Сделать домашней|Добавить в избранное

Многопользовательский новостной движок,
предназначенный для организации собственных
СМИ и блогов в интернете.

» » » Megdof truly believes
на правах рекламы

Megdof truly believes

Автор: olegj от 23-06-2013, 21:29

Megdof truly believes

Megdof truly believes... Megdof believes truly astonishing that Lenin was right when, among other things, he chose as the key features to characterize the stage of monopoly capitalism, the growing importance of the export of capital as compared to the export of goods. Indeed, he continues, "according to UN data, the volume of sales of foreign affiliates operating in the global multinational corporations (in other words, a measure of manufacturing activity, which is a direct result of the investment of the imperialist powers, exceeded the total export of goods of all capitalist countries combined. "Of course, the left-radical interpretation of the export of capital in its essence is fundamentally different from Lenin.

However, the position of a critical attitude toward capitalism, which is occupied by the radical left, makes some of its ideologues protect individual Lenin's views on the attacks of apologists moribund system. The same can be said the views of the radical left on a number of other issues of modern bourgeois society. example, about their attitudes to transnational monopolies. In the left-wing radical economic theory, as already commented, the very idea of ??the nature of the imperialist stage of capitalism, and accordingly, hence the monopoly is not formed as a Marxist-Leninist political economy.

Megdof truly believes

Nevertheless, the activities of transnational monopolies, as a rule, always remains the focus of leftist criticism. Predatory nature of international corporations to expose their works Dzhentis, J. O'Connor, B. Rautorn, E. Hunt, Radis, R. Murray and other radical theorists.

A significant contribution to the study of the nature of transnational corporations contributed C. Heimer, who was one of the pioneers of non-Marxist literature in the study of this complex problem. Subjecting criticized the bourgeois concept of TNCs, Heimer in a persuasive manner pointed out the inconsistency of apologetic fabrications about the alleged beneficial effects of international monopolies in the economically backward countries.

He clearly understands the historical inevitability of the process of real socialization of production that goes beyond. Domestic production, while at the same time clearly wrote that the monopolistic organization of such socialization within the TNC does not contribute to overcoming the technological gap between the imperial center and the backward periphery, but On the contrary, exacerbates the gap. "It is not technology - Heimer writes, produces, and the organization of inequality." Note that Megdof... It should be noted that in his writings Megdof seeks to protect the bourgeois attack Lenin's theory of imperialism, as it allows the main provisions levoradikalizma.

He strongly protested against the forces of bourgeois apologists "refute" Lenin prove that Lenin's theory of imperialism, the export of capital due to the fact that under monopoly capitalism supposedly all the way closed to any use of capital. In fact, Lenin wrote: "Of course, if capitalism could develop agriculture, which is now everywhere terribly lagging behind the industry, if he could raise the living standards of the masses of the population, which is everywhere, despite the dizzying technological progress, half-starved and miserable - then an excess of capital might not be out of the question. And this "argument" is all too often pushed the petty-bourgeois critics of imperialism. But then, capitalism would not be capitalism, and for the uneven development and the standard of living half-starved masses is fundamental, inescapable conditions and prerequisites of this mode of production.

Megdof truly believes

As long as capitalism remains, the excess capital refers not to raise the standard of living of the masses in this country, because that would be a decrease in profits of the capitalists, while increasing profits by exporting capital abroad... "This part of the book Lenin's" Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism "deliberately bypassed many forgers of Lenin's theory of imperialism, attributing his interpretation of imperialism as a continuation and development of the concept of underconsumption Hobson. Megdof, exposing these methods of falsification of one of the critics of Lenin, A. Szymanski, rightly notes that the latest randomly pulls that same quote Lenin, which deals with the emergence of "excess capital" and deliberately ignores the following (listed above) in the paragraph.

Megdof truly believes

Megdof absolutely right when he points out that such neglect can not be considered accidental. That is why the bourgeois apologists "do not notice" Leninist conclusions about patterns of export of capital under monopoly capitalism, that these conclusions are no less relevant today than seven decades ago. "In a society of mass unemployment, growing poverty, urban decay, etc. - continues Megdof - whether capitalists are making investments to eliminate this evil? Of course not. The obvious reason is that they expect too little profit, and fear much risk in these enterprises. But at the same time, our giant firms expand and continue to expand its overseas subsidiaries.


Уважаемый посетитель, Вы зашли на сайт как незарегистрированный пользователь.
Мы рекомендуем Вам зарегистрироваться либо войти на сайт под своим именем.


Оставить комментарий

Уважаемые вебмастера, Вы
просматриваете тестовую страницу
DataLife Engine.
Текущая версия 10.6.