![imperialism 2 pc youtube imperialism 2 pc youtube](https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fd00cffe712663218d983483195daa6d-1200-80.jpg)
The net drain of wealth from East to West that had prevailed for over two centuries has been reversed as East Asia in particular has risen to prominence as a powerhouse in the global economy. Moreover, Harvey’s suggestion that the “East” now exploits the “West” repeats almost word for word what he said in his 2014 work, 17 Contradictions and the End of Capitalism:ĭisparities in the global distribution of wealth and income between countries have been much reduced with rising per capita incomes in many developing parts of the world. An Imperialism Denierĭavid Harvey, author of The New Imperialism and other acclaimed books on the history of capitalism and Marxist political economy, is an imperialism-denier who uses his considerable prestige as a prominent Marxist theoretician to miseducate his readers on the single-most important issue confronting Marxist political economy: the huge drain of value and surplus-value from the global South (in which I include low-wage countries in East Asia) to the imperialist centers, a flow which has greatly increased in scale and importance during the neoliberal era.Īccording to Richard Seymour, Harvey’s contrary claim, that the “historical draining of wealth from East to West for more than two centuries… has largely been reversed over the last thirty years,” might be due to Taiwan and South Korea becoming “sub-imperialisms.” I see no basis for this in the work from which this quote is taken. Smith has gone over these to make sure they accurately reflect his view. Smith’s comments have been edited from several emails and files sent by Smith to Michael Yates. In what follows, Smith lays out his argument. That is, the above quote by Harvey, taken from Prabhat and Utsa Patnaik’s book, A Theory of Imperialism, 2 should be taken to mean that certain reasonably wealthy countries in the Global South, such as Taiwan and South Korea, “might now be ‘sub-imperialisms.’” John Smith, author of the Monthly Review Press book, Imperialism in the Twenty-First Century, 3 takes issue with Seymour’s interpretation of Harvey’s words. Seymour suggested that what Yates said was too strong an indictment of Harvey.
![imperialism 2 pc youtube imperialism 2 pc youtube](https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/imperialism/images/6/6d/Imp2-France1538-showingOldWorld.jpg)
The historical draining of wealth from East to West for more than two centuries, for example, has largely been reversed over the last thirty years. We simply think the flows are more complicated and constantly changing direction. Those of us who think the old categories of imperialism do not work too well in these times do not deny at all the complex flows of value that expand the accumulation of wealth and power in one part of the world at the expense of another. In an interview with Richard Seymour in the March 2017 issue of Monthly Review, interviewer Michael Yates, in a question about imperialism, pointed out that noted Marxist scholar David Harvey “claims that wealth in the rich nations is being drained by the countries of the Global South.” 1 Specifically, Yates quoted Harvey: