• 1 Post
  • 322 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 23rd, 2022

help-circle


  • From my reading Hudson’s Superimperialism is an more an extension of Lenin’s Imperialism, based on how material conditions had evolved over the interim fifty years and the lessons learned from (at initial publication) the first generation or so of US dollar hegemony. To simplify it maybe too much, it adds a monetary dimension to the already established framework of finance capital being the driving force behind imperialism.

    Superimperialism is indeed the same English term often used for Kautsky’s Überimperialismus hypothesis. Yet apart from the initial parallel of a global cartel, ie. dollar hegemony, I don’t see much of Kautsky’s ideas represented in Hudson’s work, but I’m also not terribly familiar with überimperialism.


  • knfrmity@lemmygrad.mltoCollapse@lemmy.mlWTF Happened In 1971?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 months ago

    For an actual explanation for what happened in 1971, economically and monetarily at least, go ahead and read Michael Hudson’s Superimperialism and Global Fracture. Superimperialism was so prescient at its original publishing that the US government itself used the book and the theory as a manual on how to be better superimperialists right back around 1971, and hired Hudson as a consultant.

    I won’t comment on the fascist economics presented in the linked website.









  • This reminds me in broad strokes of the thesis of Sakai’s Settlers, which is roughly contemporary. In the introduction Sakai similarly calls out social sciences like “African American studies” and “Asian American studies” for what they are, the societal position and historiography of these peoples from the perspective of the white settler. Settlers thus aims to discuss the white settler in similar terms, ie. as the subject of such “science.”



  • knfrmity@lemmygrad.mltoMemes@lemmy.mlYes, but
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    Varoufakis is just one of many people who have come up with fancy new terms for capitalism and imperialism. It’s not to say that he doesn’t have an important perspective on some things, but coming up with new terms for things defined over a century ago only serves to distract.