Emmanuelle without any evidence... Emmanuelle without any evidence claims that the surplus product ("economic surplus"), taken away from the periphery, creates the material basis "sverhzarplaty" workers industrially developed capitalist countries, it is certain that the "surplus" goes to the proletariat, not monopolies. Herein lies, in his opinion, the reason for the large gap in wages of workers of the imperialist center and the periphery of the working people. Indeed, the gap in the wage of workers in the least and most developed capitalist countries is very high. In the U. S., for example, the average salary is almost times higher than in the poorest countries of Africa.
But does this mean that the wage bill in the developed capitalist countries, crucially formed by the share of the surplus product that is "pumped" from less developed countries? Of course not. After all, even if we take for granted Emmanuel argument that all "surplus" is transferred to the imperialist center and goes to work, and even then the excess of their wage earnings over the periphery of the workers can not be explained only by the effects of "commercial imperialism. " And in fact, the workers of the imperialist countries themselves are subject to ruthless exploitation by capital. Their standard of living they can maintain or increase only at the cost of bitter class struggle.
And if the conditions are added to this struggle of the proletariat adversely, the ruling class immediately prejudice its interests. Life in the West constantly creates more and more evidence to support this truth. In the Political Report of the Central Committee of the CPSU XXVII Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, stated that "the middle years of the frequent economic crises and a technological restructuring of production changed the situation, allowed capital to counter-attack, to deprive workers of their significant social gains. In a number of indicators of living standards workers have been cast back many years.
" Of this, Emmanuel, that the struggle... Of this, Emmanuel, that the struggle of the workers of developed countries under the leadership of trade unions and proletarian parties for better working conditions reinforces, perpetuates the non-equivalence of the exchange between the center and the leriferiey and thus exacerbates the underdevelopment of the periphery.
Note that as a starting point for the study of underdevelopment in the developing countries Emmanuel playing the decisive role of external factors. For the French economist and important finding of the specific perpetrators of the robbery of developing countries.
Such an approach is characterized by clarity and considerable persuasive for people in the developing countries, who want to know who is to blame for their economic failures. The original culprit of the colonial and neo-colonial plunder has long been known - it is a financial oligarchy of the imperialist powers.
Emmanuel attempts to present as the culprit of economic plunder proletariat of the industrialized capitalist countries are deprived of any foundation. Absolutely absurd statement looks Emmanuel rate of return on equity for all countries of the world capitalist system. Not to mention the fact that this rule is quite different in non-monopolized sectors of the economy, rather than in the monopolized (the existence of monopolies, he in his analysis completely ignores), it is well known that the rate of return of capitalist enterprises, in particular the international monopolies, due to lower production costs in developing countries is much higher than in the mother country. B - for example, the average rate of return on the investment of the American monopolies in these countries amounted%, while in the developed capitalist countries - only%.
It is this fact acts as one of the major incentives encouraging multinationals to invest capital in developing countries. Emmanuel assumptions as to what portion of the surplus generated from the exploitation of workers in the periphery, "passed" the working class of the developed capitalist countries, drastically distort reality. But why the difference...
But why the difference in salary acts as the primary cause of "commercial imperialism"? Maybe his "generator" would be more appropriate to consider the capitalist profit? Emmanuel negative answer to this question.
To justify his theoretical position, he relies on the concept of the bourgeois-apologetic "factors of production", which states that the price of the goods (identified with its value) is the product of three equal factors of production - labor, capital and land. In accordance with these unscientific notions value is created not only labor but also capital and land, and therefore the capitalist and the landlord are equally legitimate right to receive rents and profits, the worker - for salary. Based on this concept, Emmanuelle tries to explain the mechanism of functioning of unequal exchange in the international arena unequal rewards in different countries of the same factors of production, namely labor.