive role in economic life.
2) The merger of banking capital with industrial capital and the creation of a financial oligarchy on the basis of this "financial capital".
3) The export of capital is more important than the export of goods.
4) The formation of international monopoly capitalist unions that redistribute the world.
5) The end of the territorial division of the land by the largest capitalist powers.
Today, each of the five economic hallmarks of imperialism has changed. But let's take a closer look at the fourth, the most relevant feature today - as it turns out, the most unsafe for the world. The fifth chapter of the book is devoted to this feature, which is called "The division of the world between the unions of capitalists." The chapter begins with the following words: “Monopoly capitalist unions, cartels, syndicates, trusts, divide among themselves, first of all, the domestic market, seizing the production of a given country into their more or less complete possession. But the internal market, under capitalism, is inevitably linked to the external one. Capitalism created the world market long ago. And as the export of capital grew and foreign and colonial ties and "spheres of influence" of the largest monopoly unions expanded in every possible way, things "naturally" approached a worldwide agreement between them, to the formation of international cartels. "
So, the fourth economic feature of imperialism is associated with the formation of international cartels. International cartels are monopolies of monopolies, agreements between national monopolies of different countries (trusts, concerns, syndicates) on the economic division of the world. The formation of international cartels is preceded by the formation of cartels at the national level. Lenin writes about this in the first chapter ("Concentration of Production and Monopoly"). The first national cartels appear after the crisis of 1873. The economic recovery of the late 19th century and the economic crisis of 1900–1903. led to the mass formation of national cartels, they "become one of the foundations of all economic life." At the same time, many international cartels are formed.
Cartels as a network of the shadow economy
Within the framework of international cartel agreements, monopolists from different countries divide the markets for goods, determine the geographical boundaries of the spheres of operations of individual participants in the international cartel. At the same time, uniform (monopoly high) prices for goods and services of the same type are almost always set. Sometimes the limiting volumes of production and sale of certain goods are determined. In addition to sales markets, sources of raw materials and areas of capital investment may be subject to division. There are also procurement cartels (setting monopoly low prices for purchased goods and services). It is obvious that international cartels restrict or even make it impossible for the trade, investment and financial activities of outsiders who have found themselves outside the international agreements. Often, cartels "clear" their "living space" by first carrying out synchronized dumping, and only then setting monopoly high prices.
A striking example of an international cartel at the beginning of the last century is the agreement between the American General Electric Trust and the German AEG corporation. In 1907, these giants of the electrical industry entered into an agreement on the division of the world. Competition in the markets for electrical products was eliminated. Lenin describes in great detail the history of the creation and the mechanism of the functioning of the international electrotechnical cartel. He also gives examples of international cartel agreements on the division of the world markets for rails, zinc, and commercial maritime shipping. He describes in detail the competition between the American Rockefeller kerosene trust and the German kerosene corporation. At some point in time, competitors were close to forming a worldwide kerosene cartel, but at the last moment the agreement was upset.
In revealing the fourth economic feature of imperialism, Lenin referred to the study of the German economist Robert Lifman (1874-1941) "Cartels and Trusts." According to Lifman, in 1897 there were about 40 international cartels in the world with the participation of Germany, and by 1910 there were already about 100. It is noteworthy that at the beginning of the twentieth century, almost no international cartel could do without the participation of companies from Germany and the United States, conducting an aggressive seizure world markets. They "squeezed" the markets from their competitors from England, France, Belgium, Holland.
And although already at the dawn of the century, antitrust laws were in force in many countries, which prohibited the creation of cartels. or presupposed consent from the antimonopoly services, cartels had one advantage - they, unlike other forms of monopolies (trusts, syndicates, concerns), could be created secretly from the state and society according to the type of "gentlemen's agreements". And even if the agreements were in writing, the documents were safely hidden in the signers' safes.
In other words, international cartels were, and still are, a version of the shadow economy. Often, cartels are masked by signs of information centers, scientific institutes, business unions, committees, commissions, etc. Companies that enter into a cartel agreement retain their financial, legal, commercial and industrial independence. True, sometimes cartel members create a joint stock company to perform management functions. The production and market quotas of the cartel members correspond to their shares in the capital of the joint stock company. An example is the international nitrogen fertilizer cartel (created in 1928). In 1962, the cartel members created the joint-stock company Nitrex A.G. with a capital of 1 million Swiss francs (registered in Switzerland, Zurich). The shares were divided among the cartel members. Nitrex centrally collected all orders for the supply of nitrogen fertilizers and distributed them among the cartel members.
There is also documented evidence that international cartels took an active part in the preparation and unleashing of World War II. In the period between the two world wars, the process of creating international cartels intensified sharply. By the beginning of the Second World War of 1939-1945, according to some estimates, their number had increased to almost 1200, and on the eve of the war they controlled from a third to half of the total turnover of world trade. Mostly these were agreements of monopolies of various European countries. The number of international cartels, with the simultaneous participation of European and American monopolies, was small. Capitalist countries, which were in a state of protracted economic crisis, began to pursue a differentiated antimonopoly policy. Within their countries, the authorities still tried to limit monopolies and stimulate competition. And if international cartels were created that could strengthen the positions of national companies in foreign markets, the authorities did not create almost any obstacles. On the contrary, they encouraged the creation of cartels.
Several international cartels with the participation of American and German companies did not stop their activities throughout the years of World War II. Accusations of international cartels were made at the Potsdam Conference in 1945 and at the Nuremberg Trials.
After the war, anti-cartel sentiment prevailed in all countries. The United Nations (UN) has discussed that this new institution should completely prohibit international cartels, or at least control their creation and functioning. In the post-war decades until the 1970s. antitrust laws were more or less effectively implemented in the West. Including in the part concerning international cartels. By the early 1970s. the number of such cartels was estimated at 70-80. It is noteworthy that these were predominantly transatlantic cartels, i.e. agreements with the simultaneous participation of European and American monopolies.
Cartels under the guise of research institutes
From the end of World War II to the mid-70s. the most famous in the world were international cartels in the field of maritime navigation (there were several of them), for electrical equipment, radio equipment, cars, rolling stock, as well as fertilizers: nitrogen, potash and phosphate. In the production of chemical goods, there were cartels created in the period between the two world wars: soda, dyes and quinine. In the field of non-ferrous metal production, there are cartels for aluminum and copper. In the production of ferrous metals - for steel, certain types of rolled products, rails, pipes, tinplate. Naturally, the international cartels did not advertise their activities, trying to convince the society and state control bodies that they are engaged in "research" activities. For example, the functions of the international potash cartel (before World War II it included the monopolies of France, Germany, Spain, Poland, Great Britain, the USA and other countries) after the war, three "institutions" began to perform. This is the International Potash Institute in Bern (Switzerland), representing mainly the interests of Western European companies, as well as two US organizations - the American Potash Institute and the Foundation for International Potassium Research. International maritime cartels were called “pools” and “conferences”.
For international cartels, the "roofs" of unions of entrepreneurs were used ... For example, the international steel cartel in 1967 created a "roof" in the form of the International Iron and Steel Institute (MIES). The creation of the Ministry of Emergency Situations, as it was officially announced, is aimed at strengthening contacts between steel producers of various capitalist countries, exchanging information regarding the situation on the ferrous metals market. In 1970, the Ministry of Emergency Situations united more than 100 metallurgical companies from 24 capitalist countries, which produced about 95% of the steel in the capitalist world. It is difficult to name the exact number of international unions of entrepreneurs. They can have a variety of names: chambers of commerce and industry, exchange committees, industry associations, commissions, etc.
Patent cartels
After the war, patent cartels emerged. In the context of the unfolding scientific and technological revolution in international trade, the share of manufactured goods, especially its high-tech industries, has sharply increased. The positions of corporations operating in such industries began to be actively protected with the help of such tools as patents (the right to exclusive use of a technical innovation) and licenses (permission to use a technical innovation to other companies for a license fee, participation in capital or other rights). Many authors were quick to declare that under the conditions of scientific and technological revolution, traditional international cartels "ordered to live a long time," being replaced by patent cartels based on the exchange of patents and licenses within a narrow circle of companies from different countries. Moreover, these patent cartels did not hide, moreover, they were protected by patent and other services that protect the intellectual property of big capital.
There was a "cartel blockade" of the Soviet Union and Russia, and today it is especially important. It is interesting that so far our economists, political scientists and historians have absolutely not touched upon this most important aspect of Soviet economic history. For 70 years of its existence, the USSR was in a tight ring of international cartel blockade. Soviet foreign trade organizations negotiated and concluded contracts with companies that were part of various international cartels. The USSR's trade with companies that were not part of the cartels was extremely difficult. That is why we could trade with the West only by consistently pursuing a policy of state monopoly of foreign trade. Without such a monopoly, international cartels could rob us mercilessly, setting monopoly high prices for goods imported by the Soviet Union, and monopoly low prices for goods we supply to the West. Until the end of the USSR, it was not possible to overcome the factor of the "cartel blockade", its effect only softened. That is why the fundamental principles of Soviet economic policy were self-reliance, as well as the priority development of trade and economic relations with the countries of the socialist community.
After the collapse of the USSR and the creation of the Russian Federation, the "cartel blockade" against our country did not weaken. Thank God, our Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) realized this in time. Since 2014, the key focus of the FAS has been the investigation of cartels with the participation of foreign companies. True, the FAS has repeatedly stated that the fight against international cartels in Russia is very difficult. The main reason is the absence of an international act regulating joint inspections of the FAS with foreign antimonopoly agencies, as well as allowing the exchange of confidential information with them.
But back in the 1970s, when the patent cartels came to the fore. Of course, traditional cartels, covering the markets for raw materials and semi-finished products, continued to exist. Some of them have completely disappeared into the "shadow", others have changed their status. They have acquired the form of interstate agreements on the protection of markets for certain goods. Such international commodity agreements (MTS) became widespread in the first two or three post-war decades. These are agreements on zinc, tin and some other metals, grains, jute, coffee, bananas and other exchange commodities. The most famous agreement on oil, called OPEC.
It was believed that these agreements are designed to protect developing countries from the unequal exchange of countries of the poor "south" with countries of the rich "north", exporting industrial products (the so-called "price scissors"). However, it should be borne in mind that behind the signs of developing countries, transnational corporations (TNCs) were often hiding, which operated in these countries and were interested in such cartel agreements of the interstate type. OPEC is a striking example. It is an organization of petroleum exporting countries. It was founded in 1960 by a number of countries (Algeria, Ecuador, Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, etc.) with the aim of coordinating actions on the volume of sales and setting prices for crude oil. Due to the fact that OPEC controls about half of the world's oil trade (estimated at the beginning of this century), it is able to significantly influence the level of world prices.
It was intended to remove the stiff competition between these oil giants. For this, it provided for a reduction in oil production in accordance with trends in demand for it and maintaining the existing proportion between the producing companies. By 1932, the Ahnakarri cartel included all seven of the largest Anglo-American companies, which later created a "consortium for Iran." It is noteworthy that the US antitrust services "blessed" the creation of the oil cartel, as it strengthened the position of American corporations in the world oil market.
Today almost nothing is heard about the international oil cartel. But in the media they talk a lot about OPEC. With the light hand of some journalists, they even began to call it "anti-cartel", meaning that it was created to confront the "seven sisters". Nothing of the kind: the oil cartel continues to exist. It's just that the "sisters" included in it have already managed to change their "maiden" surnames more than once. And most importantly, they are hiding behind the screen of the OPEC organization, which they have learned to use as a kind of "Trojan horse". As an example, we can recall the 1973 energy crisis, when prices for “black gold” quadrupled within a few months. Then the OPEC countries were blamed for everything. However, the main “beneficiaries” of that “price revolution” were the same “seven sisters” (and a number of other oil corporations that joined them), as well as Western banks, where tens of billions of petrodollars from OPEC countries began to flow.
Yes, of course, in the world of oil in the 70s and 80s of the last century, there were great advances. Formally, many third world countries have announced the nationalization of the oil industry. But the Western oil corporations remain the buyers of oil. Members of the international oil cartel hold monopoly positions in oil refining, transportation and sale of oil products.
Bretton Woods monetary and financial system
The 1970s were called the decline of the gold-dollar standard and the beginning of the "golden age" of international cartels. Since the late 1970s. the topic of international cartels is gradually disappearing from the economic literature, the media, and the agenda of meetings of international organizations. In later years, if there are publications on the topic of international cartels, they contain materials and figures related to previous years. It seems that the era of international cartels is over. But this is an illusion. Cartels have been in the shadows before. They still remain in the shadows. It's just that before the antimonopoly services periodically raised a fuss about international cartels, but now they prefer not to look for or notice them. An explanation for this phenomenon should be sought in the general weakening (and even dismantling) of the antimonopoly function of the modern capitalist state. And this weakening, in turn, is due to the fact that there has been a rather radical change in the world monetary and financial system. In the 1970s, there was a transition from the gold-dollar standard (Bretton Woods monetary and financial system) to the paper-dollar standard (Jamaican monetary and financial system).
The essence of this transition was that before the world currency was the US dollar, which was issued by the US Federal Reserve System, but the emission was limited by the US gold reserve. Following the Jamaican Monetary and Financial Conference (January 1976), the dollar's peg to gold was removed. Figuratively speaking, the “golden brake” was removed from the FRS “printing press”. The owners of the Fed's "printing press" have found almost complete freedom. However, there remained one and very serious limitation - the demand for the products of the FRS "printing press" - dollars. The topic of how the "owners of money" created and continue to create demand for dollars is very broad, is beyond the scope of this conversation. But the first thing that occurred to the “owners of money” was to remove the control over prices for everything and everyone. The energy crisis is the first and very striking manifestation of this new policy (as we noted, the prices for "black gold" soared in 1973 in a few months four times at once). In the light of the new financial and monetary realities, international cartels are very much needed by the “owners of money”. On the one hand, the world financial oligarchy is helping to create international cartels in every possible way. On the other hand, it controls most of the media and does everything possible to ensure that the topic of international cartels does not come up at all. An unspoken taboo has been established on her.
Banking cartels
Returning to Lenin's work "Imperialism as the Highest Stage of Capitalism", I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the "classic" bypassed one very important aspect of the topic of international cartels. Yes, he listed many industries and industries that were cartelized at the beginning of the First World War at the international level (electrical industry, merchant shipping, rail production, etc.).
It is possible to cartelize and Dunk's activity, but the topic of bank cartels is taboo. We emphasize once again that the cartel is primarily a price agreement. In the banking sector, not goods are produced, but money, which also has a price. It is expressed as interest on active (credit) and passive (deposit) transactions. Banks (both nationally and internationally) can agree on uniform interest rates, as well as share the markets for credit and deposit operations. In the work "Imperialism as the Highest Stage of Capitalism" the second section of the work is devoted exclusively to banks ("Banks and Their New Role"). But we also do not find any mention of bank cartels in it. Lenin writes about banking trusts in America: “Among the few banks that, due to the process of concentration, remain at the head of the entire capitalist economy, naturally, there is a growing desire for a monopoly agreement, for a bank trust. In America, not nine, but two of the largest banks, the billionaires Rockefeller and Morgan, dominate the capital of 11 billion marks. " But a bank trust arises as a result of the merger or takeover of some banks by others. "
However, one giant banking cartel emerged two years before Lenin began writing his work. We are talking about the US Federal Reserve System. Lenin ignored such an event as the adoption by the US Congress of the Federal Reserve Act in the last days of 1913. Why is it surprising that even many Americans did not show interest in some little-understood "Federal Reserve System". Meanwhile, the creation of the FRS has become a key event not only in American, but also in world history. And this is a topic for a special conversation. Now we are interested in the Fed as a banking cartel. And the FRS was precisely a cartel, uniting under its leadership the lion's share of all US banks. Moreover, it was a legal cartel, the status of which was determined by the law of 1913. Unfortunately, few people pay attention to the fact that the FRS is a banking cartel.
Formally, the Federal Reserve was a national banking cartel operating within the United States. But it must be borne in mind that among the main shareholders of the Fed as a private corporation were bankers not only from the New World, but also from Europe. Among them, first of all, are the Rothschilds. American researcher Eustace Mullins told his readers about this back in the early 50s of the last century in his book "Secrets of the Federal Reserve". Therefore, one can reasonably believe that the Fed was from the very beginning an international banking cartel.
It is interesting that it was the largest members of the international FRS cartel who became the main beneficiaries of the First World War, since over the years of the war, they issued war loans to the belligerent countries (primarily Great Britain and France) for many billions of dollars. The American economist Murray Rothbard wrote: “The creation of the Federal Reserve System coincided with the outbreak of the First World War in Europe. It is generally accepted that it was only thanks to the new system that the United States was able to enter the war and not only finance its own military needs, but also provide significant loans to its allies. During the war, the Federal Reserve approximately doubled the money supply in the United States and, accordingly, prices also doubled. For those who believe that the United States' entry into World War I was one of the worst events of the 20th century, with disastrous consequences for both the United States and Europe, the possibility of the United States entering the war is hardly a convincing argument in favor of the Federal reserve ".
The banking systems of most countries of the world are arranged according to the cartel principle. At the same time, the "head" of such cartels is the central banks, which determine the "rules of the game" for private commercial banks and monitor their compliance with these rules. Still, these are mostly national banking cartels. But in the period between the two wars, the building of a truly global banking cartel began. We are talking about the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in Basel, which was created in 1930. Initially, it was intended to organize reparation payments by Germany in favor of the victorious countries. However, after a while, its main function was to coordinate the activities of the largest Western banks. After World War II, the BIS officially began to coordinate the activities of central banks. The BIS is often referred to as the "central bank of central banks" or "the club of central banks." In fact, this is the "head" of the world banking cartel. It is known that this international banking supercartel played an important role in the preparation and unleashing of World War II, and during the war years it coordinated the actions of the bankers of the warring countries. At the conference in Bretton Woods, the question of the criminal activities of the BIS was raised, it was (albeit with great difficulty) a decision was made to liquidate this banking supercartel. However, the decision of the conference was never implemented. The international cartel of moneylenders with a "head" in the Swiss city of Basel continues to rule the world money market. And through the money market - the entire world economy. It goes without saying that the two world cartels, the Federal Reserve and the Bank for International Settlements, closely interact with each other. They can be compared to two heads of one world hydra.
Let's go back to the work "Imperialism as the Highest Stage of Capitalism". In it, the "classic" constantly talks about the law of uneven economic and political development under capitalism. By this "unevenness" Lenin means a constant change in the balance of power in the world arena of individual capitalist states, as well as of the largest companies in the domestic and world markets. This “unevenness”, in particular, gives rise to the instability of international cartels. Many cartel agreements are concluded for a term, but often fall apart much earlier than the agreed date. Some of the participants in international cartels are strengthening (for example, as a result of the support of their states), while others, on the contrary, are weakening. This inevitably gives rise to the temptation to revise the original agreements by the strengthened monopolies. In some cases, they manage to get a revision. In others, no. Then the cartels disintegrate. There are times when it is generally not possible to agree on the creation of an international cartel.
International cartels are a real threat of world war
Perhaps the most important political conclusion contained in Lenin's analysis of the fourth economic feature of imperialism is that international cartels pose a threat to peace and are sources of war. The conclusion, at first glance, is paradoxical. After all, seemingly cartel agreements provide for the end of competitive wars between monopolies for markets, sources of raw materials and areas of capital investment. And at the beginning of the twentieth century, some economists and politicians drew the conclusion about the onset of "eternal peace" on earth, which is brought to mankind by monopolies and the internationalization of economic life. By the way, Lenin in his work sharply criticizes Karl Kautsky for his belief that cartels bring peace to mankind. He writes: “The capitalists divide the world not because of their particular viciousness, but because the achieved level of concentration forces them to take this path for profit; at the same time they divide it "according to capital", "according to strength" - there can be no other way of division in the system of commodity production and capitalism. The strength changes depending on the economic and political development. "
Today, monopolies use their own power capabilities to redistribute the world (for example, they rely on private military companies). But they are clearly not enough. Therefore, their main power resource is a state with armed forces ready to participate in military operations anywhere in the world. The division of the world "according to strength" makes the transformation of private monopoly capitalism into state monopoly capitalism (SMC) inevitable.
The history of the creation and development of international cartels of the twentieth century allows us to draw some conclusions, and not fall into those illusions and utopias of "eternal peace" that were widespread among the "learned public" at the beginning of the last century. The era when transnational corporations and transnational banks shared the world "in terms of capital" is close to its end. We are entering an era when the extensive development of the world by monopolies (called "globalization") is no longer possible. Monopolies are beginning to divide the world "according to strength", using the state's military potential. Today's events in the Near and Middle East are a vivid confirmation of this.
Subscribe to our Telegram bot if you want to help in campaigning for the Communist Party and receive up-to-date information. To do this, you just need to have Telegram on any device, follow the @mskkprfBot link and click the Start button. ...
The first, but quite correct idea of what imperialism is, is given by the translation of the Latin noun imperium, from which the root of this word is derived. It means - power, domination. Indeed, it is customary to understand it as state policy, which is based on military force used for external expansion and seizure of foreign territories.
Colonialism is synonymous with imperialism
In general, the era of imperialism is characterized by the formation of colonies, as well as economic control, which stronger states establish over countries that are inferior to them in their development. In this regard, the term "imperialism" in the last quarter of the 19th century has acquired a synonym - "colonialism", which practically coincides with it in meaning.
For the first time the term "world imperialism" was introduced into circulation by the English historian and economist J. A. Hobson, who in 1902 dedicated his capital work to it. Such prominent Marxists as V. I. Lenin, N. I. Bukharin, R. Hilferding, and also Rosa Luxemburg became his followers. Having carried out a broader development of this category, they used its main provisions to substantiate the class struggle aimed at accomplishing the proletarian revolution.
V. I. Lenin's statement about the characteristic features of imperialism
In one of his works, V. I. Lenin gave a definition of the main features of imperialism. First of all, he pointed out that monopolies, formed as a result of a high concentration of production and capital, are beginning to play a key role in the country's economy. In addition, according to the "leader of the world proletariat" (as he was called in the Soviet period), an essential characteristic of the imperialist state is the merger of industrial and banking capital in it, and, as a result of this process, the emergence of a financial oligarchy.
Defining what imperialism is, Lenin also emphasized that at this stage in the development of capitalist society, the export of capital begins to dominate the export of goods. In this he practically quoted Marx. The monopolies, in turn, begin to unite in powerful international alliances, dividing the world into spheres of their influence (economic imperialism). And finally, the result of all the processes described above is the military division of land between the most powerful imperialist states.
Criticism of Lenin's theory
On the basis of the signs of imperialism listed by V.I. Lenin, the so-called Marxist understanding of this phenomenon was formed, which was considered the only correct one and was replicated in its time by the organs of Soviet propaganda. However, the observations of scientists of a later period largely refute it.
Analyzing the historical processes that took place during the 20th and early 21st centuries, many of them came to an unexpected conclusion. It turned out that regardless of their socio-economic system, states are capable of performing actions that result in the seizure of foreign territories, the global division of spheres of influence, as well as the formation of dominant and dependent countries. The policy of the largest imperialist powers of the 20th century was determined by a number of objective factors that did not fit into the Marxist-Leninist theory.
Globalization process
The 21st century is witnessing the formation of a qualitatively new stage of imperialism called "globalism". Under this term, which has been widely used in recent decades, it is customary to understand a wide range of various military, political, economic and other measures aimed at the dominance of the doctrine, as a rule, carried out by the most developed and powerful state that claims to be world leadership. Thus, at this stage, the policy of imperialism is reduced to the creation of a "unipolar world."
The era of neoglobalism
A new term has entered the lexicon of modern political scientists - "neo-imperialism". It is customary to understand it as a military-political and military alliance of several of the most developed powers, united by a common goal to impose their hegemony on the rest of the world in all areas of life and thus create a model of society that is beneficial for themselves.
Neo-imperialism is characterized precisely by the fact that the place of individual powers, overwhelmed by ambitious aspirations, was taken by their alliances. Having thus obtained additional potential, they began to pose a real threat to the world political and economic equilibrium.
No wonder the border of the XX and XXI centuries. became the period of birth of the worldwide anti-globalization movement, opposing the domination of transnational corporations, and all sorts of trade and government organizations, such as, for example, the sensational WTO (World Trade Organization).
What is imperialism in Russia?
At the end of the first decade of the 20th century, Russian capitalism acquired many of the features characteristic of imperialism, in the sense of it that was proposed by theorists of the Marxist-Leninist doctrine. This was largely facilitated by the economic recovery, which replaced a period of depression. During the same period, there was a significant concentration of production. Suffice it to say that, according to the statistics of those years, about 65% of all workers worked in large enterprises engaged in fulfilling government orders.
This served as the basis for the formation and development of monopolies. Researchers, in particular, note that in the pre-revolutionary decade, this process even embraced the textile industry, in which patriarchal-merchant orders were traditionally strong. The period of the formation and subsequent development of imperialism in Russia was also marked by the massive transfer of the Ural mining enterprises, from the hands of private owners to the ownership of banks and joint-stock companies, which thus received control over a huge amount of the country's natural resources.
Of particular note is the growing power of monopolies in the most significant areas of the industry. An example of this is the Prodamet syndicate, founded in 1902, which in a short time managed to concentrate in its hands almost 86% of all nationwide metal sales. At the same time, three powerful associations associated with the largest foreign trusts appeared and successfully operated in the oil industry. They were kind of industrial monsters. Producing more than 60% of domestic oil, they were, at the same time, the owners of 85% of all share capital.
The emergence of large monopoly associations in Russia
The most common form of monopoly in pre-revolutionary Russia was trusts - associations of enterprises, and in some cases banks for the implementation of a profitable pricing policy, as well as other types of commercial activities. But they were gradually replaced by higher-type monopolies such as trusts and cartels.
Continuing the conversation about what imperialism is in Russia, which was on the verge of colossal political and economic upheavals of the 20th century, it is impossible to ignore such a phenomenon as the emergence of a powerful financial oligarchy caused by the merger of banking and industrial capital. This has already been discussed above in the section devoted to Lenin's definitions of world imperialism, which are almost completely consistent with the Russian realities of that period.
The growing role of the financial and industrial oligarchy
In particular, it should be noted that from the end of the 19th century until the October armed coup, the number of commercial banks in the country practically remained the same, but the amount of funds controlled by them increased fourfold. A particularly powerful leap was made from 1908 to 1913. A characteristic feature of this period in the development of the Russian economy was the placement of bank securities - stocks and bonds not abroad, as was customary before, but within the country.
At the same time, the financial oligarchs did not limit their activities only to speculation in the shares of industrial enterprises and railways. They were actively involved in managing them, and besides that, they themselves were the creators of monopolies in a wide variety of industrial sectors - from metallurgy to the production of tobacco and salt.
Interaction of the financial elite with the government
As Lenin pointed out in his works, close interaction of oligarchic circles with representatives of the state apparatus served as an important incentive for the formation of Russia on an imperialist track. There were the most favorable prerequisites for this. It is noted that after 1910, four of the five largest banks in the capital were headed by persons who previously held key positions in the Ministry of Finance.
Thus, in matters of domestic and, importantly, foreign policy, the Russian government was the executor of the will of the highest circles of the industrial and financial oligarchy. This explains many decisions that came both from the cabinet of ministers and directly from the emperor. In particular, the interests of the monopolies that were part of the military-industrial complex, in many respects, predetermined the country's entry into the First World War, which turned out to be fatal both for the three-hundred-year dynasty of its kings, and for millions of ordinary people.
very urgent !!! the main features of the economic development of Russia at the beginning of the 20th centurywhat political system existed in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century?
describe the policy of P.A. Stolypin
main events and results of the Russian-Japanese war
main political parties of Russia
Russian political party program
Name the military alliances formed on the eve of the First World War
What are the biggest battles of the First World War?
what was the reason for the start of the war?
Name the main events of the first Russian revolution
what are the reasons for the revolution
what event triggered the revolution
The USA in the 19th century is defined by the concept A) the industrial revolution b) the American path of development of capitalism C) the Prussian path of development of capitalism D) the urban population grew rapidly2. At the end of the 19th century - the beginning of the 20th century, independent medium and small enterprises ceased to exist, they were supplanted by large monopolies A) true b) false 3. Indicate the most industrially developed country in Europe at the beginning of the 20th century. A) France B) Prussia C) England D) Austria 4. Write down the names of inventors and industrialists associated with the automotive industry Siemens, R. Fulton, O. Evans, K. Benz, E. Martin, R. Trevithick, F. Lesseps, G. Daimler, O. Lilienthal, G. Ford 5. Mark the features of conservative ideology A) revolutionary change is better than liberal reforms B) respect for political traditions C) the desire to eliminate all political freedoms D) recognition of the need for some reforms to prevent major shocks D) reforms should not violate traditional foundations 6. Mark the main features of liberal ideology A) the need to wage political struggle through creation of secret societies B) unconditional recognition of the principle of separation of powers C) recognition of the best form of government as an unlimited monarchy D) protection of political freedoms of citizens D) unconditional recognition of the inviolability of private property7. The system of measures introduced by Napoleon forbade all countries dependent on France, to trade with England was called A) a trade war B) a continental blockade c) "closing England" 8. Napoleon considered this document to be his "true glory" A) Constitution B) Declaration of Independence C) "Civil Code" 9. What is the essence of the parliamentary reform of 1832 in England A) the introduction of a secret ballot in parliament B) a decrease in property qualifications in elections C) an increase in parliamentary seats from large industrial regions D) the introduction of payment for work in parliament10 What were the requirements of the Chartists? A) the annual election of members of parliament B) the establishment of a minimum wage C) the abolition of the property qualification in the elections D) payment for the work of members of parliament E) the proclamation of the republic11. Indicate which country did not participate in the Holy Union A) Russia B) Austria C) England D) Prussia E) France 12. Urbanization is A) A doctrine that revises some of the provisions of Marxist doctrine B) A form of monopoly, whose participants jointly sell products C) The growth of cities and urban populations 13. Most of the paintings by this artist are in Spain A) F. Goya B) T. Gericault C) E. Delacroix D) Jacques Louis David 14. The stories and stories of this writer laid the foundation for detective literature A) James Fenimore Cooper B) Thomas Mine Reed C) Edgar Alan Poe
2. Align
The industrial rev-tion ended in the continental countries. Ev. in the 60-70s, prepared a service for the new. development produces. forces. Technical progress of the last. third of the XIX century. transformed the structure of the capital of the economy and its organizational forms, covering primarily the branches of heavy industry: metallurgy and mechanical engineering. They created the prerequisites for the transition to imperialism. The transition to mass production of steel opened up great opportunities for the development of railway and sea. transport. Militarism has become one of the most important. class tools. domination of the financial industry of the bourgeoisie. New branches of industry: electrical, electrical, chemical .. New. type of household. org-s and production-va - monopolies. (in the German-cartels and syndicates, in the USA-trusts). An increasing number of Hebrews. state-in beginning-t crossover. j) protectionism - capital accumulation and the development of monopolies.
English. ext. trade. Eng. continued to grow, its industry has developed (machine building) in general, the pace of development is eng. ek-ki noticeably lagged behind the USA and Germany. The process of concentration and centralization of capital and the image of capital finance proceeded at a rapid pace. Eq. crisis and will continue. depression caused numerous. bankruptcy, etc. accelerated the concentration of capital. Agrar. the sector was significantly affected by the p / e expansion in the 70s of the XIX century. deliveries to e. the markets are cheap. amer. of bread. Capital has become key. export component (1st place in the world). Up to 75% of capital investment is directed to the colonies. USA... Liquid slave owner. latifundium and distribution of land on the basis of demo principles led to the fact that early. create a wide basis for burn. growth produces strength and free investment of capital. The farming path of agricultural evolution provided the fastest possible development of production forces. The market's ability to pay, the influx of slave power in the person of emigrants from Ev., Contributed to the rapid development of the industry. Protectionist regiment and capital inflow from outside. The process of concentration in the industry and the bank was accelerated at a rate. The country has an oligarchy of finance. She ruled the money and commodity market and influenced the Amer gov-va regiment. There is an impoverishment and ruin of small and medium farmers. The agrarian movement of the XIX century was defeated in its attempts to achieve relief from the economy of farmers. Fr. The industry is developing at a fast pace, but the predominance is light. The process of the industry of Fr was slowing down (4th place in the world). Narrow internal market. The loss of Alsace-Lorraine in W with Prus hindered the development of the industrial heavy. Fr. kap-zm began to acquire the features of a usurer. imperial zma. In terms of the export of capital, it firmly occupied the 2nd place in the world. Germ. quickly turned from agrarian. in industry G. The capture of Alsace-Lorraine increased the ek potential of him kap-zma. Contribution from Fr solved the problem of capital accumulation and contributed to a successful economic recovery. New industries are rapidly developing, associated with the production of machines, shipbuilding, chemistry, etc. Heavy industry ek-ki would mean it and dominate over the remaining branches. By 1873. the gründer fever ended and the country was drawn into the world of the ec crisis (until 1987). Ec depression accelerated the concentration of production and capital. Lay down the preconditions for the gentlemen of capital finance. Concentration-I prom. production - cartels.
One of the most important. manifestations of imperialism began to strive for a revival of interest led the Jewish powers to the conquest of new overseas colonies. This was facilitated by the further successes of the industry, the development of new markets, the expansion of trade freedoms, the export of capital, the emergence of new military technologies. Colon) includes both colonies and semi-colonies. Whole groups of countries (Kit, Turts, Iran, Afghan) retained their sovereignty only formally. The term imperialism came into use in the 20th century. in Fr. In the last 10 years of the XIX century. with the strengthening of the colonies of the expansion of Britain and other countries of imperialism, it is already being used as a synonym for the term colonies. M / y by the leading powers unfolding b / b for the division of capital spheres. By the XIX century. aggravation of b / w leading countries have not yet captured the territories of Afr, Az and Oceania. Features: the tendency towards the formation of the global market has been strengthened, the theoretician of the foundations of the power regiment in the m / unar arena has begun.
In characterizing the economic system of imperialism, V.I.Lenin notes five of its main features:
1. The concentration of production and capital has reached a stage of development when it has created monopolies that play a decisive role in the economic life of the capitalist countries.
2. Banking capital merged with industrial capital, financial capital was formed, domination passed into the hands of the financial oligarchy.
3. In contrast to the export of goods, the export of capital to the colonies and dependent countries has acquired particular importance.
4. International monopoly capitalist unions were formed, dividing the world (sources of raw materials, spheres of capital investment, sales markets, etc.) among themselves into spheres of influence.
5. The territorial division of the land by the largest capitalist powers has been completed.
Monopoly capitalism (imperialism) is the highest and last stage of capitalism; it is decaying, dying capitalism. In the era of imperialism, the development of the productive forces does not stop, and at times it occurs in individual branches of production and in individual countries even faster than in the era of pre-monopoly capitalism. But, firstly, this development is extremely uneven and catastrophic, and secondly, under the dominance of monopolies, a tendency arises and increasingly intensifies to a delay in the development of productive forces, to technical stagnation. As monopoly owners in certain industries, monopolists dictate their prices for goods, buy up patents for inventions in order to prevent competitors from using them in production. This is also facilitated by the chronic underutilization of the production apparatus of the capitalist countries, at times reaching 40-50%.
The American General Motors Trust uses only 1% of its patents for inventions, and 99% were bought up only so that they would not be used by competitors.
Competition and the desire to lower production costs and thereby increase profits, of course, push capitalists in the era of monopoly domination to improve technology. "But the tendency to stagnation and decay, inherent in monopoly, continues in turn to operate, and in certain branches of industry, in certain countries, for certain periods of time, it prevails.". (V.I. Lenin, Soch., Vol. 22, ed. 4, p. 263.).
This tendency towards technical stagnation, towards decay, was especially intensified in the era of the general crisis of capitalism.
Analyzing the data on the share of income received by the English layer of rentiers from capital investments outside England, V.I.Lenin concludes:
It is characteristic of imperialism that it has transformed the colonial countries into agrarian appendages, into sources of raw materials for the industrial metropolitan countries. Capitalist monopolies retard the development of industry in the colonies, in particular - manufacturing heavy industry. By carrying out unrestrained plunder of the colonial countries, the imperialists undermine the possibilities for the development of the productive forces in the colonial countries. This is evidenced by the bicentennial dominion of England in India, Holland in Indonesia, the dominance of the imperialist countries in China before its liberation, the dominance of the United States in the countries of South America.
At present, US capitalism condemns the previously economically developed capitalist countries of Western Europe to semi-colonial dependence. Relying on the Marshall Plan, the capitalist monopolies of the United States, in their striving to secure a market, are forcing the curtailment of competing industries in the European countries that are in the orbit of the Marshall Plan. Thus, the capitalist monopolies of the main capitalist country, the United States, seek to maintain the current level of development of production in the United States at the cost of destroying the productive forces outside the United States, by transforming the economies of other capitalist countries into an appendage of US industry. This leads and cannot but lead to an extreme aggravation of the contradictions between the capitalist countries, as well as to an extreme aggravation and deepening of all other contradictions of capitalism.
Loading...