IMPERIALISM - Competition in the global market.
However,
international relations are powerfully and rapidly developing from year to
year. Increasingly large masses of goods rush from one country to another,
giving rise to and developing into an international whole. Increasingly large
masses of capital and labor force are migrating from one end of the world to
another, strengthening and expanding international ties.
At present, there is not a single country in the world that could exist in isolation for a more or less long time. The experience of the last imperialist war, as well as the experience of the blockade of Soviet Russia, clearly confirmed this fact.
The
modern economy, in its essence, is the economy of the world. Therefore, the
extension of the power of financial-capitalist associations to entire countries
does not eliminate competition from the system of modern capitalism. Quite the
contrary.
As
the power of individual capitalist organizations grows stronger, as their
influence expands, competition in the world market becomes more and more fierce
and destructive.
It
must not be forgotten that each of the competing parties is now relying on the
resources of entire countries and, moreover, acts hand in hand with powerful
state organizations.
On
the world market, as well as on national markets, the struggle between powerful
capitalist trusts and concerns is waged along three main lines:
1)
the struggle for markets,
2)
struggle for raw material markets,
3)
the struggle for capital investment markets.
All
these three types of competition
are closely connected with each other and represent, in fact, the three
sides of the single capitalist competition. All these three types of
competition, when transferred to the world market, lead to the transformation
of “peaceful” competition into armed competition, lead to the birth of
imperialism as an inevitable policy of modern states.
Fight for markets.
There
is an economic law that has long turned into a proverb, and is known to people,
even completely unfamiliar with political economy: "demand causes
supply." This short proverb contains, if you understand it well, a very
large content. It indicates that with the modern development of technology, the
production of any product can be brought to any size.
There
would be demand, but you can always produce a product and in any quantity.
Capitalist production knows no technical obstacles in its path. If it meets
certain limits in each period, then these limits are set not by the technical
impossibility of further expanding production, but by its economic
unprofitability.
The
goal of capitalist production is profit.
The
capitalist constantly strives to increase the rate of profit. The first means
of raising it is to improve the technique of the enterprise and increase the
scale of production. At the improvement of the technology of the enterprise at
full load, it gives a reduction in production costs, and at constant prices for
the product, and an increase in the rate of profit. However, the prices of a
product cannot remain unchanged in the domestic market if all entrepreneurs
throw more products into the "national" market than before.
Therefore,
the capitalists have to transport their surplus products abroad, to those
countries where they can be sold for more favorable price. Thus, export abroad
is generated not by an absolute overflow of the national market, but by a
relative overflow. Surplus products can also be sold domestically; however,
such a sale would lower prices, which the capitalists fear so much.
Where
are the "surplus" goods from the highly developed capitalist
countries going? The answer is self-evident—to countries less developed
capitalistically, to countries where industry is not as highly developed and,
as a result, prices are high.
However,
“surplus goods are thrown away simultaneously from a number of capitalist
countries. Every year the mass of commodities seeking external sales is rapidly
growing, every year a "free market" is already becoming. Prices in
the new markets are becoming more and more equal to the prices of the
capitalist countries, and there are fewer and fewer places where goods can be
exported at a higher price.
Each
of the competitors, therefore, seeks to oust all its rivals from the world
market in order to remain alone in the market. The price fight is on fire. Each
of the rivals lowers prices in the expectation that the enemy will not stand
it, go bankrupt and make room. The winner will be the one who can withstand low
prices longer, who can sell goods on the world market for a longer time without
profit.
Fierce
competition for sales markets, a sharp struggle for the buyer and the price
reduction resulting from this struggle in the old days always stimulated the
improvement of technology.
In
a modern monopoly society, on the other hand, where each of the competitors
acts side by side with a powerful state apparatus and uses this apparatus as a
weapon in the competitive struggle, the incentives for the improvement of
technology are gradually dying out.
In
this era, a completely new opportunity opens up for the entrepreneur to
withstand the fierce struggle of prices without resorting to the improvement of
production methods. This opportunity is created due to the spread of the system
of offensive duties.
The
system of customs duties existed in capitalist society even before the
development of financial-capitalist relations. However, these were, as a rule,
protective duties, the fundamental difference between which and modern ones is
very great.
The
purpose of the protective duty is to secure to the national industry such prices
for goods as would provide the average entrepreneur with the recovery of
production costs and the usual profit.
The
purpose of the offensive tax is to raise domestic prices to the maximum and
secure monopolistic super profits for monopoly associations.
Under
conditions of free competition in the internal market, any duty, no matter how
high it may be, turns into a protective duty since the struggle between
domestic entrepreneurs and the transfer of capital into the most profitable
industries always reduce the prices of each product to the level of the average
production costs plus the average (national) rate of return.
We
are saying here that monopolistic organizations inflate prices in the domestic
market to the maximum limit.
It
would seem that, under the condition of complete dominance in the market,
capitalist organizations can raise prices indefinitely. In fact, this is not
so.
The profit of the capitalist depends not only
on the height of the price, but also on the quantity of goods sold.
Meanwhile,
any increase in the price of a commodity makes this commodity unavailable to
more and more consumers and thereby reduces the demand for this commodity.
If
the monopoly organization were to raise prices exorbitantly, it would increase
its profit per unit of commodity, but at the same time it would be able to sell
so little of the commodity that its gross profit would be reduced.
Assume
that the cost of producing 1 pair of shoes is 8 rubles. The price of shoes
fluctuates. In the same way, the demand for shoes fluctuates, depending on the
price.
(…)
We
see that the monopoly organization receives the maximum gross profit not at a
maximum price of 25 rubles, but at a price of 17 rubles, which, while not being
the maximum, still greatly exceeds production costs. It is at this level that
the monopoly price is established.
It
is necessary to note, however, one more feature. While in a pure capitalist
economy the price of industrial products is determined by the average cost of
production, the monopoly organizations inflate prices to such a level that it
compensates for the cost of production and some profit even for the most basic
of enterprises belonging to the association.
Here
the price is thus determined by the cost of production, not under average
conditions, but under worse conditions. As a result, more advanced enterprises
receive additional differential profit (monopoly profit).
The
state pursuing a policy of high customs duties acts here as an agent of
monopoly associations. It is only thanks to the assistance of the state
that the establishment of monopoly prices is conceivable. It is only thanks to
the help of the state that the monopolist gangs are able to exploit the
population of the country.
The
monopoly profit received by the financial-capitalist groups is not only
their goal, but, to a large extent, also a means of competition in the
foreign market.
The
monopoly profit received by the financial-capitalist groups is not only their
goal, but, to a large extent, also a means of competition in the foreign
market. Receiving huge premiums on the home market, the capitalist associations
are able to export their goods abroad at significantly reduced prices. The
internal premium makes it easier for them to compete with foreign rivals and
often allows them to sell goods abroad at undoubtedly unprofitable prices.
“As
an example, it suffices here to quote the history of the German sugar industry,
which at the end of the 19th century exported about 3/5 of its production
abroad. Since these exports were accompanied by large losses, the German sugar
producers had to get high prices in the domestic markets.
When,
therefore, in May 1900 they succeeded in creating a cartel covering 99.5% of
the total sugar production in Germany, then immediately after this, prices in
the home markets were immediately raised by 10%. The cartel, however, did not
limit itself to this increase in its income; this is evident from the fact that
while raw sugar was becoming cheaper and cheaper, the prices of refined sugar
were kept at such a level that, with an artificial increase in them by 16-18
marks per 100 kilograms, German consumers had to annually overpay the sugar
syndicate a huge amount of 100 million marks. An even more striking picture is
in Russia's pre-war sugar industry. The famous Russian sugar syndicate
achieved, with obvious support from the government, a complete monopoly in the
domestic market.
Importation
of sugar from abroad was completely stopped by high customs duties. This made
it possible for the sugar syndicate to sell sugar domestically at 11-13 kopecks
per pound (in retail trade), while production costs barely reached 5-6 kopecks.
Inside the country, the syndicate thus
earned up to 7 kopecks (more than 100 percent) on each pound of sugar. At the
same time, on the world market, he faced fierce competition from Austro-German
and especially English factories.
In
order to bankrupt their main competitor, the syndicate sold Russian sugar to
England at 8 kopecks per pound, which allowed English farmers to feed their
pigs with Russian sugar, while the Russian peasant drank tea as a "
«priglyadku» (Russian
proverb=without adding sugar, but only looking at sugar)
(Add Page
56 without Stats)
Much
more important is the question of the distribution of these reserves among the
individual capitalist countries. It is known that lowering market prices is by
no means the only method of competitive struggle. Along with it, a prominent
place is occupied by the deprivation of the enemy of raw materials. Each of the
capitalists strives not only to provide himself with raw materials, but also to
keep his competitor out of the raw materials. Therefore, each of the monopoly
groups participating in world competition strives to seize not only those raw
materials that are necessary for its own needs, but also those that its
opponent needs or may need.
That
is why all deposits of oil, coal and all kinds of ores serve as objects of
fierce struggle between the largest capitalist groups and the states merged
with them. In these points of the globe, the appetites of all the major powers
are cracked. These places turn out to be the nodes of the imperialist struggle.
It
is known that one of the main reasons for the last imperialist war was the
desire of the “ally” to deprive Germany of coal (the Saar and Ruhr basins,
Upper Silesia) and iron (Alsace-Lorraine) and thereby undermine her economic
might; and, on the other hand, Germany's desire to take possession of the
French iron ore basin (Brieet department).
It
is no less known that almost all major European conflicts that have arisen in
recent years and threatened Europe with new military upheavals arose on the
same coal-and-iron base (the Ruhr conflict, the Polish-German conflict, the
Czech-Polish friction).
A significant role in the World War was also played by the striving of the largest
imperialist predators towards the oil basins: Germany towards Mesopotamia and
Rumania, Great Britain towards Mesopotamia, and Persia.
The
struggle for oil also played a significant role in the intervention of the
"allies" in the Caucasus, and Japan in Kamchatka and Sakhalin in the
development of the Greco-Turkish conflict, where England stood behind Greece,
striving for Mossul, and Turkey was partially supported by France and the
United States. States that did not want to let England into this rich oil
basin.
The
oil issue promises to remain the axis of international relations in the coming
decades. The largest oil-consuming country, the United States (its consumption
is about 70% of the world), is close to the complete exhaustion of its sources.
If
The States will not want to become dependent on England, which has seized
control of most of the world's oil reserves, they will have to make an attempt
in the next few years to expand their oil possessions. And since England is
unlikely to want to voluntarily release the enemy from the noose thrown around
his neck, clashes over the oil issue seem inevitable.
Countries
such as Mexico, Peru, Bolivia, Persia, and Mesopotamia will have to serve as
subjects of fierce struggle in the coming years. However, along with minerals,
raw materials supplied by agriculture are also the subject of fierce struggle. This
branch of production in capitalist society, for reasons which we cannot dwell
on here (reasons connected with the phenomena of rent), constantly lags behind
the manufacturing industry in its development.
In
capitalist society, therefore, there is a chronic shortage of agricultural
products (bread, flax, cotton, and all kinds of foodstuffs). The prices for
these products are constantly rising. However, this price increase cannot
repulse consumers since they absolutely cannot do without these items. Because
of the possibility of obtaining raw materials for industry in the required
quantity, a fierce struggle flare up.
Each
of the competing adversaries seeks to secure for itself a sufficient number
of sources of raw materials for monopoly use, to which the adversary would
not have access.
To
this end, the monopoly associations are pushing the states associated with them
onto the path of capturing the agrarian countries.
Economic
competition degenerates into competition for conquest. Each of the competing countries
is feverishly seizing "everything that lies badly", all the lands
that do not have a specific owner.
(Stats)
We
see that every major power of modern times, striving to acquire a sufficient
number of colonies, i.e. countries supplying raw materials for capitalist
industry, is steadily increasing its "possessions". If two of the
great powers: Russia and Germany have lost their colonial possessions, then the
reason for this, of course, lies not in the absence of "evil will"
among the imperialists of these countries, but in the revolution that turned
the Russian Empire into a free union of peoples, on the one hand, and in the
military defeat of Germany on the other.
.jpg)
No comments