this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2026
-43 points (33.3% liked)
Memes
55888 readers
411 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I’m following imperialism as it was first analyzed by John A. Hobson as it was arising in its modern form, then correctly carried forward and codified by Lenin, then advanced to the modern day by people like Nkrumah and Cheng Enfu. Imperialism is characterized by the following:
-The presence of monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life.
-The merging of bank capital with industrial capital into finance capital controlled by a financial oligarchy.
-The export of capital as distinguished from the simple export of commodities.
-The formation of international monopolist capitalist associations (cartels) and multinational corporations.
-The domination and exploitation of other countries by militaristic imperialist powers, now through neocolonialism.
-The territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers.
These are the mechanisms by which imperialism functions today, and they do not apply to Russia. Russia is largely a commodity exporter, with a paltry sum of finance capital, and no colonies nor neocolonies. Russia is not economically exploiting the global south, either. It is not colonial, nor neocolonial, nor imperialist.
Instead, Russia is working against the western powers that do fit this definition. It's undermining NATO, the IMF, the Petrodollar, all means by which the global south is super-exploited by the global north.
Thank you for this. Probably the first genuine attempt to answer my question without a single attack or ounce of vitriol :)
I do I see this argument, I really do! But this description does imply a sense of global altruism in Russia's foreign policy. Even if Russia's actions could be interpreted that way, how can outsiders trust Russia's starting of wars and territorial expansion as anything other than selfish?
I ask this knowing full well that the west/north is guilty of atrocities over the same period. The issue is simply that I am in the west/north and I'd probably sooner see the world transition into anarchy than I would see it controlled by yet another powerful elite.
The kind of communism I want to see is one by the people for the people. I wouldn't trust Putin or any of the current leaders to seize the world then give it back to us. Do you believe otherwise?
Russia isn't fighting imperialism out of a sense of altriusm, though, as with all things, there are genuine altruists in Russia that do wish to help the world even if this isn't why they are doing it. Russia is fighting imperialism out of its own desire for survival. In this case, it is playing a progressive historical role, even if it needs to transition to socialism in the future.
As for being in the west, I am too. I want to be a part of establishing socialism and ending settler-colonialism. Anarchism isn't convincing to me as a former anarchist, I am a Marxist-Leninist. I think your idea of "trusting world leaders to sieze the world for us" is highly flawed, that's not the Marxist position. The Marxist position is that we critically support anti-imperialist countries, and support socialist countries.
Further, your analysis of intellectuals isn't really fleshed out in my opinion. Intellectuals are not a class, each class has its own intellectuals. The role of the political party is to organize the intellectuals of a given class and bring the political consciousness of the rest of the class up to the level of the intellectuals. This is by the people, for the people.
So what does a Marxist-Leninist do in the west? Is it possible to live life in accordance with whatever principles that represents without too many contradictions?