Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/21598282.2021.1947032
Hailiang Gu
ABSTRACT Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China, state leaders including Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, Deng Xiaoping and Xi Jinping have all made important statements on the fundamental economic system of socialism. Reviewing and analyzing the history of the formulations in important Chinese documents on the fundamental economic system, this paper highlights China’s exploration of theoretical innovation as promoted by innovation in practice. The paper contends that in dealing with the relationships between planning and market and between government and market, and while defending the fundamental role played by the market in resource allocation, we should consistently stress the superiority of socialism and point to the active roles of the party and government, while emphasizing the attribute of “socialist.” In discussing how to combine the socialist economic system with the market economy, the paper stresses the superiority of socialism as a fundamental system, and contends that public ownership must be retained as the mainstay of the economy, so that the general character of the market economy can be transformed and endowed with a socialist character. The paper also discusses how the market economy should be combined with the fundamental economic system of socialism from the perspective of political economy.
{"title":"The Process and Logic of China’s Socialist Market Economy from Mechanism to System","authors":"Hailiang Gu","doi":"10.1080/21598282.2021.1947032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2021.1947032","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China, state leaders including Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, Deng Xiaoping and Xi Jinping have all made important statements on the fundamental economic system of socialism. Reviewing and analyzing the history of the formulations in important Chinese documents on the fundamental economic system, this paper highlights China’s exploration of theoretical innovation as promoted by innovation in practice. The paper contends that in dealing with the relationships between planning and market and between government and market, and while defending the fundamental role played by the market in resource allocation, we should consistently stress the superiority of socialism and point to the active roles of the party and government, while emphasizing the attribute of “socialist.” In discussing how to combine the socialist economic system with the market economy, the paper stresses the superiority of socialism as a fundamental system, and contends that public ownership must be retained as the mainstay of the economy, so that the general character of the market economy can be transformed and endowed with a socialist character. The paper also discusses how the market economy should be combined with the fundamental economic system of socialism from the perspective of political economy.","PeriodicalId":43179,"journal":{"name":"International Critical Thought","volume":"200 1","pages":"341 - 356"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77575721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/21598282.2021.1966641
Damian Winczewski
ABSTRACT The set of neo-chartalist views on the functioning of money in the economic circulation advertised as Modern Monetary Theory is becoming increasingly popular on the left. Marxist economists usually dispose of this theory as another incarnation of Keynesian reformism. However, because of its growing popularity, confronting this theory with the Marxist theory of money seems to have considerable political significance. A comparison of the two in the descriptive area indicates that there are some similarities between the two theories, but they are very general. On the other hand, my analysis shows that Marxist theory of money is not only compatible with the assumptions of Modern Monetary Theory concerning the functioning of modern money, but also gives a much more complete picture of its significance in the historically limited specificity of capitalism. Therefore, this comparison shows that it is worth promoting the Marxist theory of money as a true, actual theory of modern money, which is in its essence much more practical than alleged pragmatism of the Modern Monetary Theory.
{"title":"Neo-chartalist or Marxist Vision of the Modern Money? Critical Comparison","authors":"Damian Winczewski","doi":"10.1080/21598282.2021.1966641","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2021.1966641","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The set of neo-chartalist views on the functioning of money in the economic circulation advertised as Modern Monetary Theory is becoming increasingly popular on the left. Marxist economists usually dispose of this theory as another incarnation of Keynesian reformism. However, because of its growing popularity, confronting this theory with the Marxist theory of money seems to have considerable political significance. A comparison of the two in the descriptive area indicates that there are some similarities between the two theories, but they are very general. On the other hand, my analysis shows that Marxist theory of money is not only compatible with the assumptions of Modern Monetary Theory concerning the functioning of modern money, but also gives a much more complete picture of its significance in the historically limited specificity of capitalism. Therefore, this comparison shows that it is worth promoting the Marxist theory of money as a true, actual theory of modern money, which is in its essence much more practical than alleged pragmatism of the Modern Monetary Theory.","PeriodicalId":43179,"journal":{"name":"International Critical Thought","volume":"12 1","pages":"408 - 426"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73251260","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/21598282.2021.1966819
Mark D. Steinberg
ABSTRACT Architecture and utopia have long been allies—not least in the history of imagining and building the new Soviet socialist city, an obsessive idea and project from before the 1917 revolution to the early 1930s. This essay explores these efforts as a determination to obliterate the poisonous cities of old and transcend the suffering cities of the present—as practiced utopia against the dystopia of the status quo. “Utopia” here is defined, drawing on Ernst Bloch, as perception, orientation, and critical method: the human impulse to “venture beyond” the “darkness of the lived moment” to discover the emerging “not-yet.” This essay examines Russian Marxist responses (including among workers) to the “hell” as well as the dynamism of the capitalist city, and examines, through the concept of “utopia,” visionary architectural projects and arguments, including Vladimir Tatlin’s monumental tower for the Third International (1919–20), “disurbanist” and “green city” plans in the 1920s and early 1930s, Georgy Krutikov’s flying “City of the Future” in 1928, the work of Moisei Ginzburg, and Boris Iofan’s “Palace of Soviets” in the early 1930s.
{"title":"The New Socialist City: Building Utopia in the USSR, 1917–1934","authors":"Mark D. Steinberg","doi":"10.1080/21598282.2021.1966819","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2021.1966819","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Architecture and utopia have long been allies—not least in the history of imagining and building the new Soviet socialist city, an obsessive idea and project from before the 1917 revolution to the early 1930s. This essay explores these efforts as a determination to obliterate the poisonous cities of old and transcend the suffering cities of the present—as practiced utopia against the dystopia of the status quo. “Utopia” here is defined, drawing on Ernst Bloch, as perception, orientation, and critical method: the human impulse to “venture beyond” the “darkness of the lived moment” to discover the emerging “not-yet.” This essay examines Russian Marxist responses (including among workers) to the “hell” as well as the dynamism of the capitalist city, and examines, through the concept of “utopia,” visionary architectural projects and arguments, including Vladimir Tatlin’s monumental tower for the Third International (1919–20), “disurbanist” and “green city” plans in the 1920s and early 1930s, Georgy Krutikov’s flying “City of the Future” in 1928, the work of Moisei Ginzburg, and Boris Iofan’s “Palace of Soviets” in the early 1930s.","PeriodicalId":43179,"journal":{"name":"International Critical Thought","volume":"25 1","pages":"427 - 449"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90333829","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/21598282.2021.1965493
S. Sayers
ABSTRACT The question “What is Marxism?” is not as straightforward as it appears. There are different ways of answering it. One can study and describe what Marx himself wrote and said, but Marx’s views changed, and Marxism has had a life beyond Marx. Some try to define Marxism by specifying an agreed core of doctrines, others by its method, or by its practical commitments. Each of these definitions captures an aspect of the nature of Marxism, but none is without problems. Controversy still rages about Marx’s legacy and its contemporary significance.
{"title":"What Is Marxism?","authors":"S. Sayers","doi":"10.1080/21598282.2021.1965493","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2021.1965493","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The question “What is Marxism?” is not as straightforward as it appears. There are different ways of answering it. One can study and describe what Marx himself wrote and said, but Marx’s views changed, and Marxism has had a life beyond Marx. Some try to define Marxism by specifying an agreed core of doctrines, others by its method, or by its practical commitments. Each of these definitions captures an aspect of the nature of Marxism, but none is without problems. Controversy still rages about Marx’s legacy and its contemporary significance.","PeriodicalId":43179,"journal":{"name":"International Critical Thought","volume":"2015 1","pages":"377 - 388"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86255707","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/21598282.2021.1924072
Yulong Li, Xiaojing Liu
ABSTRACT When Hong Kong became a British colony in 1842, the educational system was not centralized. However, after World War II, a wave of decolonization swarmed the globe. In 1945 an internal war broke out between the Chinese Communists and the Nationalists, resulting in the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949, and the Nationalists' retreat to the Taiwan region. Both sides attempted to shape the direction of education to influence Chinese habitants in Hong Kong. The British colonizer in Hong Kong, in order to safeguard their vested interests, decided to centralize the Chinese people's education and impose a series of curricular reforms, which acted to instill negative feelings or political indifference towards China among younger Hong Kong residents. Following the Bourdieusian theory of social reproduction by educational means, this paper proposes to foster and develop critical thinking regarding the colonial history of Hong Kong and the changing nature of the local Chinese identity as fostered in the school curriculum. This study found that the British colonizer imposed cultural arbitraries in the pedagogic action of the colonial Chinese curriculum and gradually established a colonial educational system that guaranteed the reproduction of the Hong Kong residents with little Chinese nationalism.
{"title":"A Bourdieusian Analysis of the Cultural Arbitraries in the Educational System for Chinese People in the Post WWII Hong Kong, 1940s–1970s","authors":"Yulong Li, Xiaojing Liu","doi":"10.1080/21598282.2021.1924072","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2021.1924072","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT When Hong Kong became a British colony in 1842, the educational system was not centralized. However, after World War II, a wave of decolonization swarmed the globe. In 1945 an internal war broke out between the Chinese Communists and the Nationalists, resulting in the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949, and the Nationalists' retreat to the Taiwan region. Both sides attempted to shape the direction of education to influence Chinese habitants in Hong Kong. The British colonizer in Hong Kong, in order to safeguard their vested interests, decided to centralize the Chinese people's education and impose a series of curricular reforms, which acted to instill negative feelings or political indifference towards China among younger Hong Kong residents. Following the Bourdieusian theory of social reproduction by educational means, this paper proposes to foster and develop critical thinking regarding the colonial history of Hong Kong and the changing nature of the local Chinese identity as fostered in the school curriculum. This study found that the British colonizer imposed cultural arbitraries in the pedagogic action of the colonial Chinese curriculum and gradually established a colonial educational system that guaranteed the reproduction of the Hong Kong residents with little Chinese nationalism.","PeriodicalId":43179,"journal":{"name":"International Critical Thought","volume":"21 1","pages":"287 - 302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80867115","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/21598282.2021.1924069
Mubarak Altwaiji, E. Alwuraafi
ABSTRACT The Muslim world has been plagued by imperial interests, cultural ravaging and plundering, unequal partnership with the West. However, since the September 11, 2001 (9/11) attacks, the Arab world has moved to the center of political and cultural debates and attracted the major number of representations in American writings. These writings form a new phenomenon called neo-orientalism and revolve around a major theme: Muslim Arabs as victims of fundamentalist dogma. This study explores the ways in which neo-orientalism developed and was communicated to the reader in the United States after 9/11. The literature on this phenomenon is limited; therefore, there exists a need for the study of neo-orientalism through contemporary fictions that deal directly with Arab-American relationship. This study also investigates the assumption implicit in the conception that contemporary American novel is in solidarity with the state ignoring its imperial ambitions and its saturation with hegemonic practices. In response to the terrorist attacks, novel has been one of the most effective genres to represent the feelings of the nation and the concern of the country. This part of the study will refer to different attitudes and political orientations of novelists, which allow novel to follow the mainstream politics and do not grapple with the hegemonic interests.
{"title":"The Fallacy of Neo-orientalism and the Risk of Imperialism: How American Politics Mobilize Novelists","authors":"Mubarak Altwaiji, E. Alwuraafi","doi":"10.1080/21598282.2021.1924069","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2021.1924069","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Muslim world has been plagued by imperial interests, cultural ravaging and plundering, unequal partnership with the West. However, since the September 11, 2001 (9/11) attacks, the Arab world has moved to the center of political and cultural debates and attracted the major number of representations in American writings. These writings form a new phenomenon called neo-orientalism and revolve around a major theme: Muslim Arabs as victims of fundamentalist dogma. This study explores the ways in which neo-orientalism developed and was communicated to the reader in the United States after 9/11. The literature on this phenomenon is limited; therefore, there exists a need for the study of neo-orientalism through contemporary fictions that deal directly with Arab-American relationship. This study also investigates the assumption implicit in the conception that contemporary American novel is in solidarity with the state ignoring its imperial ambitions and its saturation with hegemonic practices. In response to the terrorist attacks, novel has been one of the most effective genres to represent the feelings of the nation and the concern of the country. This part of the study will refer to different attitudes and political orientations of novelists, which allow novel to follow the mainstream politics and do not grapple with the hegemonic interests.","PeriodicalId":43179,"journal":{"name":"International Critical Thought","volume":"18 1","pages":"190 - 209"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81699513","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/21598282.2021.1924829
Ifeanyi Ezeonu
ABSTRACT Guadeloupe and Martinique, two French overseas territories located in the Caribbean, are today facing serious public health crises; particularly, the highest rates of prostate cancer in the world. These crises resulted from the French colonial policy of primitive accumulation, which authorized two decades of the use of a carcinogenic pesticide, chlordecone (a.k.a. Kepone), by French settler farmers to control banana weevil pests. This was despite evidence of its lethal toxicity. Deploying the theoretical arguments of Market Criminology, this paper discusses the current health crises in both islands and the political economy of predation which created them as criminal. This is in sync with a growing body of literature which contextualizes preventable market-generated harms as criminal.
{"title":"Capital and Chlordecone Poisoning in the French Caribbean Islands of Guadeloupe and Martinique: A Thesis on Crimes of the Market","authors":"Ifeanyi Ezeonu","doi":"10.1080/21598282.2021.1924829","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2021.1924829","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Guadeloupe and Martinique, two French overseas territories located in the Caribbean, are today facing serious public health crises; particularly, the highest rates of prostate cancer in the world. These crises resulted from the French colonial policy of primitive accumulation, which authorized two decades of the use of a carcinogenic pesticide, chlordecone (a.k.a. Kepone), by French settler farmers to control banana weevil pests. This was despite evidence of its lethal toxicity. Deploying the theoretical arguments of Market Criminology, this paper discusses the current health crises in both islands and the political economy of predation which created them as criminal. This is in sync with a growing body of literature which contextualizes preventable market-generated harms as criminal.","PeriodicalId":43179,"journal":{"name":"International Critical Thought","volume":"28 1","pages":"271 - 286"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80457384","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/21598282.2021.1924070
Iderley Colombini
ABSTRACT The conception of financialization and the impacts of the oil market will be presented in this work from an alternative perspective. Financialization will not be analyzed as a dominance of finance over industry, as if these two sides of the productive process were dissociated. Financialization will be understood as a moment of expansion of a mechanism of domination, reaching not only the state-form and enterprise, but also the own constitution of the social being as an “individual capitalist,” being part of the process of constitution of form-value. Oil, from production to the market, cannot be seen only in a reduced view of its high incomes. Oil must be understood as a social relationship. Oil from the 1980s onwards became one of the central elements of support for the US dollar, therefore, of support for the international monetary system. In addition to this new social role of sustaining the international currency that oil now has, this commodity also incorporates a determined form of social relation through its imposition as an energy source. Therefore, the main purpose of this paper is to show how both financialization and recent developments in the oil market are part of the actual constellation of the forms of capitalist social relations.
{"title":"Oil and Financialization: Another Relation","authors":"Iderley Colombini","doi":"10.1080/21598282.2021.1924070","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2021.1924070","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The conception of financialization and the impacts of the oil market will be presented in this work from an alternative perspective. Financialization will not be analyzed as a dominance of finance over industry, as if these two sides of the productive process were dissociated. Financialization will be understood as a moment of expansion of a mechanism of domination, reaching not only the state-form and enterprise, but also the own constitution of the social being as an “individual capitalist,” being part of the process of constitution of form-value. Oil, from production to the market, cannot be seen only in a reduced view of its high incomes. Oil must be understood as a social relationship. Oil from the 1980s onwards became one of the central elements of support for the US dollar, therefore, of support for the international monetary system. In addition to this new social role of sustaining the international currency that oil now has, this commodity also incorporates a determined form of social relation through its imposition as an energy source. Therefore, the main purpose of this paper is to show how both financialization and recent developments in the oil market are part of the actual constellation of the forms of capitalist social relations.","PeriodicalId":43179,"journal":{"name":"International Critical Thought","volume":"11 1","pages":"232 - 251"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87934873","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/21598282.2021.1923171
R. Boer, P. Yan
ABSTRACT This study tackles four Western Marxist misrepresentations of socialism with Chinese characteristics, particularly as it has developed with the reform and opening-up. Each of these misrepresentations sets in opposition the economy and the state, with the former being seen as “capitalist” (in some form) and the latter as variously “authoritarian,” “bureaucratic” or simply as “interventionist.” In other words, “Chinese characteristics” designates the superstructural feature that determines—incorrectly in light of Marxist analysis—the economic base, which is mistakenly seen as capitalist. While each misrepresentation has its own distinct problems, they also have common problems: a voluntarist position on political decisions, which fails to provide any reason for a “capitalist turn”; the assumption that a “market economy,” wherever and whenever it appears, is by definition capitalist; the deployment of neocolonial and “Orientalist” assumptions coupled with a Western “betrayal narrative”; and a systemic neglect of Chinese language research. The conclusion provides a summarising assessment that focuses on the empirical flaws and methodological presuppositions of these misrepresentations. We emphasise that our focus is primarily on the internal problems and inconsistencies of these misrepresentations, although we also offer—where needed—some constructive alternatives.
{"title":"“Not Some Other -ism”—On Some Western Marxist Misrepresentations of Chinese Socialism","authors":"R. Boer, P. Yan","doi":"10.1080/21598282.2021.1923171","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2021.1923171","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study tackles four Western Marxist misrepresentations of socialism with Chinese characteristics, particularly as it has developed with the reform and opening-up. Each of these misrepresentations sets in opposition the economy and the state, with the former being seen as “capitalist” (in some form) and the latter as variously “authoritarian,” “bureaucratic” or simply as “interventionist.” In other words, “Chinese characteristics” designates the superstructural feature that determines—incorrectly in light of Marxist analysis—the economic base, which is mistakenly seen as capitalist. While each misrepresentation has its own distinct problems, they also have common problems: a voluntarist position on political decisions, which fails to provide any reason for a “capitalist turn”; the assumption that a “market economy,” wherever and whenever it appears, is by definition capitalist; the deployment of neocolonial and “Orientalist” assumptions coupled with a Western “betrayal narrative”; and a systemic neglect of Chinese language research. The conclusion provides a summarising assessment that focuses on the empirical flaws and methodological presuppositions of these misrepresentations. We emphasise that our focus is primarily on the internal problems and inconsistencies of these misrepresentations, although we also offer—where needed—some constructive alternatives.","PeriodicalId":43179,"journal":{"name":"International Critical Thought","volume":"56 1","pages":"171 - 189"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85686971","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/21598282.2021.1924071
Michael Pröbsting
ABSTRACT Due to a combination of specific factors South Korea experienced a rapid process of industrialization and capital accumulation. This process has resulted in the country’s transformation from a semi-colony dominated by US imperialism in 1945 into an emerging imperialist state in the 2000s. Today South Korea’s economy is dominated by large corporations—the chaebols—which have dominated the domestic market for a good few decades. These corporations, moreover, export not only commodities but also capital. As a result there has been a massive increase in foreign investment by Korean capitalists, both in imperialist countries and in countries of the South. Today, South Korea’s chaebols have secured a prominent place among the top global corporations. The chaebols usually consist of a vast network of formally independent firms, but they are united under the common administrative and financial control of a single family via a complex cross-shareholding structure. South Korea’s imperialism still faces some limitations, especially in the political field given the presence of US troops and Washington’s ongoing influence in Seoul’s ruling circles. However, the dramatic economic rise of South Korean capital has created the preconditions to shed these political limitations too in the foreseeable future.
{"title":"South Korea’s Transformation into an Imperialist Power","authors":"Michael Pröbsting","doi":"10.1080/21598282.2021.1924071","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21598282.2021.1924071","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Due to a combination of specific factors South Korea experienced a rapid process of industrialization and capital accumulation. This process has resulted in the country’s transformation from a semi-colony dominated by US imperialism in 1945 into an emerging imperialist state in the 2000s. Today South Korea’s economy is dominated by large corporations—the chaebols—which have dominated the domestic market for a good few decades. These corporations, moreover, export not only commodities but also capital. As a result there has been a massive increase in foreign investment by Korean capitalists, both in imperialist countries and in countries of the South. Today, South Korea’s chaebols have secured a prominent place among the top global corporations. The chaebols usually consist of a vast network of formally independent firms, but they are united under the common administrative and financial control of a single family via a complex cross-shareholding structure. South Korea’s imperialism still faces some limitations, especially in the political field given the presence of US troops and Washington’s ongoing influence in Seoul’s ruling circles. However, the dramatic economic rise of South Korean capital has created the preconditions to shed these political limitations too in the foreseeable future.","PeriodicalId":43179,"journal":{"name":"International Critical Thought","volume":"9 1","pages":"210 - 231"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75767702","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：