Imperalism:

A policy of extending a country's power and influence through diplomacy or

military force.

1st para:
-

Enormous dimension of fianc capital concentrated in few hands creates far-flung and
close network connections.
Subordinates very small capitalists and small masters.
Increase struggle against other national state groups of financiers for the division and
domination over other countries.
Causes Imperialism.
Furious defense over imperialism
Imperialism penetrates the working class.
Social democratic party are justly called social-imperialists (socialist words, imperialists
in deeds)
In 1902, Hobson noted Fabian Imperialists in England.

2nd para:
-

Bourgeois scholars and publicists come out in defence of imperialism.

Obscure its complete domination and profound roots
Cynical and frank imperialists come forward who are bold enough to admit the absuridyt
of the idea of reforming the fundamental characteristics of imperlism.

3rd para:
-

German imperalists attempt to follow the movements for national emancipation in the
colonies that didnt belong to Germany.
Protest movmeents in india, Natal(south Africa), Dutch East Indies, etc.
Commenting on English report (june 28-30, 1910): International tribunal should
supervise the fulfilment of treaties between great powers and weak peoples.
No trace of understand imperialism is inseparably bound up with capitalism.
Therefore open struggle against imperialism is hopeless.

4th para:
-

Question is whether it is possible to reform the basis of imperialism, it will intensify and
deepen antagonism. Or go backwards allaying antagonism, are fundamental questionsin
the criqtue of imperialism.

Pg3 1st para:

-

In United States, imperialist war wged against Spain in 1898, stirred up antiimperalists(the last of Mohicans of burgeois democracy), declared war to be criminal,
and as a violation of the Constitution (Americans promised Flipinos indenendce of his
ctounry).
When white man governs himself and others, its no longer self government, it is
despotism.

Pg3 2nd para:

Hobson critique of imperialism: urged the necessity of increasing the consuming

capacity of people under camptislim.
Petty-bourgeious point of view in the critique, the omnipotent of banks, financial
oligarchy, etc, is adopted by autohers who make no cliam to Marxists.
Marxists: contrast imperailsm with free competeion and democracy.

Pg3 3rd para:

-

Bourgeois economists pretend to be nnaive and talk seriously about peace under
imperialism.
Kautskys Marxism takes the same bourgeious reformist POV and everybody
(imperialists, pseudo, Socialists, social-pacifists) agree on matter of peace.

Pg3 4th para:

-

Kautsky economic crit of imperialism: Takes stat of British export and import trade with
Egypt for 1872 and 1912.
Transpires that this export and import trade grown more slowly than british foreign trade
as a whole.
From this event, no reason to supposed without military occupation the growth of british
trade with Egypt would have been less.
The urge of captal to expand can be best promted not by the violent methods of
impeorlism, but by peaceful democracy.

Pg4 1st para:

-

Hilferding conclusion on Kautsky, april 1915, declared to have been unanimously

adopted by all socialst theoreticians.

Pg 4 2nd para:
-

No business of the proletariat to contract progressive capitalst policy with the bygone era
of free trade and hostility towards the state.
Reply of proletariat to the economic policy of finance capital, to imperlalism, cannot be
free trade, but Socialism.
Aim of proletarian policy can not now be ideal of restoring free competition (now a
reactionary ideal), but compete elimination of competition by the abolition of captism.

Pg4 3rd para:

-

Trade with Egypt would have grown more without military occupation without imperialism
and without finance capital means that captilism would have developed more rapidly if
free comptetion had not be restricted by monoplies in general.

Pg4 4th para:

-

Kautsky assume: free completion without any sort of monopoly would have delopved
captilism and trade more rapidly. But the more rapidly trade and captilism develop, the

great the concentration of production and captical which gives rise to monopoly. And
monoplloies have already arisen precisely out of free compettion.
Kautsky argument just gourgeious reformism.

Pg5 1st para:

-

If Germany trade with bristish coloines is devlopeing more rapidly, it only means german
imperialism is stronger, and better organized than bristish imperialism.
However, does not prove the superioiity of free trade, for it is not a fight between free
trade and protection and colonial depence, but between two rival imperslim and 2
monoploies, 2 groups of finane capital.
Germany did better, thus this use argument that free trade and peaceful democracy is
banal.

Pg5 2nd para:

-

Lansburgh compared countries of export trade of an imperlaist contry (financially

dependent on Germany), and countries finically independent.
Didnt make much connections.
Graph says coutnies finically dependent on Germany gornw more rapidly.

Pg 6 1st para:
-

Lansburgh Traced connection between exports and loans.

In 1891, german export to Rumania 55m marks. Folowing year dropped to 39.4m marks.
In 1900 down to 25.4m. Only in recent years have they regaind the level of 1891 thanks
to two new loans.
German export to Portugal rose following the loans of 1888-1889, to 21.1m (1890), then
two years later dropped to 16.2m, and 7.4m. Regained former level only in 1903.
With argentina loans floated in 1888 and 1890. In 1889, 60.7m, two years later, 18.6m.
Not until 1901, back to 1889 level.
Chile same result
As a result, Lansburgh draw the amusing petty-bourgeois moral of how unstable and
irregular export trade is when it is bound up with loans.
Increase in export precisely connected with swindling tricks of finance capital (first
pockets and profits from the loan, then pockets other profits from the same loan)

Pg6 2nd para:

-

One must be able to single out the connection of exports witht eh tricks of the financiers

Pg7 1st para:

-

Kautsky critique only a propaganda for peace and unity with opportunists and socialchauvinists. Thus it evades and obscures the very profound fundamanetal contradtions
of imperialism:
The contradtions between monopoly and free competeiton.
The contradiction between cartels and trsuts.

Pg7 2nd para:

-

Kausky (1915) Ultraimperialism, Hobson arguemnts (1902): ultraimperialism and

interimperialism.
Cannot the present imperialist policy be supplanted by a new, ultraimperialist policy, which will introduce the joint exploitation of the
world by internationally united finance capital in place of the mutual
rivalries of national finance capitals? Such a new phase of capitalism is
at any rate conceivable. Can it be achieved? Sufficient premises are
still lacking to enable us to answer this question.

Pg 8 1st para:
-

Assume imperialist coutnries form alliance against one another in order to protect or
enlarge their possessions.
These alliances will be interimperlist, or ultraimpoerlist alliance.
Assume that all the imperialst countrists conclude an alliance for the peaceful division of
these parts of Asia, this alliance would be an alliance of internationally united finance
capital.

Pg 8 2nd para:
-

Half century ago, Germany was a miserable insignificant country, as far as capitalist
strength was concerended compared to England. Japan compared to Russian.
It was not inconceiveblae that this would flip 10-20 years later.
Thus, in realities of capitalist system,

Pg 9 2nd para:
-

Imperialism is the epoch of fianc captical and of monploy, which introduce everywhere
the striving for monination, not for freedom.
Result of these tendencies is the raction of antagonism in this domiian.
Intensified the yoke of national oppression and striving for annexation, violation of
national indenpence.
Hilferding: In the newly opened up coutnries, the capital imported into them intensifies
antagonism and excites against the itnruders the constantly growing resitance of the
peoples who are awakening to national consciousness. This resistance can easily
delvop into dangerous measures against foreign capcital.
Imperlism is leading to annexation, to increased national oppression, increasing
resistance.
The impssibliity of unity with the opoutnist in the epoc of imtpperialism

Last page:
-

Kautskys theorical analysis are irrconciblae with Marxism, or obscuring and glossing
over the fundamental contradiction of imperialism and with a striving to preserve at all
costs the crumling unity with opportunism in the Europen working movement.