Impact Of Karl Marx On Capitalism

In this day and age political scientists and world leaders alike have marveled at how small the world has become due to technology and the interdependence of countries throughout the international system. For most of recent history America has been carrying the banner for globalization and been successful in its efforts. The number of democracies around the world has grown dramatically since the US’s rise to power, the economic market is increasingly interconnected and the exchange of technology and ideas constantly generates new tools for global evolution and success. Many scholars would point at these accomplishments as indicators of a unique era of globalization, a new wealth of opportunities for countries and groups of people that had

Robert Gilpin analyzes Marx’s views on capitalism throughout his book The Political Economy of International Relations, stating “...Marx asserted that the historical mission of capitalism was to develop the forces of production throughout the world. When this task of transformation and capitalist accumulation was completed, capitalism would have fulfilled its assigned role in history and would give way to its successors, the socialist and communist systems.” (The Political Economy of International Relations 1987) While Marx believes that capitalism will eventually be replaced, he admits that it plays an instrumental part in the success of the international system. An instrumental part, which relies on the continuous implementation of inequality and desire for dominance. According to Michael Hardt in his book Empire,“One of the central arguments of the tradition of Marxist thinking on imperialism is that… capitalist expansion inevitably takes the political form of imperialism...[Marx stated] ‘The tendency to create the world market is directly given in the concept of capital itself. Every limit appears as a barrier to be overcome.’”(Empire 2000) These elements found in capitalism that Marx disliked can

While it seemed to abandon the same brutality witnessed throughout British imperialism, the US still found ways to relegate certain states to lower levels within the international system. Throughout its conflict between the Soviet Union, America made several agreements with nations throughout the “third world” such as SEATO and CENTO. Although it claimed to be making these treaties to create stable globalization and free trade, a large incentive for these actions was to ensure the continuity of US power in response to the threat provided by the Soviet Union. This exemplifies Wallerstein's statement,“One of the objectives of the colonizing power was not merely to ensure its control of the production processes in the colony but also to make sure that no other relatively strong state in the world-system could have access to the resources or the markets of the colony…”(World Systems Analysis 2004) The US’s hand in the creation of the UN & NATO, its rebuilding of Europe after WW2 through the Marshall Plan, and its grapple with the Soviet Union throughout the 20th century, were all heralded as displays of America’s desire to spread democracy and a better way of life to the rest of the world. However, despite these altruistic aspirations the United States was simply mirroring the actions of Britain and making modern day