|
Export to colonies (and financially depend- ent countries) versus export to independent countries: Let us assume that the latter is greater and increases at a faster rate than the former. Does this prove the “non-necessity” of colonies and networks of financial dependence? |
|
(K. Kautsky.) No, for (1) even in relation to independent countries (taking all exports) the share of cartels, trusts, dumping, in- creases.... (2) Finance capital does not abolish the lower (less developed, backward) forms of cap- italism, but grows out of them, above them.... (3) There is a definite ratio between “normal” and monopoly sales, ergo between “normal” and monopoly exports. Capitalist cannot help selling staple commodities to millions of workers. Does this mean that it is “unnecessary” for them to acquire extra-profit through government, railway “contracts”, etc.? (4) The extra-profit from privileged and monopoly sales compensates for the low profit of “normal” sales. (5) Compare with the banks: extra-profit as intermediaries in floating loans, promoting bubble companies, etc., compensates for low profit (sometimes no profit) on “normal” credit operations. (6) The high technique of concentrated industry and the “high technique” of financial swindling, and the “high technique” (in reali- ty, low technique) of oppression by finance capital—they are inseparably linked under capitalism. K. Kautsky wants to destroy the link, “whitewash” capitalism, take the good and throw away the bad: “modern Proudhon- ism”, petty-bourgeois reformism “under the mask of Marxism”. ΣΣ = finance capital (monopolies, banks, oligarchy, buying up, etc.) is not an accidental excrescence on capitalism, but its ineradicable continuation and product.... Not merely colo- nies, but also (a) export of capital; (b) monop- olies; (c) a financial network of connections and dependencies; (d) omnipotence of the banks; (e) concessions and bribes, etc., etc. |
||||
|
N.B. on finance capital and its signifi- cance |
||||
| | |
| | | | | | |