Financial-Economic Colonialism
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

 
Other articles
 

 

In the stage of imperialist globalization, a new type of colonialism has emerged. All the barriers and obstacles that prevented the free movement of the capital had to be lifted. Capital had to penetrate into the country of its choice as much, as often, and in the way they wanted to, in order to disappear with the profit it has striven for. Wherever the labor force was cheaper, wherever there was more potential for market expansion, there should be free flow.

 

 

Colonialism is the political and economic occupation of a country by a state or a group of states.
Colonialism existed before capitalism. The first examples that come to mind are colonialism in the slavery of the Roman Empire, as well as the colonialism of the feudal Ottoman Empire. In the societies before capitalism, the main form of colonialism was to bind a country to tribute by means of military occupation and political rule.
In capitalism, however, colonialism gains a new content. To annex the conquered country also economically, a capitalist state, forcing another country under political domination, must break its traditional economy and structure it in such a way that it can be exploited and robbed,
The Different Forms of Colonialism


1- The Classical Capitalist Colonialism


The history of capitalist colonialism extends to the years in which the bourgeois countries, with more or less ruling capitalist production relations, have emerged. The Dutch and subsequently the English colonialism are typical examples of it. The spread of capitalism in Western Europe, progress in transport technology and new trade routes have led to the colonization of the American continent and India. The military conquerors carried out the population and capital flow from the conquerer land immediately after conquest. The resources and wealth of the conquered country were plundered, domestic and foreign trade were taken over by the conquerer land.
The basic characteristic of classical colonialism is the political and economic leadership of the conquered country by the conqueror state. Of course, this does not mean that from top to bottom all governing bodies are taken over by individuals of the colonial state. It is not possible to colonize without creating a native collaborating caste. There are two forms of classical colonial leadership. Firstly, a part of the population of the colonial country can be settled over and build a colony to lead the conquered land and its native peoples. Secondly, a small group of occupiers can exercise the leadership through a collaborative native interlayer. Australia, New Zealand, North America and South Africa belong to the first category. India and some other African countries belong to the second. In particular the English colonialists were specialists of the second category. They have led India with a small number of leading, official cadres. It is obvious that they could not have done this without a collaborative layer.
In the imperialist phase of capitalism, a few large imperialist states have divided the rest of the world. Almost the entire continent of Africa was divided among the colonialists. Southeast Asia has also been split. Classical colonialism has become a basic form of imperialist expansion. The other capitalist states have fallen into a disadvantageous position in the colonial division. This inevitably led to a multiplication of the colonialist wars and ultimately to world wars that broke out for the new division of the world by the imperialists.


2- Semi-Colonialism


For some states, the power of imperialist states was not sufficient to conquer, or their being shared by division would not have corresponded the interests of the imperialists. China and the Ottoman Empire are two typical examples of this. These states could not be turned into classical colonies, but became semi-colonies of the capitalist imperialists.
Semi-colonized states are officially independent, but in turn they are under the command of one or a few capitalist-imperialist states. The capitalist-imperialist states build alliances with the ruling classes of these countries, which have usually feudal character. The economic, financial and military dependency reaches such a stage that the leaders became marionettes of the capitalist imperialists.
In many respects there are similarities to classical colonialism. The imperialists do not rule the country directly, but, by force of their capital, they receive privileges for the elimination of the wealth above or below the earth, like a colony. They open up new markets for their own goods, which destroy the traditional products of the region. By creating a layer of rampant subcontractors and traders, they form their social supports. They tie up the state administrators to themselves with the opened credits.
3- Neo-Colonialism
The development of the movement of the working class and its revolutionary impulses, the revolutionary resistance of colonized or semi-colonized peoples and the formation of the USSR have shaken the imperialist monopoly of colonialism. Some of the oppressed peoples have freed themselves from the colonialist yoke. After the second re-division war, fascism was defeated, which encouraged the colonized peoples. Many countries have crushed the colonialist yoke despite all the cruel oppressive measures of the imperialists. Vietnam and Algeria are two main examples of national liberation struggles. The imperialists, who had understood that they could not prevent the passion for independence, have withdrawn from some areas and thus recognized independence. Thus the imperialist monopoly of colonialism was destroyed at the end of the 1960's.
In countries where national liberation has not been linked to social liberation and the struggle for independence has been won by the bourgeois class, capitalist development has taken place. Even though a bourgeois national liberation was obtained in these countries, the capitalist development had remained very far behind, the accumulation of capital was still weak, and as weak as the bourgeoisie, the working classes were weak. These countries did not have a modern industrial infrastructure and the majority of the population were farmers. This is why it was not possible for an independent economy to develop for those who sought a bourgeois development.
Whether under the leadership of the national bourgeoisie, or under petty bourgeois leadership, it is inevitable that the backward capitalist countries in which bourgeois development occurs, depend on imperialism. Money, commerce and industry accumulate in developed, capitalist countries. The possibility that a backward country creates a leap into the imperialist block in the stage of capitalist monopolization was historically overcome. The bourgeoisie, which would end the rule of colonialism, was forced to turn to the imperialist colonialists to stay on their feet and enrich themselves. The imperialist colonialists, however, brought about conditions which kept these countries dependent. Thereby these independent countries were dependent on imperialism through thousands of financial, economic, political, military and diplomatic connections. Just like their economic structure, the political structure was adapted to the interests of the imperialists. This is the status of the neo-colony.


The Difference Between Neo-Colonialism and Semi-Colonialism


Capitalist imperialism collaborates with the regimes, for this reason also the rulers of the countries, that it has made to semi-colonies. The rulers are usually feudal class members. With these collaborative feudal classes, the imperialists form an alliance. Thus, in neo-colonies the rulers are usually those who destroyed the political rule of the imperialists and their collaborators, or those who took the lead, whereby the imperialists were forced to resign. These are bourgeois layers who have taken the path of bourgeois capitalist development. This is why their main purpose is not the preservation of feudal rule, as it is customary in half-colonies, but the stabilization of class rule by advancing in the "capitalist development" path.
In semi-colonies, being the local elements of the imperialist expulsion, proliferating subcontractors and merchants bands are the main support of colonialists. In neo-colonies, on the contrary the bourgeoisie had got own interests. Without the development of national industry and trade and without the expansion of the internal market, it is not possible for this class to survive. Instead of a group of rampant subcontractors and traders, a class that has a certain capital power occurred and tried, even if it is slow, to develop an industrial infrastructure. This class is gaining more and more power. Similarly, the basis of a middle bourgeoisie emerges in the enlarged internal market.
In colonies and semi-colonies there existed or emerged the layer of a national bourgeoisie that opposed the imperialist rule. The contradiction of some parts of this national bourgeoisie with the imperialists gained antagonistic character after some time. It could become the basic political goal of this national bourgeoisie, to put an end to the imperialist rule and thus national independence. The national bourgeoisie of yesterday against the imperialist domination, now develop after the seizure of the rule in the new phase of colonization, becoming a monopolist bourgeoisie, which collaborated with the growing imperialism.
The "national" bourgeoisie of yesterday divided into two main layers of the middle and monopolist bourgeoisie, their interests differentiated. Their political inclinations were inevitably changing in accordance with their economic interests. The middle bourgeoisie had a tendency to relatively restrict the monopolist bourgeoisie and the imperialist hegemony, to pursue the 'national progress' and a bourgeois-liberal program which included a land reform. The middle bourgeoisie had objectively no anti-imperialist character because the national market can not expand without the imperialist market and the 'national rise/progress' interrupts after a period of time. For this reason the goal of the middle bourgeoisie is different from that of the old national bourgeoisie. Their goal is not end the imperialist rule, but to limit it relatively.


The Decisive Influence of Political Confrontation To The Process Of Neo-Colonialism


The law of unequal development in capitalism and the extreme accumulation of capital in imperialist metropolises have led to, that the countries that have gained their independence from imperialism, have once again come to the agenda of imperialism. But after the founding of the USSR, the concomitant political confrontation was just as decisive. It can be said that the political confrontation became even more decisive for some countries after the second re-division war.
Regardless of the economic interests of the ruling bourgeoisie, the rulers of these countries have been chiefly aiming to get under the protective shield of the imperialist bloc, led by the USA against the "danger of communism." This political confrontation has accelerated the phase of neo-colonialism. The economic order and political regimes of these countries have adequately restructured this acceleration. The military coup in many countries were result of this necessary restructuring. The coups in Iran, South Korea, Turkey, Indonesia, Greece and Latin America are examples of this.


Some Characteristic Features of Neo-Colonialism


First it was the goal of the colonialists to rob the wealth under and over the earth's surface of the conquered countries and expand the market for the merchandise trade. In the stage of imperialism, capital export has gained importance.
Capital export means to transfer the accumulated over capital of a country into the foreign market in order to gain added value in the most effective and decisive way. The unequal development in capitalism reaches a new level in the phase of imperialism. On the one hand there is capital, which is looking for investment areas, next to the countries with very few capital in which the inequality is deepening. On the other hand, the world market is divided among a few large imperialist states. In classical colonialism, it is the same hegemonic country that realizes the economic occupation and has political power in its hands. In semi-colony and neo-colony, the local collaborative class is a tool. The political and economic dependency is not direct but indirect.
In neo-colonialism, the most important forms of capital export are the debts of the states, direct capital investments and investment in securities. In these countries, the capitalist development has been left behind, which makes investment in securities unimportant. Private debt from abroad is also relatively small.
Two prominent forms of capital export are state debt and direct investment.
The states that give the debts impose conditions for the use of these loans. Under the conditions imposed by the creditor countries, borrowed loans are generally invested in military funds and other end products purchased from these countries. These loans are used to pay interest on debt.
Direct capital investments are used more for raw material production, trade and light industry. Investment in the heavy industry is very low. Direct capital investments are already beginning to build up, expand and deepen the dependency.
The imperialist states and monopolies do not want to export their modern technology. That is why technology is one of the means by which the countries are held under a yoke, because they do not themselves have these technologies. For this reason, obsolete technologies were transferred to neo-colonies in order to use it as a means of production of overvalue. The automobile production and production of white goods are exemplary. These technologies are no longer used in the countries previously used, but are still used as a means for monopoly profits in neo-colonies.
This gives us another characteristic peculiarity of neo-colonialism. National markets were protected with high customs walls. An economic order called import-substitution has established itself. Foreign capital was introduced with the help of collaborating partners. High customs walls afforded both the collaborating bourgeoisie and imperialist capital high monopoly profits in the national market. Currency trade was either prohibited or subject to strict control. Laws for the protection of domestic money have been issued.
The special role of the neo-colony state in capital accumulation and the expansion of the national market has to be underlined. Because the accumulation of private capital was not sufficient, the state took a larger place in the economy. High capital investments, such as infrastructure construction, were carried out by the state. Large capital developed in the shadow of the state and with help and incentives of the state. All possessing classes are fed from top to bottom by state funds. The state's activities in the economy required a strict, central, political system. This centralization was in accordance with the interests of the imperialists, as it facilitated control over the neo-colonies.
Another characteristic feature is that, in the capitalist world, industrialized countries are distinguished from agriculture and raw materials. The industrialized countries represented the cities, while the others represented the villages. The main function of the villages was to satisfy the needs of the cities by procuring favorable agriculture and raw materials. With this division of labor, productivity was brought to the highest level, and for the most favorable export goods, neo-colonies were specialized in the production of certain agricultural products or raw material production. For example, once 70% of exports from Brazil and 79% of exports from Colombia consisted of coffee. Cuba's exports consisted of 88% of sugar, Egypt's exports to 88% of cotton, Malaysia's exports to 58% of rubber and Bolivia's exports to 76% of tin. 50% of Ecuador's exports consisted of cocoa, while 43% of Mexican exports consisted of oil. This one-sided economic development deepened the dependency. For the countries that are bound to a product, a price drop of these basic export goods in the world market meant destruction and the only way out of this crisis led to new debts. Common apparatus of the imperialist states and monopolies, such as the IMF and the World Bank, lent the loans to strict conditions. In the countries which did not accept these conditions, military coupes could follow.
The development towards capitalism was relatively slow in the neo-colonies due to the restrictions on international capital circulation, the low level of capital accumulation in the country, the limitation of industrial investment on the production of mainly consumer goods and the compulsion of agriculture and raw materials exports.
As it can be seen, the stage of capitalist imperialism has produced various forms of colonialism.


The New Stage of Imperialism, mperialist Globalization and Financial-Economic Colonialism

 

In the stage of imperialist globalization, a new type of colonialism has emerged. Neo-colonialism was the product of conditions in which imperialism was forced to take a step back and to realize colonialism on detours. Strengthening national liberation struggles, the tendency of national progress and the division of the world into a socialist and a capitalist block were among the most important subjective factors that restricted capitalism. When the Soviet Union succumbed to revisionism, the reality of "two blocks" has not changed. Even if the road to capitalist development has been pursued, the rule of the imperialist economy and politics has been limited. Objective factors for the limits of imperialism include the "national rise", insufficient transport and communication technology, or the fact that monopolistic capital accumulation has not yet reached the level of conquering the world.
The monopolistic accumulation of capital has thus reached a point that it was no longer possible to continue the accumulation with the prevailing capitalist world order. The "two blocs" and neo-colonialism bordered the monopolistic capital.
As the objective boundaries have been overcome, the monopolistic capital has attacked the subjective boundaries with all its might. The progress of transport and communication technology has also made things easier.
All the barriers and obstacles that prevented the free movement of the capital had to be lifted. Capital had to penetrate into the country of its choice as much, as often, and in the way they wanted to, in order to disappear with the profit it has striven for. Wherever the labor force was cheaper, wherever there was more potential for market expansion, there should be free flow.


The Difference Between Financial-Economic Colonialism and Neo- Colonialism


This inevitably led to the fact, that economic and political systems of neo-colonies had to be restructured and the colonies had to be prepared for the direct conquest of monopolistic capital. The existence and strict control of the state within the economy had to be weakened. The walls for the entry and exit of the currency had to be reduced to a minimum, the subsidies in the agricultural sector had to be lifted. The price of labor had to be kept to a minimum.
All this meant a new type of economic and political annexation. Through privatization, the economic reserves in state ownership should be transferred to monopolistic capital. While the central banks were privatized, they have been placed under the control of the imperialist financial institutions. From now on, foreign capital should enter as much and as often it wanted into a country. The imperialist monopolistic capital became henceforth an inner element. Its market relations could determine the value of domestic money or the bank rate. The more foreign capital flowed into the country, the more favorable the foreign currency, the domestic money gained in value and the bank rates declined. Once the foreign money quickly left the country, the foreign currency became expensive, the domestic money lost in value and the bank rates rose. Because capital is concentrated and centralized in the hands of world monopolies, they also have control over the world market. Through various speculations and rapid entry and exit of the capital, they were now able to make radical shocks from one country.
Instead of 'import-substitution', the export-oriented economy took its place. The financial-economic colonies were henceforth the production and distribution bases of world monopolies. These countries were among the factories of the world. Production and infrastructure were built according to the interests of the monopolies. But the monopolies could at any time switch to countries where better conditions prevailed. Such a retreat could easily lead the country's economy into a crisis. At the same time, this situation led to the intersection of the interests of all the elements of the exploiter-bourgeoisie with the interests of imperialist monopoly capital. The capital oligarchy has merged with the imperialist monopolies; from the bottom upwards, the entire exploiting bourgeoisie has been attached. The withdrawal of foreign capital can also crush the middle bourgeoisie, which has become its supplier and subcontractor. When the export came under the control of the international monopolies and their local partners, the internal market was left to the management of the autonomous companies which are ruled by the monopolies. The real commanders of finance, production and commerce are the imperialist monopolies and their partners.
The agricultural sector was also directly exposed to the international exploitation of capital. The small and medium-sized agricultural enterprises, important for the economy of the neo-colonies, were destroyed to a large extent. A part of small and medium farmers became workers without the support of the state, under the ruthless conditions of the market. Another part became dependent producers of agricultural monopolies.
Under these new conditions, the capitalist development of financial-economic colonies is more rapid than in neo-colonies. Even if this is dependent on the imperialist monopolies, industrialization increases, the level of workers and bourgeoisie is intensified. The distribution of the world in the form of cities and villages is overcome, the vast structure of the raw materials or the agricultural products of the export have changed, and in general the export is no longer predominantly linked to a single product.
Today, the financial-economic colonies are mostly no longer agricultural or commodity countries. Many of them have risen to industrialized countries. Their export mainly consists of industrial products. But the industry of these countries is under the control of international monopolies. The actual technology is in the imperialist country, where the monopoly capital is indigenous. This is why the most liquid part of the surplus value flows into the imperialist monopolies. The exports of the financial-economic colonies consist largely of the products that the world monopolies have produced in this country. In fact, the one making exports is not that country, but international monopolies. For example, the products of the monopolies of the USA and Europe, such as the brands Puma, Reebok, Adidas, Nike, H & M, GAP and Levi's, are produced the cheapest in Bangladesh and in Cambodia. In Cambodia, more than 350 thousand textile workers work under heavy and unhealthy working conditions, earning $ 60-100 a month. The products are exported from here to the world market. Even if "made in Cambodia" is written on the product, the actual owner of the product is the exporting international monopoly.


Washington Consensus


Some important impulses can be enumerated for the transition to the stage of imperialist globalization: the world monopolies have become a decisive force, which is a result and expression of the new level of capital accumulation and centralization; thus, the average profit margin has fallen and the "oil crisis" and these three reasons have resulted in an extreme capital surplus. The profits of big capital fall in the industrial products, which is why it plunders the accumulated value, funds and wages through financial capital.
In the end of the 1970s, the restructuring of the capitalist imperialist system has accelerated in this direction. The G7 Summit, composed of the leading imperialist countries, and the principles defined as Washington Consensus in 1989, were imposed upon the workers and neo-colonies, like revelations. These principles form the manifesto with which the neo-colonies should be transformed into individual financial- economic colonies.
These "principles" were as follows:
1- All the restrictions towards foreign capital shall be removed and freed.
2- Customs barriers shall be lowered to the lowest or nullified and trade shall be freed.
3- State owned economical enterprises shall be privatized.
4- State's expenses shall be limited, many state services (health, education, etc.) shall be opened to private capital investment.
5- Interest rates shall be freed.
6- Restrictions towards foreign currency incoming and outgoing shall be removed, currency rates shall be decided in the market.
7- Under the name of "tax reform", taxes on capital, especially foreign capital, shall be lowered to the lowest or nullified; indirect taxes shall be increased under the name of "spreading taxes in the basis" and the burden shall be saddled to the laborers' back.
8- Rules about the capital investment and circulation shall be lowered to minimum.
9- "Financial discipline shall be sustained", so state budget and expenses shall be organized and planned according to the needs and interests of the foreign capital; payback of the debts to the foreign capital shall be guaranteed and prioritized.
10- Property rights shall be taken under guarantee. The exact meaning of this is "banning the nationalization".
Only these ten points are sufficient to show that the neo-colonies are subjected to a political and economic annexation. In the stage of imperialist globalization, monopolistic capital is itself an occupying force which forces its colonialists to act according to these principles and rules. Constitutions and laws of the countries are altered accordingly. The last word have the imperialist monopolies, the imperialist states, and the international institutions, which have the task of acting according to their interests.
IMF, the World Bank and the World Trade Organization are the international troika, which has the task of restructuring the colonized states with these principals. The economic and political occupation by these institutions is guaranteed under the name of "Structural Adjustment Program", "Good Administrating" and "Free Trade".


Economic and Political Violence


It would be an illusion to assert that financial-economic colonization is always peaceful. Moreover, we must emphasize that economic and political violence, as well as military attacks and occupation are predominant. There is no doubt that in the interests of the collaborative monopolistic bourgeoisie, neo-colonies have to be transformed into financial-economic colonies. That is why this class readily participates in the colonization. The same can not be said for the state government. The restructuring of the state will take away many of their privileges. For some parts of the middle bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie, financial-economic colonization entails destructive consequences. With the loss of many profits, the working class with the other laborer layers becomes a main potential of opposition force.
Blackmailing and menace are the main forms of economic and political violence. Countries which do not agree in some respects are equated with this method. The sudden rise of "hot money" is a practical form of blackmailing and menace. Loan credits, direct capital investment in other countries, the distribution of notes in the name of international institutions and embargoes are among the forms of economic violence. For example, the prices of foreign currency are increased by a serious decrease in the flow into the foreign exchange. In order to stop it and let the foreign currency rise again, bank rates have to be raised. For this reason alone, billions of dollars from the colonized countries are deposited in the cases of financial oligarchies. The debt of private capital, including that of banks, is largely based on foreign currency. The sudden and lasting rise in the foreign currency price can increase the debt in one fell swoop. The increase in the bid price increases the credit and production costs in the country. Even simple waves are sufficient to strike a blow to the bourgeoisie and its countries. "The way out" is the "structural reform" which is forced by the international imperialist institutions. If the resistance continues, the "crisis" is at the door. Undoubtedly, the crises are not artificial, but instead of helping, the imperialist institutions enter the swamp as soon as they resist. "Crises" are the safest way to take delivery of something. Thus, it is possible that laws that have not been passed in 15 years are passed as "15 laws within 15 days". Once the crisis begins, dependent countries quickly strike the bottom. If it is not a world economic crisis, the constant capital of the crisis country becomes "the commodity of a sinking ship" and is seized by the imperialist monopolies. This acquisition of ownership was slow in earlier times, but accelerates today. Local brands become the property of international monopolies and the domination of the monopolies strengthens itself. The South-East Asia crisis of 1997, the successive crises of Latin America and the crisis in Turkey 2001 are some examples of this.
Despite all this, hate campaigns, intelligence provocations, coercion to change government, military coups and military occupation are being pursued and applied to countries that do not want to accept the status of the financial-economic colony. These are some forms of political violence. Many examples of these forms of political violence can be enumerated in the world history.
In Venezuela, for example, many forms of political violence were applied simultaneously. The progressive, populist forces under the leadership of Chavez have resisted financial-economic colonization and have been declared "enemies of freedom and democracy". Oil workers and students were used for provocations, followed by a military coup.
The occupation of Iraq is an example of the highest form of political violence. Another example is Syria. The two countries have given free access to international capital. In certain areas, however, there was still "national control," while imperialist capital demanded complete submission. This is the real reason for the occupation of Iraq and the imperialist interference in Syria.
It can not be assumed that the imperialist states want to remain permanently in the occupied countries. This is both expensive and unnecessary. Their aim is to transform these countries into financial-economic colonies, thereby integrating them into the system of imperialist globalization. When this is accomplished, there is no reason to continue the occupation.
In some countries of the former USSR or in the states in its hinterland, governments have been brought to power by the imperialists. Together with them and with the colonial regimes under protectionism, which resulted from the decay of the old Yugoslav republic, the imperialist wants to integrate these countries into the system of imperialist globalization. In the end, almost all of these countries are now integrated into the system.
Regional Integration and Financial- Economic Colonialism
One of the special features of the phase of imperialist globalization is the regional integration. Even if they are economic integrations, they also involve political integration in many respects. One or more imperialist states constitute the hegemony of this integration. The other countries which are weaker compared with then become financial-economic colonies. Many countries in the EU, NAFTA and ASEAN are in this condition or have been brought there. For example, Estonia, Lithuania or Croatia are real financial-economic colonies of the ruling states and imperialist monopolies within the EU. In these countries, most of the banks are the property of the international monopolies. Its central banks are subcontractors of the ECB. The growth of industrial production and exports is largely under the control of international monopolies. In reality, the situation in Greece is not very different. In Mexico or the Philippines, there is no other situation. Of course, it would be wrong to say that they are all the same. But the differences are quantitative. Qualitatively, however, is that they are under the financial-economic rule of the international imperialist monopolies and states.


The Rearrangement of Classes


The relationship between the imperialist states and also the order of the classes has changed with the financial-economic colonies compared to the previous phase of the Imperialism. The imperialist monopolies have turned indirect rule into a direct one. The imperialist monopolies are no longer "secret occupiers", but settled directly into the financial-economic colonies. This settlement is secured by international laws and institutions. The financial oligarchy of the past has been fused with these monopolies and the international monopolies have merged with the domestic capital oligarchy, moreover, they are decisive elements of these oligarchies. The rest of the bourgeoisie will be part of this financial oligarchy. This is why the entire bourgeoisie is shaken because the entire "bourgeoisie" with the world market, the imperialist capital connected is. Of course there may be middle-class classes swimming against the current, but usually it is a transitional period or a bourgeois who has lost their old positions.
From the viewpoint of the laboring classes the situation has changed. The liquidation of small property owners and proletarianization has accelerated. A large part of the public services were market, which has increased one of the factors influencing proletarianization. Today the financial-economic colonies are identified more with proletarians and cities.
Contradiction of Oppressor and Oppressed, Instead of The Oppressing-Oppressed Nation Contradiction
In the new stage of imperialism, the workers and laborers in the imperialist countries are increasingly losing their privileges of the oppressive nation. With the abolition of the limits, the capital has raised the profit from financial industry and trade to a maximum. In these countries, armies of cheap labor have been gathered, so that the workers of the imperialist countries can not even secure their former profits. Wages have declined, social rights are denied. In the imperialist states the working class is no longer part of the 'oppressive nation'. All the cream of imperialist exploitation abolishes the monopolistic bourgeoisie and its adherent bourgeoisie. What remains to the workers, however, is even more impoverishment. That is why the relationship between imperialist countries and their financial-economic colonies is no longer that of a "oppressive nation," but of an oppressive bourgeoisie. In financial-economic colonies, the imperialist monopolies, together with the bourgeoisies of these countries, benefit from the freedom of movement of capital, while the working class is becoming impoverished and unemployed.
That is why we can not speak of a "oppressed nation" on this front, but of oppressed workers, workers, and other oppressed people. Instead of "workers of all countries and oppressed nations, unite!" as the main point of this period, 'workers of all countries and oppressed, unite!'
 

 

Archive

 

2019
March
2018
November September
June March
2017
October
2008
December January
2007
January
2006
January
2005
April
2004
September

 

Financial-Economic Colonialism
fc Share on Twitter

 

 

In the stage of imperialist globalization, a new type of colonialism has emerged. All the barriers and obstacles that prevented the free movement of the capital had to be lifted. Capital had to penetrate into the country of its choice as much, as often, and in the way they wanted to, in order to disappear with the profit it has striven for. Wherever the labor force was cheaper, wherever there was more potential for market expansion, there should be free flow.

 

 

Colonialism is the political and economic occupation of a country by a state or a group of states.
Colonialism existed before capitalism. The first examples that come to mind are colonialism in the slavery of the Roman Empire, as well as the colonialism of the feudal Ottoman Empire. In the societies before capitalism, the main form of colonialism was to bind a country to tribute by means of military occupation and political rule.
In capitalism, however, colonialism gains a new content. To annex the conquered country also economically, a capitalist state, forcing another country under political domination, must break its traditional economy and structure it in such a way that it can be exploited and robbed,
The Different Forms of Colonialism


1- The Classical Capitalist Colonialism


The history of capitalist colonialism extends to the years in which the bourgeois countries, with more or less ruling capitalist production relations, have emerged. The Dutch and subsequently the English colonialism are typical examples of it. The spread of capitalism in Western Europe, progress in transport technology and new trade routes have led to the colonization of the American continent and India. The military conquerors carried out the population and capital flow from the conquerer land immediately after conquest. The resources and wealth of the conquered country were plundered, domestic and foreign trade were taken over by the conquerer land.
The basic characteristic of classical colonialism is the political and economic leadership of the conquered country by the conqueror state. Of course, this does not mean that from top to bottom all governing bodies are taken over by individuals of the colonial state. It is not possible to colonize without creating a native collaborating caste. There are two forms of classical colonial leadership. Firstly, a part of the population of the colonial country can be settled over and build a colony to lead the conquered land and its native peoples. Secondly, a small group of occupiers can exercise the leadership through a collaborative native interlayer. Australia, New Zealand, North America and South Africa belong to the first category. India and some other African countries belong to the second. In particular the English colonialists were specialists of the second category. They have led India with a small number of leading, official cadres. It is obvious that they could not have done this without a collaborative layer.
In the imperialist phase of capitalism, a few large imperialist states have divided the rest of the world. Almost the entire continent of Africa was divided among the colonialists. Southeast Asia has also been split. Classical colonialism has become a basic form of imperialist expansion. The other capitalist states have fallen into a disadvantageous position in the colonial division. This inevitably led to a multiplication of the colonialist wars and ultimately to world wars that broke out for the new division of the world by the imperialists.


2- Semi-Colonialism


For some states, the power of imperialist states was not sufficient to conquer, or their being shared by division would not have corresponded the interests of the imperialists. China and the Ottoman Empire are two typical examples of this. These states could not be turned into classical colonies, but became semi-colonies of the capitalist imperialists.
Semi-colonized states are officially independent, but in turn they are under the command of one or a few capitalist-imperialist states. The capitalist-imperialist states build alliances with the ruling classes of these countries, which have usually feudal character. The economic, financial and military dependency reaches such a stage that the leaders became marionettes of the capitalist imperialists.
In many respects there are similarities to classical colonialism. The imperialists do not rule the country directly, but, by force of their capital, they receive privileges for the elimination of the wealth above or below the earth, like a colony. They open up new markets for their own goods, which destroy the traditional products of the region. By creating a layer of rampant subcontractors and traders, they form their social supports. They tie up the state administrators to themselves with the opened credits.
3- Neo-Colonialism
The development of the movement of the working class and its revolutionary impulses, the revolutionary resistance of colonized or semi-colonized peoples and the formation of the USSR have shaken the imperialist monopoly of colonialism. Some of the oppressed peoples have freed themselves from the colonialist yoke. After the second re-division war, fascism was defeated, which encouraged the colonized peoples. Many countries have crushed the colonialist yoke despite all the cruel oppressive measures of the imperialists. Vietnam and Algeria are two main examples of national liberation struggles. The imperialists, who had understood that they could not prevent the passion for independence, have withdrawn from some areas and thus recognized independence. Thus the imperialist monopoly of colonialism was destroyed at the end of the 1960's.
In countries where national liberation has not been linked to social liberation and the struggle for independence has been won by the bourgeois class, capitalist development has taken place. Even though a bourgeois national liberation was obtained in these countries, the capitalist development had remained very far behind, the accumulation of capital was still weak, and as weak as the bourgeoisie, the working classes were weak. These countries did not have a modern industrial infrastructure and the majority of the population were farmers. This is why it was not possible for an independent economy to develop for those who sought a bourgeois development.
Whether under the leadership of the national bourgeoisie, or under petty bourgeois leadership, it is inevitable that the backward capitalist countries in which bourgeois development occurs, depend on imperialism. Money, commerce and industry accumulate in developed, capitalist countries. The possibility that a backward country creates a leap into the imperialist block in the stage of capitalist monopolization was historically overcome. The bourgeoisie, which would end the rule of colonialism, was forced to turn to the imperialist colonialists to stay on their feet and enrich themselves. The imperialist colonialists, however, brought about conditions which kept these countries dependent. Thereby these independent countries were dependent on imperialism through thousands of financial, economic, political, military and diplomatic connections. Just like their economic structure, the political structure was adapted to the interests of the imperialists. This is the status of the neo-colony.


The Difference Between Neo-Colonialism and Semi-Colonialism


Capitalist imperialism collaborates with the regimes, for this reason also the rulers of the countries, that it has made to semi-colonies. The rulers are usually feudal class members. With these collaborative feudal classes, the imperialists form an alliance. Thus, in neo-colonies the rulers are usually those who destroyed the political rule of the imperialists and their collaborators, or those who took the lead, whereby the imperialists were forced to resign. These are bourgeois layers who have taken the path of bourgeois capitalist development. This is why their main purpose is not the preservation of feudal rule, as it is customary in half-colonies, but the stabilization of class rule by advancing in the "capitalist development" path.
In semi-colonies, being the local elements of the imperialist expulsion, proliferating subcontractors and merchants bands are the main support of colonialists. In neo-colonies, on the contrary the bourgeoisie had got own interests. Without the development of national industry and trade and without the expansion of the internal market, it is not possible for this class to survive. Instead of a group of rampant subcontractors and traders, a class that has a certain capital power occurred and tried, even if it is slow, to develop an industrial infrastructure. This class is gaining more and more power. Similarly, the basis of a middle bourgeoisie emerges in the enlarged internal market.
In colonies and semi-colonies there existed or emerged the layer of a national bourgeoisie that opposed the imperialist rule. The contradiction of some parts of this national bourgeoisie with the imperialists gained antagonistic character after some time. It could become the basic political goal of this national bourgeoisie, to put an end to the imperialist rule and thus national independence. The national bourgeoisie of yesterday against the imperialist domination, now develop after the seizure of the rule in the new phase of colonization, becoming a monopolist bourgeoisie, which collaborated with the growing imperialism.
The "national" bourgeoisie of yesterday divided into two main layers of the middle and monopolist bourgeoisie, their interests differentiated. Their political inclinations were inevitably changing in accordance with their economic interests. The middle bourgeoisie had a tendency to relatively restrict the monopolist bourgeoisie and the imperialist hegemony, to pursue the 'national progress' and a bourgeois-liberal program which included a land reform. The middle bourgeoisie had objectively no anti-imperialist character because the national market can not expand without the imperialist market and the 'national rise/progress' interrupts after a period of time. For this reason the goal of the middle bourgeoisie is different from that of the old national bourgeoisie. Their goal is not end the imperialist rule, but to limit it relatively.


The Decisive Influence of Political Confrontation To The Process Of Neo-Colonialism


The law of unequal development in capitalism and the extreme accumulation of capital in imperialist metropolises have led to, that the countries that have gained their independence from imperialism, have once again come to the agenda of imperialism. But after the founding of the USSR, the concomitant political confrontation was just as decisive. It can be said that the political confrontation became even more decisive for some countries after the second re-division war.
Regardless of the economic interests of the ruling bourgeoisie, the rulers of these countries have been chiefly aiming to get under the protective shield of the imperialist bloc, led by the USA against the "danger of communism." This political confrontation has accelerated the phase of neo-colonialism. The economic order and political regimes of these countries have adequately restructured this acceleration. The military coup in many countries were result of this necessary restructuring. The coups in Iran, South Korea, Turkey, Indonesia, Greece and Latin America are examples of this.


Some Characteristic Features of Neo-Colonialism


First it was the goal of the colonialists to rob the wealth under and over the earth's surface of the conquered countries and expand the market for the merchandise trade. In the stage of imperialism, capital export has gained importance.
Capital export means to transfer the accumulated over capital of a country into the foreign market in order to gain added value in the most effective and decisive way. The unequal development in capitalism reaches a new level in the phase of imperialism. On the one hand there is capital, which is looking for investment areas, next to the countries with very few capital in which the inequality is deepening. On the other hand, the world market is divided among a few large imperialist states. In classical colonialism, it is the same hegemonic country that realizes the economic occupation and has political power in its hands. In semi-colony and neo-colony, the local collaborative class is a tool. The political and economic dependency is not direct but indirect.
In neo-colonialism, the most important forms of capital export are the debts of the states, direct capital investments and investment in securities. In these countries, the capitalist development has been left behind, which makes investment in securities unimportant. Private debt from abroad is also relatively small.
Two prominent forms of capital export are state debt and direct investment.
The states that give the debts impose conditions for the use of these loans. Under the conditions imposed by the creditor countries, borrowed loans are generally invested in military funds and other end products purchased from these countries. These loans are used to pay interest on debt.
Direct capital investments are used more for raw material production, trade and light industry. Investment in the heavy industry is very low. Direct capital investments are already beginning to build up, expand and deepen the dependency.
The imperialist states and monopolies do not want to export their modern technology. That is why technology is one of the means by which the countries are held under a yoke, because they do not themselves have these technologies. For this reason, obsolete technologies were transferred to neo-colonies in order to use it as a means of production of overvalue. The automobile production and production of white goods are exemplary. These technologies are no longer used in the countries previously used, but are still used as a means for monopoly profits in neo-colonies.
This gives us another characteristic peculiarity of neo-colonialism. National markets were protected with high customs walls. An economic order called import-substitution has established itself. Foreign capital was introduced with the help of collaborating partners. High customs walls afforded both the collaborating bourgeoisie and imperialist capital high monopoly profits in the national market. Currency trade was either prohibited or subject to strict control. Laws for the protection of domestic money have been issued.
The special role of the neo-colony state in capital accumulation and the expansion of the national market has to be underlined. Because the accumulation of private capital was not sufficient, the state took a larger place in the economy. High capital investments, such as infrastructure construction, were carried out by the state. Large capital developed in the shadow of the state and with help and incentives of the state. All possessing classes are fed from top to bottom by state funds. The state's activities in the economy required a strict, central, political system. This centralization was in accordance with the interests of the imperialists, as it facilitated control over the neo-colonies.
Another characteristic feature is that, in the capitalist world, industrialized countries are distinguished from agriculture and raw materials. The industrialized countries represented the cities, while the others represented the villages. The main function of the villages was to satisfy the needs of the cities by procuring favorable agriculture and raw materials. With this division of labor, productivity was brought to the highest level, and for the most favorable export goods, neo-colonies were specialized in the production of certain agricultural products or raw material production. For example, once 70% of exports from Brazil and 79% of exports from Colombia consisted of coffee. Cuba's exports consisted of 88% of sugar, Egypt's exports to 88% of cotton, Malaysia's exports to 58% of rubber and Bolivia's exports to 76% of tin. 50% of Ecuador's exports consisted of cocoa, while 43% of Mexican exports consisted of oil. This one-sided economic development deepened the dependency. For the countries that are bound to a product, a price drop of these basic export goods in the world market meant destruction and the only way out of this crisis led to new debts. Common apparatus of the imperialist states and monopolies, such as the IMF and the World Bank, lent the loans to strict conditions. In the countries which did not accept these conditions, military coupes could follow.
The development towards capitalism was relatively slow in the neo-colonies due to the restrictions on international capital circulation, the low level of capital accumulation in the country, the limitation of industrial investment on the production of mainly consumer goods and the compulsion of agriculture and raw materials exports.
As it can be seen, the stage of capitalist imperialism has produced various forms of colonialism.


The New Stage of Imperialism, mperialist Globalization and Financial-Economic Colonialism

 

In the stage of imperialist globalization, a new type of colonialism has emerged. Neo-colonialism was the product of conditions in which imperialism was forced to take a step back and to realize colonialism on detours. Strengthening national liberation struggles, the tendency of national progress and the division of the world into a socialist and a capitalist block were among the most important subjective factors that restricted capitalism. When the Soviet Union succumbed to revisionism, the reality of "two blocks" has not changed. Even if the road to capitalist development has been pursued, the rule of the imperialist economy and politics has been limited. Objective factors for the limits of imperialism include the "national rise", insufficient transport and communication technology, or the fact that monopolistic capital accumulation has not yet reached the level of conquering the world.
The monopolistic accumulation of capital has thus reached a point that it was no longer possible to continue the accumulation with the prevailing capitalist world order. The "two blocs" and neo-colonialism bordered the monopolistic capital.
As the objective boundaries have been overcome, the monopolistic capital has attacked the subjective boundaries with all its might. The progress of transport and communication technology has also made things easier.
All the barriers and obstacles that prevented the free movement of the capital had to be lifted. Capital had to penetrate into the country of its choice as much, as often, and in the way they wanted to, in order to disappear with the profit it has striven for. Wherever the labor force was cheaper, wherever there was more potential for market expansion, there should be free flow.


The Difference Between Financial-Economic Colonialism and Neo- Colonialism


This inevitably led to the fact, that economic and political systems of neo-colonies had to be restructured and the colonies had to be prepared for the direct conquest of monopolistic capital. The existence and strict control of the state within the economy had to be weakened. The walls for the entry and exit of the currency had to be reduced to a minimum, the subsidies in the agricultural sector had to be lifted. The price of labor had to be kept to a minimum.
All this meant a new type of economic and political annexation. Through privatization, the economic reserves in state ownership should be transferred to monopolistic capital. While the central banks were privatized, they have been placed under the control of the imperialist financial institutions. From now on, foreign capital should enter as much and as often it wanted into a country. The imperialist monopolistic capital became henceforth an inner element. Its market relations could determine the value of domestic money or the bank rate. The more foreign capital flowed into the country, the more favorable the foreign currency, the domestic money gained in value and the bank rates declined. Once the foreign money quickly left the country, the foreign currency became expensive, the domestic money lost in value and the bank rates rose. Because capital is concentrated and centralized in the hands of world monopolies, they also have control over the world market. Through various speculations and rapid entry and exit of the capital, they were now able to make radical shocks from one country.
Instead of 'import-substitution', the export-oriented economy took its place. The financial-economic colonies were henceforth the production and distribution bases of world monopolies. These countries were among the factories of the world. Production and infrastructure were built according to the interests of the monopolies. But the monopolies could at any time switch to countries where better conditions prevailed. Such a retreat could easily lead the country's economy into a crisis. At the same time, this situation led to the intersection of the interests of all the elements of the exploiter-bourgeoisie with the interests of imperialist monopoly capital. The capital oligarchy has merged with the imperialist monopolies; from the bottom upwards, the entire exploiting bourgeoisie has been attached. The withdrawal of foreign capital can also crush the middle bourgeoisie, which has become its supplier and subcontractor. When the export came under the control of the international monopolies and their local partners, the internal market was left to the management of the autonomous companies which are ruled by the monopolies. The real commanders of finance, production and commerce are the imperialist monopolies and their partners.
The agricultural sector was also directly exposed to the international exploitation of capital. The small and medium-sized agricultural enterprises, important for the economy of the neo-colonies, were destroyed to a large extent. A part of small and medium farmers became workers without the support of the state, under the ruthless conditions of the market. Another part became dependent producers of agricultural monopolies.
Under these new conditions, the capitalist development of financial-economic colonies is more rapid than in neo-colonies. Even if this is dependent on the imperialist monopolies, industrialization increases, the level of workers and bourgeoisie is intensified. The distribution of the world in the form of cities and villages is overcome, the vast structure of the raw materials or the agricultural products of the export have changed, and in general the export is no longer predominantly linked to a single product.
Today, the financial-economic colonies are mostly no longer agricultural or commodity countries. Many of them have risen to industrialized countries. Their export mainly consists of industrial products. But the industry of these countries is under the control of international monopolies. The actual technology is in the imperialist country, where the monopoly capital is indigenous. This is why the most liquid part of the surplus value flows into the imperialist monopolies. The exports of the financial-economic colonies consist largely of the products that the world monopolies have produced in this country. In fact, the one making exports is not that country, but international monopolies. For example, the products of the monopolies of the USA and Europe, such as the brands Puma, Reebok, Adidas, Nike, H & M, GAP and Levi's, are produced the cheapest in Bangladesh and in Cambodia. In Cambodia, more than 350 thousand textile workers work under heavy and unhealthy working conditions, earning $ 60-100 a month. The products are exported from here to the world market. Even if "made in Cambodia" is written on the product, the actual owner of the product is the exporting international monopoly.


Washington Consensus


Some important impulses can be enumerated for the transition to the stage of imperialist globalization: the world monopolies have become a decisive force, which is a result and expression of the new level of capital accumulation and centralization; thus, the average profit margin has fallen and the "oil crisis" and these three reasons have resulted in an extreme capital surplus. The profits of big capital fall in the industrial products, which is why it plunders the accumulated value, funds and wages through financial capital.
In the end of the 1970s, the restructuring of the capitalist imperialist system has accelerated in this direction. The G7 Summit, composed of the leading imperialist countries, and the principles defined as Washington Consensus in 1989, were imposed upon the workers and neo-colonies, like revelations. These principles form the manifesto with which the neo-colonies should be transformed into individual financial- economic colonies.
These "principles" were as follows:
1- All the restrictions towards foreign capital shall be removed and freed.
2- Customs barriers shall be lowered to the lowest or nullified and trade shall be freed.
3- State owned economical enterprises shall be privatized.
4- State's expenses shall be limited, many state services (health, education, etc.) shall be opened to private capital investment.
5- Interest rates shall be freed.
6- Restrictions towards foreign currency incoming and outgoing shall be removed, currency rates shall be decided in the market.
7- Under the name of "tax reform", taxes on capital, especially foreign capital, shall be lowered to the lowest or nullified; indirect taxes shall be increased under the name of "spreading taxes in the basis" and the burden shall be saddled to the laborers' back.
8- Rules about the capital investment and circulation shall be lowered to minimum.
9- "Financial discipline shall be sustained", so state budget and expenses shall be organized and planned according to the needs and interests of the foreign capital; payback of the debts to the foreign capital shall be guaranteed and prioritized.
10- Property rights shall be taken under guarantee. The exact meaning of this is "banning the nationalization".
Only these ten points are sufficient to show that the neo-colonies are subjected to a political and economic annexation. In the stage of imperialist globalization, monopolistic capital is itself an occupying force which forces its colonialists to act according to these principles and rules. Constitutions and laws of the countries are altered accordingly. The last word have the imperialist monopolies, the imperialist states, and the international institutions, which have the task of acting according to their interests.
IMF, the World Bank and the World Trade Organization are the international troika, which has the task of restructuring the colonized states with these principals. The economic and political occupation by these institutions is guaranteed under the name of "Structural Adjustment Program", "Good Administrating" and "Free Trade".


Economic and Political Violence


It would be an illusion to assert that financial-economic colonization is always peaceful. Moreover, we must emphasize that economic and political violence, as well as military attacks and occupation are predominant. There is no doubt that in the interests of the collaborative monopolistic bourgeoisie, neo-colonies have to be transformed into financial-economic colonies. That is why this class readily participates in the colonization. The same can not be said for the state government. The restructuring of the state will take away many of their privileges. For some parts of the middle bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie, financial-economic colonization entails destructive consequences. With the loss of many profits, the working class with the other laborer layers becomes a main potential of opposition force.
Blackmailing and menace are the main forms of economic and political violence. Countries which do not agree in some respects are equated with this method. The sudden rise of "hot money" is a practical form of blackmailing and menace. Loan credits, direct capital investment in other countries, the distribution of notes in the name of international institutions and embargoes are among the forms of economic violence. For example, the prices of foreign currency are increased by a serious decrease in the flow into the foreign exchange. In order to stop it and let the foreign currency rise again, bank rates have to be raised. For this reason alone, billions of dollars from the colonized countries are deposited in the cases of financial oligarchies. The debt of private capital, including that of banks, is largely based on foreign currency. The sudden and lasting rise in the foreign currency price can increase the debt in one fell swoop. The increase in the bid price increases the credit and production costs in the country. Even simple waves are sufficient to strike a blow to the bourgeoisie and its countries. "The way out" is the "structural reform" which is forced by the international imperialist institutions. If the resistance continues, the "crisis" is at the door. Undoubtedly, the crises are not artificial, but instead of helping, the imperialist institutions enter the swamp as soon as they resist. "Crises" are the safest way to take delivery of something. Thus, it is possible that laws that have not been passed in 15 years are passed as "15 laws within 15 days". Once the crisis begins, dependent countries quickly strike the bottom. If it is not a world economic crisis, the constant capital of the crisis country becomes "the commodity of a sinking ship" and is seized by the imperialist monopolies. This acquisition of ownership was slow in earlier times, but accelerates today. Local brands become the property of international monopolies and the domination of the monopolies strengthens itself. The South-East Asia crisis of 1997, the successive crises of Latin America and the crisis in Turkey 2001 are some examples of this.
Despite all this, hate campaigns, intelligence provocations, coercion to change government, military coups and military occupation are being pursued and applied to countries that do not want to accept the status of the financial-economic colony. These are some forms of political violence. Many examples of these forms of political violence can be enumerated in the world history.
In Venezuela, for example, many forms of political violence were applied simultaneously. The progressive, populist forces under the leadership of Chavez have resisted financial-economic colonization and have been declared "enemies of freedom and democracy". Oil workers and students were used for provocations, followed by a military coup.
The occupation of Iraq is an example of the highest form of political violence. Another example is Syria. The two countries have given free access to international capital. In certain areas, however, there was still "national control," while imperialist capital demanded complete submission. This is the real reason for the occupation of Iraq and the imperialist interference in Syria.
It can not be assumed that the imperialist states want to remain permanently in the occupied countries. This is both expensive and unnecessary. Their aim is to transform these countries into financial-economic colonies, thereby integrating them into the system of imperialist globalization. When this is accomplished, there is no reason to continue the occupation.
In some countries of the former USSR or in the states in its hinterland, governments have been brought to power by the imperialists. Together with them and with the colonial regimes under protectionism, which resulted from the decay of the old Yugoslav republic, the imperialist wants to integrate these countries into the system of imperialist globalization. In the end, almost all of these countries are now integrated into the system.
Regional Integration and Financial- Economic Colonialism
One of the special features of the phase of imperialist globalization is the regional integration. Even if they are economic integrations, they also involve political integration in many respects. One or more imperialist states constitute the hegemony of this integration. The other countries which are weaker compared with then become financial-economic colonies. Many countries in the EU, NAFTA and ASEAN are in this condition or have been brought there. For example, Estonia, Lithuania or Croatia are real financial-economic colonies of the ruling states and imperialist monopolies within the EU. In these countries, most of the banks are the property of the international monopolies. Its central banks are subcontractors of the ECB. The growth of industrial production and exports is largely under the control of international monopolies. In reality, the situation in Greece is not very different. In Mexico or the Philippines, there is no other situation. Of course, it would be wrong to say that they are all the same. But the differences are quantitative. Qualitatively, however, is that they are under the financial-economic rule of the international imperialist monopolies and states.


The Rearrangement of Classes


The relationship between the imperialist states and also the order of the classes has changed with the financial-economic colonies compared to the previous phase of the Imperialism. The imperialist monopolies have turned indirect rule into a direct one. The imperialist monopolies are no longer "secret occupiers", but settled directly into the financial-economic colonies. This settlement is secured by international laws and institutions. The financial oligarchy of the past has been fused with these monopolies and the international monopolies have merged with the domestic capital oligarchy, moreover, they are decisive elements of these oligarchies. The rest of the bourgeoisie will be part of this financial oligarchy. This is why the entire bourgeoisie is shaken because the entire "bourgeoisie" with the world market, the imperialist capital connected is. Of course there may be middle-class classes swimming against the current, but usually it is a transitional period or a bourgeois who has lost their old positions.
From the viewpoint of the laboring classes the situation has changed. The liquidation of small property owners and proletarianization has accelerated. A large part of the public services were market, which has increased one of the factors influencing proletarianization. Today the financial-economic colonies are identified more with proletarians and cities.
Contradiction of Oppressor and Oppressed, Instead of The Oppressing-Oppressed Nation Contradiction
In the new stage of imperialism, the workers and laborers in the imperialist countries are increasingly losing their privileges of the oppressive nation. With the abolition of the limits, the capital has raised the profit from financial industry and trade to a maximum. In these countries, armies of cheap labor have been gathered, so that the workers of the imperialist countries can not even secure their former profits. Wages have declined, social rights are denied. In the imperialist states the working class is no longer part of the 'oppressive nation'. All the cream of imperialist exploitation abolishes the monopolistic bourgeoisie and its adherent bourgeoisie. What remains to the workers, however, is even more impoverishment. That is why the relationship between imperialist countries and their financial-economic colonies is no longer that of a "oppressive nation," but of an oppressive bourgeoisie. In financial-economic colonies, the imperialist monopolies, together with the bourgeoisies of these countries, benefit from the freedom of movement of capital, while the working class is becoming impoverished and unemployed.
That is why we can not speak of a "oppressed nation" on this front, but of oppressed workers, workers, and other oppressed people. Instead of "workers of all countries and oppressed nations, unite!" as the main point of this period, 'workers of all countries and oppressed, unite!'