Politics

Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism

Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism

  • Downloads：5207
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2021-07-17 09:54:58
  • Update Date：2025-09-06
  • Status：finish
  • Author：Vladimir Lenin
  • ISBN：0141192569
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Summary

Vladimir Lenin created this hugely significant Marxist text to explain fully the inevitable flaws and destructive power of Capitalism: that it would lead unavoidably to imperialism， monopolies and colonialism。 He prophesied that those third world countries used merely as capitalist labour would have no choice but to join the Communist revolution in Russia。

GREAT IDEAS。 Throughout history， some books have changed the world。 They have transformed the way we see ourselves - and each other。 They have inspired debate， dissent， war and revolution。 They have enlightened， outraged， provoked and comforted。 They have enriched lives - and destroyed them。 Now Penguin brings you the works of the great thinkers， pioneers， radicals and visionaries whose ideas shook civilization and helped make us who we are。

Download

Reviews

Jack ，

This is alot easier to read than anything Marx ever put out and yet in many ways is even more prophetic， while Lenin was far from the only one to notice the trend of monopolization of industry and banking and the need for corporations and governments to work together to expand the horizons of capital into the developing world and increase the rate of profit， he sure was the one who wrote about it with the most revolutionary Ferver。Although， honestly， you should only read this if your profoundly This is alot easier to read than anything Marx ever put out and yet in many ways is even more prophetic， while Lenin was far from the only one to notice the trend of monopolization of industry and banking and the need for corporations and governments to work together to expand the horizons of capital into the developing world and increase the rate of profit， he sure was the one who wrote about it with the most revolutionary Ferver。Although， honestly， you should only read this if your profoundly interested in that stage of history as alot of his predictions are just accepted as how the world runs now， while many have also fallen flat on their face， despite this I still give Lenin alot of credit for seeing some of the major trends of the 20th century way before most。If you are looking for a poineeint critique of modern imperial corporate capitalism， there are much better books than this however。 。。。more

Cameron Mackintosh ，

another classic by Lenin

cristine ，

Had to read it for my international relations theory class。

Oscar Nergård ，

It is still a very relevant critique of Capitalism， maybe especially considering the economic developments in the world over the last 4 or so decades。 The main issue I have with this book is that it is in many cases too specific， which leads it to lose some relevancy for today， and at times it makes it somewhat hard to read， but overrall still very relevant。 includes strong critiques of and explanations of the developments of capitalism into a form of late stage capitalism （which leads to Imperi It is still a very relevant critique of Capitalism， maybe especially considering the economic developments in the world over the last 4 or so decades。 The main issue I have with this book is that it is in many cases too specific， which leads it to lose some relevancy for today， and at times it makes it somewhat hard to read， but overrall still very relevant。 includes strong critiques of and explanations of the developments of capitalism into a form of late stage capitalism （which leads to Imperialism）Overrall very good book。 。。。more

L ，

I really liked Lenin's definition and characterisation of imperialism。I found this a lot easier to follow than State and Rev。 I really liked Lenin's definition and characterisation of imperialism。I found this a lot easier to follow than State and Rev。 。。。more

Roman Cabay ，

this lenin guy keeps posting bangers

Matt Stiles ，

He sounds like Trump talking about China。。

Gail ，

lenin kind of went off in this one

Liv Jøhnk ，

This was a bit too advanced for me， as I am just starting to learn about political theory。 The book is a hundred years old， and the events and statistics it refers to are therefore outdated， but the theory and concepts were very interesting。

Jd Lancaster ，

I always say that while Imperialism is a great book， with to this day accurate predictions by Lenin， it ultimately falls short in that we live in all of his predictions。 I too be frank was not a huge fan of this book， however I know many are， and even to this day I am still left sourcing/quoting it。 I think in order to give it true justice one should study rather than read it， preferably in a group scenario where discussion is present （if anyone wants to let me know！）

Jaylee ，

Now just going to call anyone I don't like "bourgeois reformists" Now just going to call anyone I don't like "bourgeois reformists" 。。。more

Chris ，

An important read， but goddamn is it dry。

Idiris A ，

10/10。 Eye opening。

Andrew Noselli ，

Good nutriment after reading Thomas Jefferson's reflections on France before their Revolution。 Good nutriment after reading Thomas Jefferson's reflections on France before their Revolution。 。。。more

Mickey Dubs ，

'Today， monopoly is a fact。'I'm more of a Ludo man personally。 Hard pass。 'Today， monopoly is a fact。'I'm more of a Ludo man personally。 Hard pass。 。。。more

Jordan Alves ，

Dense and kinda boring read at times， but this is just flat out good theory。

Calvin Pomeroy ，

Our king Vladimir Lenin absolutely took the piss out of the social democrats/pacifists/anarchists。 Lenin perfectly sets up and then knocks imperialism's foundations out of the park。 The only way to end inequality is to end imperialism。 And no， Norway， you have not done that。 （This is all in Minecraft）。 Our king Vladimir Lenin absolutely took the piss out of the social democrats/pacifists/anarchists。 Lenin perfectly sets up and then knocks imperialism's foundations out of the park。 The only way to end inequality is to end imperialism。 And no， Norway， you have not done that。 （This is all in Minecraft）。 。。。more

Nathanael Mickelson ，

Sigh。。。 the things I read for a PhD

Kosta Barlas ，

Ronald Reagan's assistant treasure secretary didn't write "If Karl Marx and V。 I。 Lenin were alive today， they would be leading contenders for the Nobel Prize in economics。" for nothing。 In this book， Lenin lays out a marxist analysis of imperialism: its causes， effects， and characteristics。 It's pretty dry reading for the first half or so， very data heavy， but you can't lay out a proper analysis of the capitalist system without a ton of numbers to back it up so you can't really fault the guy。 L Ronald Reagan's assistant treasure secretary didn't write "If Karl Marx and V。 I。 Lenin were alive today， they would be leading contenders for the Nobel Prize in economics。" for nothing。 In this book， Lenin lays out a marxist analysis of imperialism: its causes， effects， and characteristics。 It's pretty dry reading for the first half or so， very data heavy， but you can't lay out a proper analysis of the capitalist system without a ton of numbers to back it up so you can't really fault the guy。 Lenin argues that imperialism is a natural outgrowth of monopoly and the increased power of finance capital。 While this was a basic point that previous writers had agreed on， Lenin points out the reasons behind why previous writers had come to incorrect conclusions about what was possible within this system and what it would do， and he does this remarkably accurately。 When he's talking about smaller imperialist powers， for instance， he identifies the economic conditions in Germany and Japan that would eventually lead to WWII。 A correct heuristic and a ton of data goes a long way。 The one fault in his analysis is his optimism; he refers to capitalism as 'moribund'， 'dying'， 'rotting' etc。 It's easy to see how he could come to those conclusions - the conditions at the time （1917） looking increasingly like world revolution was just around the corner， his position as a leader of a revolutionary organisation - but it definitely hits different reading this living in an imperialist capitalist state a hundred years later。If you want to understand why modern wealthy countries have acted the way they have in the past hundred years， this is the book to read。 Where power sits and why， what decisions are made and why， this is the stuff Lenin deals with 。。。more

Philip ，

It's a nice book describing our era of exploitative monopoly capitalism。 Wish it was longer and also told us how to fight it， but it's good as a purely descriptive literature。 It's a nice book describing our era of exploitative monopoly capitalism。 Wish it was longer and also told us how to fight it， but it's good as a purely descriptive literature。 。。。more

Noah ，

It reads a little dry， but it is a very important text for understanding the economics of the early 20th century which laid the foundation for the world we live in today。

Raghav Pandey ，

Kautsky spanked Lenin when Lenin was a child

Vanessa Maderová ，

Notwithstanding the dated statistics， which were in my opinion too plentiful， （read tedious）， and the shifts in semantics， one would not believe that this book was written over a hundred years ago。 That's for several reasons:1） the resemblance between financialised capitalism of the early 20th century， which must have given meaning to the phrase "revolving doors，" and the （namely） pre-2008 Wall Street/City unfettered financial practices is uncanny2） the monopolisation of production， bolstered th Notwithstanding the dated statistics， which were in my opinion too plentiful， （read tedious）， and the shifts in semantics， one would not believe that this book was written over a hundred years ago。 That's for several reasons:1） the resemblance between financialised capitalism of the early 20th century， which must have given meaning to the phrase "revolving doors，" and the （namely） pre-2008 Wall Street/City unfettered financial practices is uncanny2） the monopolisation of production， bolstered through the concentration of finance capital， and subsequent patterns of value creation， retention and capture in the global economy has remained essentially unchanged， only nowadays we call it global value chains3） the ideological split in the labour movement （Lenin and his Third International v Kautsky and Hilferding's "reformism，" ie complacency） and even some of the terms of the debate are eerily similar to the recent developments in the British Labour 。。。more

Serenata ，

finished my uni assignments let's fuckin goooobeen looking forward to this day for over a year now finished my uni assignments let's fuckin goooobeen looking forward to this day for over a year now 。。。more

boekjes van max ，

de EU wordt weirdly accurate hierin voorspeld

Stefan Gugler ，

Hm， maybe 3。5。 I like Lenin's ardor but it's very difficult to read。 Most of his reasoning doesn't feel super theoretical （or from an a priori stance） compared to other Marxists and more bound to the economical circumstances of the time， which makes it hard to follow for me。 But I think many of his conclusions were spot on if the numbers are correct and are still true today: Capital and power is concentrated more and more in the hands of a few companies as we witness monopolization over time， su Hm， maybe 3。5。 I like Lenin's ardor but it's very difficult to read。 Most of his reasoning doesn't feel super theoretical （or from an a priori stance） compared to other Marxists and more bound to the economical circumstances of the time， which makes it hard to follow for me。 But I think many of his conclusions were spot on if the numbers are correct and are still true today: Capital and power is concentrated more and more in the hands of a few companies as we witness monopolization over time， such that at some point the only expansion is imperialism （or nowadays space exploration （or more juicily and/or accurately space colonialization））。 In Lenin's time they also witnessed how the entire land mass of the world was divvied up between the super powers。 It's in a way interesting to imagine that most human history not all land belonged to somebody。 One great move in Lenin's argumentation is that most of his numbers originate from capitalist and liberal writers and economists。 Like this he avoids of being criticized for bad or wrong or ideologically charged sources。 For me that added to his epistemic rigor。I have to read more on Kautsky's ultra-imperialism but I didn't find all of Lenin's rebuttals convincing but maybe I'm at a more theoretical outlook （which Lenin conceded might be correct， after all， but idk）。 The capitalist nations amongst themselves （absolutely not with other nations） today live in sort of an ultra-imperial relation with each other as more spending for the military might not be the most efficient allotment of spending for growth。 But maybe it's not really the point to look at the relationship between only capitalist states。 Furthermore， the US is increasing their military spending each year， which is also more straightforward imperialist rather than ultra-imperialist。 。。。more

Eleanor Coombe ，

This book was a suggested read for my degree essay explaining the relationship between Capitalism and Empire。 I found Lenin’s arguments very interesting - it never occurred to me that imperialism could be its own stage of Capitalism。 I’m not sure I agree with Lenin on this - it seems clear to me that imperialism began way before the advent of Capitalism in the mid-eighteenth century。 However his explanation for how free-market Capitalism inevitably leads to monopoly （where smaller companies are This book was a suggested read for my degree essay explaining the relationship between Capitalism and Empire。 I found Lenin’s arguments very interesting - it never occurred to me that imperialism could be its own stage of Capitalism。 I’m not sure I agree with Lenin on this - it seems clear to me that imperialism began way before the advent of Capitalism in the mid-eighteenth century。 However his explanation for how free-market Capitalism inevitably leads to monopoly （where smaller companies are engulfed by large-scale producers） is well written。 。。。more

JRT ，

Lenin wrote this classic piece for the express purpose of fleshing out the “economic essence of imperialism，” which he describes as monopolized financial capitalism。 At its core， this is a book about definitions and explanations。 Lenin defines “monopolies" as a feature of modern capitalism that encourages the concentration of industry and the means of production。 He contends that capitalism at its highest stage is consumed with monopolization。 Lenin traces the history of the development of monop Lenin wrote this classic piece for the express purpose of fleshing out the “economic essence of imperialism，” which he describes as monopolized financial capitalism。 At its core， this is a book about definitions and explanations。 Lenin defines “monopolies" as a feature of modern capitalism that encourages the concentration of industry and the means of production。 He contends that capitalism at its highest stage is consumed with monopolization。 Lenin traces the history of the development of monopolies， demonstrating how they have led to modern imperialism and imperialist war。 He notes that monopolization is parasitic in that it socializes production while privatizing profit。 Lenin engages in detailed analysis of the various industries that are thoroughly monopolized throughout the developed Euro-American world， thereby establishing the foundation for modern imperialism。 After discussing monopolization， Lenin turns his focus to the phenomenon of global financialization and banking， demonstrating how “finance capital” is instrumental to modern imperialism。 Here， Lenin is ahead of his time， speaking about financial market concentration as if he just witnessed the major bank bailouts of the 21st Century。 Lenin contends that monopoly financialization is the vehicle that allowed for the global expansion of capital， paving the way for imperialist endeavors。 He notes the centrality of stock market speculation as indicative of the change from competition-based capitalism， to post-monopoly capitalism， which he contends is the engine for imperialism。 He identifies the emergence of monopolized finance capital as the vehicle for imperialism， in that it allows a handful of financial elites to “export” their capital in the form of predatory investments and loans， giving them a direct and exploitative stake in the developing / underdeveloped world。 Next， Lenin discusses how "financial capitalism" paved the way for crude colonialism and the partition of the globe。 Lenin contends that colonial annexation is a product of monopoly financialization in that financiers are always on the look out for “new markets” to exploit。 Further， the securing of raw materials and cheap labor is a direct benefit of colonial policy and imperialism。 Ultimately， Lenin sets forth the factors for modern imperialism， defining them as: （1） monopoly industrial capitalism; （2） monopoly financial capitalism; （3） the export of financial capital; （4） the development of international capitalist monopolies; and （5） the division of the world on lines created by international capitalist monopolies and their home nation-states。 In short， Lenin defines "imperialism" as the stage of capitalism where both industrial and financial monopolies dominate the globe。 This is a classic book because it perfectly describes the world we currently live in。 100 years later， not much has changed。 。。。more

Benjamin ，

Considered one of Lenin's classics， 'Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism' had to live up to two standards for me: Being a somewhat analytical work about capitalism， while at the same time shedding light upon this issue in the early 20th century climate。In my opinion， it very much succeeds in that effort。Lenin begins to talk a lot about monopolies， cartels and syndicates - these chapters are even more interesting from our modern 21th century standpoint， where you can observe which leadin Considered one of Lenin's classics， 'Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism' had to live up to two standards for me: Being a somewhat analytical work about capitalism， while at the same time shedding light upon this issue in the early 20th century climate。In my opinion， it very much succeeds in that effort。Lenin begins to talk a lot about monopolies， cartels and syndicates - these chapters are even more interesting from our modern 21th century standpoint， where you can observe which leading economical forces completely changed （f。 ex。 from steel manufacturers to tech giants）， and which ones are literally the same companies Lenin mentions more than a hundred years ago （like the Deutsche Bank）。More importantly， he then goes on to explain in what sense these few western burgeois use capital to control the entirety of the global economy and， as he likes to call it 'the parasitic nature of capitalism'。Although this book is intended to be more of a pamphlet， it uses a lot of statistics， numbers and figures to carefully prove the huge claims。 On top of that， Lenin references many contemporary scholars from either side and reasons for or against them。All of this makes this book not only a must-read for everyone generally interested in Marxist/Leninist ideas， but also for anyone interested in history and the development of economy and globalisation as it is today。 。。。more

/d。 ，

People can criticize this book all they want - and yes it is polemic and yes it sometimes over-simplifies some things - but you just have to be in awe of the absolute brilliancy with which Lenin analyzes the international relations of his time， long before other political commentators came on the scene。 This is a book that problematizes the predatory role of banks - which barely anyone seems to have understood before 2008/9 and probably not even then - as well as the capitalism's inherent strive People can criticize this book all they want - and yes it is polemic and yes it sometimes over-simplifies some things - but you just have to be in awe of the absolute brilliancy with which Lenin analyzes the international relations of his time， long before other political commentators came on the scene。 This is a book that problematizes the predatory role of banks - which barely anyone seems to have understood before 2008/9 and probably not even then - as well as the capitalism's inherent strive toward monopolies （among other things through imperial endeavours）。 It's a wonderful book that was unbelievably ahead of its time: the book came out in 1916 and spot on laid out how the current world politics would lead to catastrophy。 Yes， WW1 was already raging， but Lenin manages to both lay down how things got there as well as the world is in for an even bigger bang in the near future。 It has been a long disagreement whether WW1 and WW2 should really be seen as two separate wars and from that perspective， it might not take predictive superpowers to foresee an even bigger European calamity than what we today consider WW1。 That being said， Lenin wrote in the initial war years as things were unfolding in a chaotic matter， in real time all around him， and the clarity with which he analysis the state of affairs is nothing short of astounding。 Another case in point is his analysis of the partitioning of the world in colonial satellites and how this process would only end once the entire world had been divides between what we call（ed） the most powerful countries。 Even then， the strive wouldn't end but turn into conflict over colonial control。 He wrote this， the year of the Sykes Picot conference - 1916 - that is to say， before the conference。 Yes， the largest part of the world had already been subdued to European colonial control but the mother of all colonial partitioning conferences， the conference that made the Middle East into what it is today， was still to come。The book is a bit tedious in some places， with a ton of numbers to bolster his arguments。 In some places， the books polemics are getting somewhat tiresome but I think that is excusable considering what I wrote above。 If you ask me， it's not even about whether or not you or I agree with Lenin。 He and his book were a product of their time and should be treated as such。 But Lenin is - at least were I come from - one of those historical figures that seems to have a bad reputation simply based on where he came from。 With all of this being said， I don't judge the man but his book and his book is an absolute marvel if read in a historical context and even though the world has changed rapidly in the 100 years since the book's publication， Imperialism shows us that most of the underlying dynamics that led to the Great Wars are still at play in our world today。 Don't reject it out of hand， but give it a try。 Try to read beyond the polemics and I'm sure there is something for anyone who is interested in politics。 。。。more

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0