Gayblack Canadian Man

Foreign Policy Analysis
Capitalism Is NOT Imperialism

Capitalism Is NOT Imperialism


Many people think that capitalism and imperialism
are the same thing, or at the very least that they’re very closely connected. In fact, they’re
contradictory and opposed systems of economic and political organization. Because of this
confusion, many people blame capitalism and the world trading system for bad things that
have happened in the past or in the present – the exploitation of poor people, mass famines.
and like – when in fact it’s imperialism and empire that should get the blame. So what
are these two different systems? Capitalism is a system of the free exchange
of goods and services between individuals on a voluntary basis under the rule of law
and in a system of private property rights. In other words, it is a system of voluntary
exchange in which all parties to the exchange are better off. Now imperialism, by contrast,
is a system of relations based upon power. Essentially, it’s a system in which certain
groups of privileged people in one part of the world are able to extract unearned income
from people in other parts of the world through the use of exploitative power relations, usually
with the help of local collaborators. The key to this is the use of political power,
ultimately military power, to establish economic relations which are involuntary and exploitative.
Empires have existed throughout the whole of human history. In fact, there are so many
examples of empires that it’s hard to know where to start. So, for example, in the early
17th century the Dutch Republic created the Dutch East India Company. This was a way in
which privileged merchants in the province of Holland in particular were able to gain
monopoly rights to trade with the people of what is now Indonesia and were able to use
that and the military power of the Dutch Republic to establish exploitative and politically
domineering relations over the populations of that part of the world. Later on the English got in on the act and
created their own East India Company, which for over 150 years ruthlessly exploited many
of the people of the Indian subcontinent, most notably in Bengal, but elsewhere as well.
Once again you had a politically privileged group of people backed by the military power
of the state establishing trade relations with people in another part of the world that
were not voluntary and which were highly exploitative. More recently, in the Caribbean, the United
Fruit Company, backed by the U.S. federal government, was able to establish similarly
exploitative relations with people in parts of Central America, such as Honduras and Guatemala. The important thing to realize is that while
these were profit-making enterprises, they were not true commercial capitalist businesses
in the real sense of the term. The profits that they gained were due not to free competition
or voluntary cooperation with willing buyers and sellers but the use of political power.
Had we had a true capitalist system operating here, we would’ve had lots of free trade between
the people in the other parts of the world, not only with people from the U.S. or the
UK, but also other people from other parts of the world. And there would have been a
much more voluntary and mutually beneficial relationship. The results of imperialism are generally not
very good. Not only does it lead to political corruption and the exploitation of any poor
people, but it often has quite catastrophic results, such as the enormous famines which
occurred in the late Victorian period in many parts of the world. in the 1890s in particular,
most notably in India but also elsewhere, which are often blamed on capitalism, which
in fact were clearly the result of the policies of the British Empire and other colonial powers
at that time. So the thing to take away is this: imperialism is not and never has been
the highest stage of capitalism. For one thing, empires have existed long before capitalism
came into existence. Capitalism and imperialism are not complementary but contradictory and
hostile systems of political, economic, and social organization. Where one of them flourishes,
the other has
to decline.

100 comments on “Capitalism Is NOT Imperialism

  1. This is the classic libertarian cop out, and it's astounding this is the best you people can seem to do,,,this is how you try to win hearts and minds? "sure sweat shops suck but everything else is even worse, soooo…go team free markets!!"…..trying to excuse the sins of one system by putting up this shit shield of "everything else is worse" is the worst kind of deflection

  2. These things take time, not even markets can solve poverty in a single day, they gradually improve peoples lives one incremental advancement at a time, the accumulation of many such improvements over years or even decades is what creates the sort of life style we experience in the west. your argument is the intellectual equivalent of rejecting a medicine that cures cancer because it takes a month or two to take effect rather than solving the problem instantly.

  3. People still do die (in non capitalist nations) of diseases that have been eradicated by Capitalist America. Children still do work in inhumane conditions in non capitalist nations and Maggots are still medicine.

  4. I dont believe there are objective standards of morality so i cant argue that taxation is immoral. i can however show that taxation is aggression and you can decide for yourself whether, or under what circumstances, you believe aggression is immoral. Taxation is the same set of physical actions that characterize extortion the only difference being that the people committing these actions are generally believed to have the right, so its a particular type of extortion and extortion is aggression.

  5. yet what you fail to understand is capitalism is the major force today keeping people living in those conditions as source of cheap labor.

  6. Markets improve nothing for the majority of the working world. you capitalists like to take credit for the natural rising of standards of living that simply occur over time and act like improvements on technology only occur under "free markets" even though the soviet union completely industrialized in 15 yrs….you espouse how crony capitalism isn't part of free markets when the power consolidation makes it impossible to avoid, watch the video called "mutant capitalism"

  7. "LEARN LIBERTY" is another astroturffed pile of trash funded primarily by the KOCH BROTHERS and their think tanks.they throw out this red herring nonsense of "free markets are NOT the same as cronyism" a really nice deflection as they give the illusion that they oppose their own principles because they know the vast majority of the realty of what they actually want when they remove consumer production laws is allowing them to run more rough shot over consumers, NOT freeing up small bussiness.

  8. It is true that life was gradually improving for the first 200,000 years but since the advent of capitalism we have seen an exponential catalyzation of this process. 200000 bc was ~ the same as 199800 bc, same for 50000 vs 49800 or 0 vs 200. since capitalism this process of improvement has exploded to the point where in as little as a few generations the population of the planet doubles. the difference is night and day, if you cant see it than you simply have no historical perspective.

  9. It is you who has no historical perspective because your entire thinking is very westernized. You take every distortion about the soviet union or north korea at face value. …You think progress is having 500 kinds of tooth paste and asprin on a store shelf while the cost of a hospital visit is astronomical.

  10. I'm sorry guy but i dont know how to have a reasonable rational discussion with a north korea supporter. I'm glad you let that cat out of the bag though, it makes my job much easier. Have you even seen the satellite pictures of the korean continent at night? i mean forget about 500 kinds of toothpaste, they dont even have basic electricity to heat or illuminate their homes.

    Sure hospitals in the west are expensive, but that's because of government monopoly in europe and monopsony in the US.

  11. That is nonsense. America does not set the price of labor in China to use an example. China sets the wages, or the businesses in China set their labor prices. Do you really think the people in Chine would be better off without the jobs that Capitalist America creates through demand I don't.

    America does not force people to provide cheap labor. The cheap labor worker want their jobs. Those countries compete with other countries, even the US for those jobs.

  12. Do you actually know one solitary thing AT ALL about north korea besides what's been spoon fed to you or you read in you stupid little right wing blogs? Do you know how many out right lies are spread about that nation?..you're a brain washed idiot

  13. i thought you would say something like this. im not going to fall for your sophist tricks. do a google image search for "korea at night" and account for and justify that disparity. If your next comment isn't an explanation of and justification for that disparity than do not bother penning it.

  14. hahaha, "sophism"? the only sophism is coming form uneducated morons like you…You need this monstrous socialist boogyman to point at which is achieved by demonizing nations that don't live the way you want them too. It's the same kind of deflection libertarians use discredit any kind of criticism of the capitalist system by automatically saying that "anything else is so much much worse" camp 21, death camps and any other western bullshit lies you want to try to push will be met with distain

  15. what an asinine comment. I wonder if that might just have a little to do with oil? You seem to give a rubber stamp that The U.S.'s sanctioning of ANYTHING should be tolerated, seems pretty adverse to your bullshit libertarian ideals but you're really just another nationalist.

  16. Where on earth did i say that i approve of sanctions? show me where i even hinted at that. How on earth did you come to the conclusion that im a nationalist? im actually an anarchist, thats literally the exact opposite thing of a nationalist. I never said anything that would indicate that i support sanctions, yet you believe i do, this is evidence that your thought processes is necessarily not driven by reason, i can only assume it is driven by emotional needs, please consider seeing a therapist

  17. You made a dismissive comment about Iran having sanctions, which is in a completely different universe than a sanction against north korea, a country the united states has no vested interested in, and you didn't address sanctions themselves, so don't play coy. I doubt very much you follow any kind of anarchist thought and are one of these "anarcho capitalists"

  18. "which is in a completely different universe than a sanction against north korea" i wonder if you could corroborate this claim for me with some sources or links. i would be very interested to learn that this were the case if it were the case. Yes i am an anarcho-capitalist, but that would mean that i follow atleast one kind of anarchist thought, why would you insinuate that anarcho-capitalists dont follow any kind of anarchist thought?

  19. I really have to source links to you about how the United States approaches nations that have an oil interest differently? Do I need to post scientific studies about how water is wet? Maybe you should look up some articles about how anarcho capitaism isn't rea anarchy.

  20. my suspicion is that they would approach nations with oil interests with harsher sanctions than otherwise would be the case. which would invalidate your claim that seemed to imply that the reason why iran has power and north korea does not is because the sanctions against north korea are harsher than the sanctions against iran. I have heard arguments for why ancap isn't real anarchy, it all comes down to how you define anarchy, for my purposes i use it to refer to a stateless society.

  21. Iran has power but the people are starving. The truth is that American and British imperialists has ruined and pushed around Iran and the middle east for over 100 years.

  22. I get that it's aimed at being an introductory brief for the curious, but it's worth clarifying that this video dichotomises Liberal-Capitalism and Imperialism-Mercantilism. Which are specific sub-sects of the two ideologies, not the ideologies in and of themselves.

  23. I remember learning about Nestle exploiting children of the Ivory Coast and Ghana back in 2000-2005 These children were being paid minimal amounts for the cocoa beans they gathered while unfortunately and involuntarily selling them to these "assigned" local agents who would then collect these beans and money…for Nestle…….

  24. this is dumb and ideological, he explains aspects of imperialism which are absolutely apparent in the capitalist system! saying that an agreement is 'freely' entered into does not qualify all capitalist deals as ethical or even that free, local cronies provide capitalists with cheap labour all over the world in a way not too far removed from the way imperialism did, calling the global market 'free' cannot wash away the similarities i'm afraid!

  25. @Justin Nelson, Marxists have a completely different conception of capitalism than the person in this video. The person pretty much assumes that capitalism and imperialism are timeless concepts, whereas in the view of Marxists the colonial pursuits of, say, the British Empire simply presaged the further growth of capitalism. From the 1970's Great Soviet Encyclopedia: "Colonial policy played a major role in primitive accumulation, resulting in the concentration in the European countries of a great deal of capital, which was derived chiefly from the robbery of the colonies and from the slave trade, which expanded particularly from the second half of the 17th century and which was one of the key factors in the transformation of England into the main capitalist country of that era. Trade with the colonies during the period of primitive accumulation made a substantial contribution to the development of a world market and the emergence of the rudiments of a world division of labor….

    In the period of primitive accumulation colonial policy was implemented by large, privileged trading companies created specifically for that purpose. Although colonial policy was a source of enormous profits for all the colonial powers, its effect on them varied. Where colonial policy was implemented by feudal lords, it led to the stagnation and, subsequently, the decline of the state. Spain and, to a considerable degree, Portugal endeavored to reproduce their own feudal organizations in the territories they conquered. Huge sums of money flowed from the colonies to absolute monarchs, the nobility, and the church, strengthening the feudal system and paralyzing the stimulus toward the development of industry and agriculture. By contrast, where colonial policy was implemented by the bourgeoisie (Great Britain and the Netherlands), it accelerated the development of capitalist relations in the metropolitan powers, promoted the development of trade and industry there, and resulted in the strengthening and enrichment of the bourgeoisie."

  26. If you were to create a society where a person can keep what they earn and spend it freely with as many rights and freedoms as they can have without infringing on the rights and freedoms of another person you'd have a free-market anarcho-capitalist society.

    Listening to people try to lump capitalism in with imperialism is like listening to a creationist lump evolution in with devil worship. It demonstrates their ignorance but also their arrogance.

    I mean grow up children. You don't even know what you're talking about.

  27. Even THIS definition of capitalism can coexist with imperialism. When the British empire forced china to open its ports, people didn't HAVE to trade in those ports. 

  28. Capitalism is much older than any other system. In truth, the first capitalist was the gatherer who did not eat all the grains he gathered, but used it as a seeds for next year harvest. It was long time before  the first empire on earth (Sumerian empire). So capitalism is a natural form of cooperation among people. 

  29.  "Capitalism" is now a loaded term that is now useless thanks to left-wing propaganda. So there is no point in using the term anymore since it lost it original meaning. Hell, it was Karl Marx who invented the term anyways. So when ever someone uses the term capitalism the left automatically scream "Croprate Domonationz of teh worldz!!"

    When conservatives, libertarians, and an-caps use the world capitalism what they actually mean is the free market, not the leftist starwman. So just use the term Free Market instead that way the left can't constantly starwman us to death like they always to do anyone who oppose them. Semantic arguments with brain damaged leftist is a complete nightmare and should be advoided at all cost.

  30. The reason people see imperialism in capitalism isn't because of capitalism. It's because of the high government regulation of the capitalist system through tariffs, price fixing, the minimum wage, ETC.

  31. Capitalism was certainly not involved in every empire.  How could it?  This system has only a few centuries ago become the dominant mode of production, while the first empires emerged thousands of years before Christ.

    That said, since the days of the Dutch East India Company the bulk of imperialism, colonialism and neocolonialism has been driven by capital's demand for access to natural resources, cheap labour, opening up overseas markets and destroying foreign competition.

  32. It's hard to imagine that anyone would believe this.
    You listen to the nice words and look at the nice cartoon going: "it's a voluntary exchange of goods and services" and think oh – ok! That's nice.
    Then you turn your brain on and go: but what about Coca-Cola funding mobsters to put a hit on union members in South America. Or what about Nesté indirectly hiring child-slaves in Ghana and Togo? What about Dow and the Bhopal accident? What about the Oil-lobby completely trashing the environment of indidenous people in the rain forrest in Ecuador? There is nothing voluntary there. It's pure brute force that is being imposed on those people.

  33. Imagine if moderate Christians thought about the Crusades the same way that mainstream Muslims thought about Mo's imperial crusades.  That would be politically incorrect!

  34. The fact is, capitalism evolves into imperialism. The market forces that drive capitalism require constant development. The moment the national markets reach saturation, the only way for further development is expansion into new markets.
    To do this, the capitalist in one country needs to compete, with the support of its government, with the capitalist of its country of interest.
    In the case of the United States and South America for example, after the collapse of the Bretton-Woods agreement, during the Nixon administration and governments following it, it meant overthrowing democratically elected governments, installing CIA trained and supported military fascist regimes and keep its people under the thumb while raping and pillaging its raw materials.
    Similarly with the middle east and the oil interests of the Bush family (see the history of the Zapata Oil/Hargringer Group).
    The very nature of capitalism is to exploit the labor force of one section of the population (the vast majority) for the accumulation of capital (profit) by another, the minority.
    Imagine a glass of water. Profit is derived from the surplus value of a product. Say 1/5 of the glass goes to labor, 3/5 to the cost of production (including storage, transport, raw materials, taxes, etc.), and 1/5 to profit. Assume you can get a little more out of the cost by getting a cheaper supplier, streamlining production, etc.. Now, where is the vast quantity of profit going to come from? From the reduction of the first Fifth. Profit and labor cost are directly at conflict with one another. To increase one, you have to decrease the other.
    Now look at the demands by the market in the 80's and 90's for further and further increases in investment return. Where is the money going to magically come from? Decrease in jobs, working conditions, wages, looking for cheap labor elsewhere, governments giving the nation's tax money, which previously went into providing services back to the population that paid them, to industry in the form of incentives and concessions.

  35. Of course, Capitalism the ideology bares little resemblance to the history of Capitalism the practice. Recognizing this distinction is crucial to understanding why that system must be confronted in the real world for what it is rather than allowed to assume the guise of abstraction while imposing its power against our political will to achieve justice. Those who make social justice impossible make violent conflict inevitable.

  36. If it were necessary to give the briefest possible definition of imperialism we should have to say that imperialism is the monopoly stage of capitalism. -Lenin 

  37. And because money and power do not and never have existed, thats why capitalism isn't inherently;y exploitative and imperialistic. Wait, whats that you say? The rich will use their money and power in every underhanded way to gain every advatage they can so only they grow rich? And this is exactly what will happen by design under capitalism? Well, if I didn't know better, I'd think this was full of crap.

  38. The involuntary relations under imperialism are just as "voluntary" as the ones in capitalism.  And that is part of why people see them as the same thing.  Ultimately, the only real difference is that capitalism uses monetary power and imperialism uses political power.

  39. Capitalism = Imperialism .Why? Because the trading system has led into and idea of exploiting the poor. Those capitalist bitches on top will not and never understand the proletariat. 

  40. lol this video is just like when communists say that Stalinism isn't communism, just because it doesn't match what they count as the intended goal of communism. But what matters is what the conditions and incentives of a particular system tend to produce. 

    Just defining capitalism out of being compatible with imperialism is just semantic trickery to fool stupid people. The fact is that the capitalist condition of seeking profit incentivizes imperialism, because greater acquisition and control of resources and costs means greater profits can be made.

  41. The East India Company had their own armies (like many private corporations use PMCs today). The British government only helped. The incentive was there for capitalists regardless of government. If a company becomes strong enough, then it can act as an imperialist power on its own.

    Also, because of the wealth of these companies, they can control the political systems they  inhabit – or create them if they don't currently exist.

  42. this is utter stupidy – study Rosa Luxemburg, Lenin and  Bukharin who show you how free competition leads to monopoly capitalism and imperialism and for an updated version of capitalist imperialism read David Harvey's Imperialism published at beginning of 21st century –  this video really is a perversion of mans intellect and no doubt paid for by some free market libertarian foundation which will never be short of money because it promotes such drivel.

  43. Right off the bat he messes up.   His definition of capitalism as "the free exchange of goods, etc." is wrong.  Capitalism is defined by ownership and is:  "an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state."  Whether or not the trade is "free" is another issue.  Thus, we can have a terms like "free trade (Laissez-faire) capitalism" or "crony capitalism"   which both describe a type of capitalism, but very different types.

  44. %'s of All systems are ruined by greed, lies and deceit.
        In Florida a large part of the real estate market has been completely over sold and over hyped thus over priced.  This cannot work for the majority of the working citizens cause MOST of them make too little. 
        A small % of completely predatory greedy assholes have invested in properties in Florida, created false news articles, spread lies and hyped up areas that have no reason to be hyped.  Then a bit of time passes, the hype becomes 'truth' in the minds of many clowns who just follow along – then you have strore fronts in dead empty towns renting for 6 times what an occupant can generate once they open a business there – and they open a business there cause they are sold a lie about the area. 
             Similar greed from a small group of real estate predators has doubled the price of a simple 1 bedroom apt. in just a few short years.    Capitalism in South Florida is fed on by deviant greedy unethical criminals who work withing the system to commit basic endless theft. 

  45. They can be connected. Capitalism fuels imperialism because imperialism is based on a "profit" and property motive.

    "Capitalism is a system based on voluntary exchanges that benefit all of the parties involved."

    Not always and volunteerism has nothing to do with capitalism in particular because privacy and profit don;t need to deal with "free choices" of other people outside of their interest. Many people seem to "voluntarily" want to exchange because there's limits to property obtaining and only exchange because they're the only game in town sort of speak and that's not to say capitalists can't influence choices themselves if they have enough assets to do it. That would be like saying people have the choice to have a 20 dollar minimum wage when they can't, especially if they don't privately own the means of production unlike those who do.

    "In contrast, imperialism is based on exploiting the poor through political power and military force"

    Capitalism can also do that as well because it sustains it and imperialism is about profit. If I have privacy rights and property I can have the choice to exploit those who use my property or get someone who values it to do as I want such as paying people to kill people for my oil. You can also exploit the poor with money and other assets like property besides bureaucracy and military force and many imperialists for years done that also. Spend money to get more money and property and spend money on bureaucrats and soldiers is no different.

    "such as political corruption, exploitation of the poor, mass famines, and others—that were in fact a result of imperialism."

    All wars and corruption were always about money, property, and resources. Why would anyone build a military for the sake of it if there wasn't a reason beyond that? Corruption in politics and war are just methods of doing that. You can even see it in business – people going to "war" with each other in this competitive market.

  46. Capitalism has been confused with imperialism is all mainly because capitalism funds it!

    The thing is though that collectivist will never understand is that Capitalism has been funding all ideology (-ism) since 4000BC!

    It funds Socialism, Statism, communism, Nazism, Fascism, Imperialism, totalitarism, corporations, banks and ect….

    The main reason imperialism and capitalism are in fact against each other is mainly because Imperialism relies on taxes!

  47. Capitalism has been confused with imperialism is all mainly because capitalism funds it!

    The thing is though that collectivist will never understand is that Capitalism has been funding all ideology (-ism) since 4000BC!

    It funds Socialism, Statism, communism, Nazism, Fascism, Imperialism, totalitarism, corporations, banks and ect….

    The main reason imperialism and capitalism are in fact against each other is mainly because Imperialism relies on taxes!

  48. Taking-in the dig at Lenin, imperialism is just as much a symptom and inevitable result of capitalism as cronyism and corporatism. One of the many contradictions within capitalist economics is the assumption that resources are abundant: without abundance, capitalist growth ultimately transfers limited resources into capital gains that demand and supply labour whilst ignoring the renewal of said resources. This logically, without much thought required, leads to imperialism as states become market agents within the greater global economy and so forcing them to steal and fight other agents for dwindling resources.

    Basic economics mixed in with some international relations theory there.

  49. If "capitalism is the free exchange of good and services between individuals on a voluntary bases under the rule of law and in a system of private property rights." how can there be law and a system of private property rights without having political power to establish it? Thus, if political power is necessary to enforce law and a system of private property rights, then imperialism is a necessary condition for capitalism to expand.

  50. Intresting vidio. You have a nice clear deffenichon for capitalisum but the one for impirealisup was rather vage.

    Is there a place I can disscus this vidio with you or someone of your posichon away from youtube coment system?

  51. Ok, so lets agree that capitallism and imperialism are not the same thing. In this case, we do not live in this day and age, in a capitallistic society, but rather an imperialistic one.

    Initially I am against capitallism because as I know it, it is all about exploitation. But lets step away from this and focus on the idea that we have imperialism instead of capitallism right now. Exploitation of resources and people who are put under oppressive regimes is not morally right, it is a parasitic relationship between the exploiter and exploited. Do you agree that in a just society this should not be?

    Many call me a communist/nationalist prick because I love my country and hate seeing it being exploited. I love the idea of real capitallism. Lets say we have two companies, x and y, in country A with high standards of living. My company X produces a product entirely within country A and if needed I import materials if necessary, workers are happy, my profits are decent, and I am happy that I provide opportunities to my fellow citizens.

    Now we have company Y, outsourcing its jobs to tax havens and cheap labour regions. They can sell the same product that I sell for $500.00, for only $300.00. My company will fail. My fellow citizens are left without a job. Because company Y would not hire them as they have cheap labour already.

    Does that seem right to you?

    Next, innovation, you may say that innovation would be non-existent but I highly doubt that. Why? because if 2 companies are on the same playing field, they are on competition with each other, t produce a higher quality product with similar resources. If one jumps ahead, the other is coerced into keeping up and vice versa, innovation.

  52. 1. Glossing capitalism without addressing the creation and distribution of surplus value through the capitalist mode of production seems disingenuous. 2. Separating imperialism from Marx's critique of 'primitive accumulation' is mystifying, especially as it continues through warfare and lawfare into the present era of neo-liberal privatization.

  53. So in other words real capitalism is an imaginary system in which humans are not corrupt and don't take advantage of each other. Got it. Seems eerily similar to how real socialism or communism are also hypothetical systems where people are indoctrinated to the point that they do not take advantage of the system.

  54. i agree with this video except that i think capitalism exists LONG BEFORE any empire. If capitalism is just two more parties trading freely, then it existed since there was consciousness in this world. (consensual sex would be an example of capitalism, as would a caveman trading another fur for stones)

  55. Very interesting piece, though I wonder how we should look at for example certain economic relations between western- and african countries. While there is being traded, due to certain policies the african parties grow exponentially poorer and weaker, due to the exchange of raw materials from the african continent and finished goods from the west. It gets really close to imperialism in a lot of ways in my opinion, though it could be that I'm not informed enough on the matter. Could anyone elaborate?

  56. Imperialism and Capitalism are not mutually exclusive but I am agree with you, it is not the highest stage of capitalism either. And free trade is not the same thing than capitalism. For example, two communists states where all private property is abolished can trade toghether but it is not capitalism. In the opposite, the british empire has florished in the industrial revolution in england.

  57. To argue what you are arguing, you have to dismiss the actual historically affirming consequence of capital: oppression, inequality, a history of colonialism, exploitation of foreign and domestic labor, constant battles between workers and owners, to the point of owners hiring militias, and the ever present inevitable ultimate consolidation of wealth and power. It's easy to say that Capitalism allows for open, free involvement by everyone and mutual benefit; but that just is not true. Capitalism encourages and perhaps even necessitates consolidation and greed; the argument you present is asinine and really draconian; it fails to take into account all the data from over 2 centuries of history now. This misinforms a public. It is disingenuous or grossly negligent. Even Adam Smith acknowledged the tendency for Capitalism to lead to monopolies – aka private tyrannies. So in a sense, this civil, peaceful and nice sounding argument of the theory really hides the more devastating and brutal components inherent in Capitalism – regardless of whether or not we agree Imperialism or Communism or Socialism or whatever is better.

  58. This video is a great example of how narrowly right-wing libertarians think. You define Capitalism so narrowly that it cannot have almost any causal relation to any real world phenomenon. However, there's a clear historical link between Capitalism and Imperialism since one of the causes of imperialist expansion in the 19th century was the deflation of profits in Capitalist countries. Low profitability drove developed countries to exploit the undeveloped ones.

    To real people it doesn't matter whether the definitions of Capitalism and Imperialism are different. The issue that matters is whether the former causes the latter.

  59. There's something about this answer that sounds like the "No, that's not a real socialist system" answer you get every time a socialist system fails.

  60. I don't understand why the promise of exemption from extermination is considered to be fundamentally different from any other good or service. Definitionally of course, it appears to me to be an arbitrary line on a sliding scale.

  61. Capitalism by this definition is to the trade of finished products as socialism is to the trade of labor, for the goal of socialism is to ensure satisfied laborers. An open product market is as quintessential to capitalism as an open labor market is to socialism. (And yes, communism [i.e. socialism with barter] is just as conflated with imperialism as capitalism is.)

  62. The global elite capitalists use government/military power and debt to force imperialism upon other countries in order to spread the corrupt power of the elites by exploiting them of cheap labor and resources. It's what the EU does.

  63. A :take land with gun and blades
    B: buy or rent land with money, only if the native is willing to sell the land

  64. These idiots so often inflate Mercantilism and Fascism with Capitalism. Its their way of saying: everything bad in the world is Capitalism.

  65. Imperialism may not be what is intended with Capitalism, but it is often a byproduct of it. Due to the greed and conquests for power that Capitalism drives. So yes, capitalism has killed at least hundreds of millions of people.

  66. The first known empire in recorded history is the Sumer empire. That empire was based on the extreme form of collectivism and socialism.

    Imperialism can arise in any economical and societal system. Nazi Germany, Japanese Empire and Soviet Union were all militaristic empires, while having heavily socialised economies.

    The only reason capitalism and imperialism tend to be seen as being directly connected by many is because they only look at the British Empire. They do not look at hundreds other empires, which exhibited a large array of economical systems, from the most communist (Inca and Egyptian empires), to the most capitalist (British and Spanish Empires).

  67. Ironically, you need government regulations and control over the "free market" to ensure freedom in the marketplace. Otherwise, the companies in the marketplace will inevitably grow into monopolies and with it, destroy any semblance of free or fair trade. This contradiction has always existed in the capitalist socio-economic model, and always will until a new system is born.

  68. Imperialism is intended to destroy the competition (freedom of a country) and have one monopoly (one country) owning the world.
    Capitalism is intended to destroy competition (freedom of the "free" market) and eventually have one monopoly run the market.

    In an ideal world, imperialist would want to own the world. While capitalist would want to run the world.

    When Americans say "capitalism", they mean regulated capitalism, where you can't buy out the competition and/or destroy them by having such low prices (dumping prices) with the intention to destroy the competition. Imperialism is a country running the world. Capitalism is companies running the world. You can say all that "free market is good for competition" bullshit. But we all know that big companies wouldn't want any competition in an ideal world, because that means that they're allowed to set their own prices and abuse the system.

  69. There is a pretty good book on this that i must recommend for who ever wrote this video.

    Imperislism, the highest syage of capitalism.

    It's old but accurately describes what is going on today.

  70. I'm starting to think all of these videos are a waste of time. Yes I know what Capitalism is and how it is NOT exploitation and is the solution to modern day woes in the economy. Despite the good of Capitalism, their are way too many misinformed Bernie Sanders voters who don't care about what Capitalism is. They only care about the caricatures, hence the waste of time of these videos. Bernie will be elected, his policies will fail, the US economy will implode and then hopefully we will have learned from it and finally elect a libertarian.

  71. So does this mean we have never had "a true capitalist system" (voluntary and mutually beneficial exchange without coercive political power) and we should therefore KEEP TRYING??? ( How is inequality produced? No exploitation?)

  72. wait a second mister those banana ware taken by imperialism from Guatemala during the banana wars + the blue eyed pale face devil was responsible ,voluntary ? exchange .or a gun to your head.Hey mister blue eye you did not mention Leopold II with 15 million death to his credit in Imperialism of Congo

  73. This is PURE IDEOLEGY of course capitalism isn’t volentary, when profitmargins fall and groth slows you need to expand to other countryes, and of corse the company that super exploits other contenents Will win! His saying thas not real capitalism! Read imperialism the higest stage of capitalism

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *