Romain Kroes:
On the other hand, the exogenous realizing surplus value allows a
theoretical approach of both imperialism history and today's
Globalization, by taking together Luxemburg's and Wallerstein's works.
Does the idea of the exogenous realising of surplus value imply the
existence
Does the idea of the exogenous realising of surplus value imply the
existence non-capitalist modes of production? Are there any such
geographical and sociological spaces left in any part of the world for
the realisation surplus value?
Ulhas
There are very few spaces left, now.
Title: RE: [PEN-L:27676] Re: e: Imperialism in decline?
Romain Kroes writes:Not only Marxists have no coherent theory of contemporary Imperialism, but they are prisoners of a contradiction between Lenin's theory and Rosa Luxemburg's.
does this conclusion follow from a full search
Romain Kroes wrote:
Geographically, the whole world is
already more or less integrated into the net of the financial markets.
But how deeply rooted is this net, to mix metaphors hideously? In
national economies, the financial system is deeply bound up with
issues of ownership and control of
RE: [PEN-L:27676] Re: e: Imperialism in decline?James Devine writes: I
disagree. Marx showed very clearly that capitalism need not suffer from
chronic realization problems, i.e., that it was _possible_ for surplus-value
to be realized internal to the system.
- But Marx did not succeed
Doug wrote:
(...) Lots of international capital flows are just hot money
moving in and out. They inject and withdraw liquidity, but don't
necessarily get deeply involved in the local scene. Direct investment
is another matter.
- But what about the resultant of capital flows? If this
