Toggle menu
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.

Social-imperialism: Difference between revisions

From ProleWiki, the proletarian encyclopedia
More languages
No edit summary
Tag: Visual edit
(Removed bias)
Tag: Visual edit
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Social-imperialism''' is an [[idealist]] term commonly used by [[Ultra-leftist|ultra-leftists]], such as [[Maoism|Maoists]] and [[Anti-revisionism|"anti-revisionists"]], to explain their belief that [[Actually existing socialism|socialist states]] like the Soviet Union and post-Mao China had become [[Imperialism|imperialist]].  
'''Social-imperialism''' is a term commonly used by [[Anti-revisionism|Anti-revisionists]] as explanation that [[Actually existing socialism|socialist states]] like the [[Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (1922–1991)|Soviet Union]] after [[Joseph Stalin|Stalin]] and [[People's Republic of China|China]] after [[Mao Zedong]] had become [[Imperialism|imperialist]].  


== History ==
== History ==
Line 14: Line 14:
}}
}}
</ref>; afterward, the term was not used again until it was reintroduced by [[Mao]] after the [[Sino-Soviet split]], used to describe the post-Stalin USSR as a "Hitlerite imperialist state". It saw further use by [[Enver Hoxha]], for example in his treatise "Imperialism and the Revolution"; notably, neither Mao nor Hoxha ever explained what the material basis of a "social-imperialist" state would be, and what the social formation of such a state looked like.  
</ref>; afterward, the term was not used again until it was reintroduced by [[Mao]] after the [[Sino-Soviet split]], used to describe the post-Stalin USSR as a "Hitlerite imperialist state". It saw further use by [[Enver Hoxha]], for example in his treatise "Imperialism and the Revolution"; notably, neither Mao nor Hoxha ever explained what the material basis of a "social-imperialist" state would be, and what the social formation of such a state looked like.  
== Criticism ==
Imperialism, as the highest stage of capitalism, would require there to be sufficiently developed capitalist monopolies. It is left unexplained by proponents of the theory of "social-imperialism" how exactly it is possible for a socialist state to become capitalist without an outright [[Counterrevolution|counter-revolution]]; in this sense, the theory of "social-imperialism" is a [[reformist]] and [[revisionist]] idea that suggests it is not necessary for the [[Class society|class character]] of a state to change for it to shift between capitalism and socialism.


== References ==
== References ==

Revision as of 16:54, 9 February 2023

Social-imperialism is a term commonly used by Anti-revisionists as explanation that socialist states like the Soviet Union after Stalin and China after Mao Zedong had become imperialist.

History

The term originated in a one-off quote by Vladimir Lenin, where he describes the liberal social democractic SPD as "socialist in name, imperialist in deeds"[1]; afterward, the term was not used again until it was reintroduced by Mao after the Sino-Soviet split, used to describe the post-Stalin USSR as a "Hitlerite imperialist state". It saw further use by Enver Hoxha, for example in his treatise "Imperialism and the Revolution"; notably, neither Mao nor Hoxha ever explained what the material basis of a "social-imperialist" state would be, and what the social formation of such a state looked like.

References

  1. ““Social-Democratic” Party of Germany are justly called “social-imperialists,” that is, socialists in words and imperialists in deeds;”

    V.I. Lenin (1916). Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism: 'CRITIQUE OF IMPERIALISM'. [PDF]