Abstract
A systematic attempt to understand the connections between domestic social change, state structures and foreign policy, and the uneven development of the world economy was presented in the theory of capitalist imperialism. This analysis was prompted by the failure of the European working classes to respond to the call for international revolution at the beginning of the First World War. At the theoretical level, Marxist theories of imperialism broke with earlier accounts of the transition between capitalism and socialism in two main respects. In the first place, they attached far greater importance to the way in which the symbols of national power and prestige had contributed to the reproduction of capitalist societies; and secondly, they stressed the inadequacy of any discussion of the transition between capitalism and socialism which failed to take account of the fact of war. These shifts of emphases embodied a recognition that the power of nation-states had been greatly enhanced by the process of industrialisation. In this context these approaches raised serious problems for earlier Marxist attempts to construct a critical sociology of world politics.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
H. Magdoff, “Militarism and Imperialism”, American Economic Review, 60 (1970) p. 237.
N. Etherington, Theories of Imperialism: War, Conquest and Capital (New Jersey, 1984) p. 273.
See the comments in W. Berghahn (ed.) Germany and the Approach of War in 1914 (New York, 1973) pp. 79–81.
G. Lichtheim, Europe in the Twentieth Century (New York, 1974) chs. 1–3.
J.Schumpeter, Imperialism and Social Classes (New York, 1951).
Cohen (1973) and P. Darby, Three Faces of Imperialism: British and American Approaches to Asia and Africa (New Haven, 1987) pp. 13–21.
ibid., p. 81. See H.U. Wehler, The German Empire 1871–1918 (Leamington Spa, 1985) pp. 172–3 and 178 where it is claimed that “economic interests in the narrow sense” were always involved in the process of annexation.
Fieldhouse (1976) pp. 35 and 475. And R. Robinson, “The Excentric Idea of Imperialism, with or without Empire”, in W. Mommsen and O. Osterhammel, Imperialism and After: Continuities and Discontinuities (London, 1987).
See Robinson and Gallagher, “The Partition of Africa”, in W. R. Louis (ed.) Imperialism: The Robinson and Gallagher Controversy (London, 1976) p. 100. See the editor’s comments on p 4 on the need to distinguish the strategic “motives” for expansion from the actual “causes” of colonialism which were located in the periphery.
W. Baumgart, Imperialism: The Idea and Reality of British and French Colonial Expansion (Oxford, 1982) p. 183.
J. S. Mill, Essays on Sex Equality, edited by A. S. Rossi (Chicago, 1970) pp. 152–3.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1990 Andrew Linklater
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Linklater, A. (1990). Class, State and Nation in the Theory of Capitalist Imperialism. In: Beyond Realism and Marxism. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230374546_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230374546_5
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-51720-8
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-37454-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)