GLOBAL OFFENSIVE BY U.S. IMPERIALISM

Crimea Referendum: the Hidden Truth Behind the U.S.-Russia Rivalry The next stage in the global offensive by U.S. imperialism  Brian Becker Imperialism, however, isn’t fundamentally an ideological program or project. It is a global economic system that compels the banks and corporations to dominate every piece of potential real estate for the benefit of those same entities. ... Source - Global Research - here.

Lenin Characteristics of the imperialist epoch - concentration of production growth of monopolistic trusts and cartels importance of the export of capital (compared with the export of commodities) internationalisation of capitalist economic relations struggle between the rival European powers to partition the world market parasitism and decay of capitalism Kautsky Argued wrong to "identify with imperialism all the phenomena of present-day capitalism — ": cartels protection domination of the financiers colonial policy According 'to Kautsky, imperialism was not a "phase" of capitalist economic development but a "special policy" of capital ...': "striving of every industrial capitalist nation to bring under its control or to annex ever bigger areas of agrarian territory irrespective of what nations inhabit them". 'Kautsky argued that this "special policy" might be superseded after the world war by a new policy': 'the extension of the policy of the cartels to foreign policy, the phase of ultra-imperialism' "i.e., the peaceful uniting of all the rival finance groups into a single,world-wide trust and the "abolition of imperialism through a holy alliance of the imperialists". 'Lenin sought to counter this argument by demonstrating that imperialism was the highest and last stage of the development of capitalism.' Source - DSP - here.

Karl Johann Kautsky ( 1854 –1938) was a Czech-German philosopher, journalist, and Marxist theoretician. Kautsky was recognized as among the most authoritative promulgators of Orthodox Marxism after the death of Friedrich Engels in 1895 until the coming of World War I in 1914 and was called by some the "Pope of Marxism." Following the war, Kautsky was an outspoken critic of the Bolshevik Revolution and its excesses, engaging in polemics with V.I. Lenin and Leon Trotsky on the nature of the Soviet state. He saw the Bolsheviks (or Communists) as a conspiratorial organization that had gained power by a coup and initiated revolutionary changes for which there was no economic rationale in Russia. Karl Kautsky died October 17, 1938 in Amsterdam. His son, Benedikt Kautsky (de) spent seven years in concentration camps, while his wife Luise Kautsky died in Auschwitz.  Kautsky is remembered, in addition to his anti-Bolshevik polemics, for his editing and publication of Marx's Capital, Volume IV (usually published as "Theories of Surplus Value"). Source - Wikipedia - here. Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (born Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov) (1870 – 1924) was a Russian communist revolutionary, politician and political theorist. He served as the leader of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic from 1917, and then concurrently as Premier of the Soviet Union from 1922-[1924]. Under his administration... Russian Empire ... replaced by the Soviet Union, a single-party constitutionally socialist state; all wealth including land, industry and business were nationalized. Based in Marxism, his theoretical contributions to Marxist thought are known as Leninism. Died aged 53. Chinese premier Sun Yat-sen ... said: Through the ages of world history, thousands of leaders and scholars appeared who spoke eloquent words, but these remained words. You, Lenin, were an exception. You not only spoke and taught us, but translated your words into deeds. You created a new country. You showed us the road of joint struggle... You, great man that you are, will live on in the memories of the oppressed people through the centuries. Petrograd was renamed Leningrad in his honour. Source - Wikipedia - here.

So are we living an an age of ultra-imperialism?

I think we are, but I don't think it matters whether it is a progression of capitalism to it's logical conclusion or if it is the result of a 'special policy'.

How amazing is it that people sat around working out these theories?  

Unsure what the mutual disdain was about:

Kautsky ... castigated Lenin in his 1934 work Marxism and Bolshevism: Democracy and Dictatorship: "The Bolsheviki under Lenin's leadership, however, succeeded in capturing control of the armed forces in Petrograd and later in Moscow and thus laid the foundation for a new dictatorship in place of the old Czarist dictatorship."

Both Lenin and Trotsky, however, defended the Bolshevik Revolution as a legitimate and historic social upheaval akin to the French Revolution, casting themselves and the Bolsheviks in the role of the Jacobins, and viewing the "opportunism" of Kautsky and similar figures as a function of "social bribery" rooted in their increasing intimacy with the privileged classes. [wikipedia]

Even though I have no idea what I'm talking about, I'm going to side with Lenin and Trotsy, because Lenin got past the theorising and actually got the job done.

Why do these guys take this stuff so seriously?  

What's wrong with trying something just to see if it works, without over-thinking it or expecting it to be some absolute solution?

So is it possible to escape 'imperialism'?  

To my way of thinking, it's impossible.  All you can change is the rulers and the rules.

Trying to picture global communism but it's impossible for me to imagine.  

What would happen?  

Wouldn't it still be the same thing, in that nations would still be vying for resources, profit, territory, military supremacy ... etc?

The articles are worthwhile looking at.  Might have to revisit the 'Imperialism Highest Stage ...' article (Source - DSP - here) because my concentration and ability to take things in is fairly limited.  LOL

P.S.  Thought about it some more doing the dishes ... I'm with Lenin again.  

It's a progression:   imperialism is the final stage of capitalism.

The very nature of capitalism is MORE, MORE, MORE ... more stuff, more consumption, more sales, more profits, more markets ... and, as cartels and monopolies grow out of that, doesn't that just feed into the MORE, and MORE, and MORE nature of the beast (only the MORE is concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer powerful players) ... so it's a cycle that feeds on itself to a logical conclusion:  concentration and control.

After bashing that out, I'm having second thoughts ... what if I'm wrong?  LOL.

Nope, I'm sticking with that.