Reference no: EM133806953
Assignment:
Directions: Answer the following question using any readings, lectures or discussions from class, and make sure to back up your points with examples and short quotations. Parenthetical citations are fine for this assignment - i.e. "at the end of a citation" (60).
Readings:
Luxemburg and Kautsky on Imperialism.pdf Luxemburg and Kautsky on Imperialism.pdf - Alternative Formats (2.055 MB)
Debates within Marxism: V. I. Lenin, Rosa Luxemburg, Karl Kautsky, Rudolf Hilferding [pdfs] upload
- On Hilferding:
V. I. Lenin:
- In Lenin's Imperialism The Highest Stage of Capitalism, read the first two prefaces, the first page of Chapter 5, and the first two pages of
- Matthew G. Stannard, 'Empires at War: 1912-1922', in European Overseas Empire, 1879-1999: A Short History
- Lenin vs. Wilson: Erez Manela, The Wilsonian Moment, (2007), Introduction
- Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, Part Two, Chapters 5-9
- J. A. Hobson, Imperialism: A Study (1902) Introduction, + 15-23; Chapter IV + Chapter VI in Part I
- Berenson - Heroes of Empire - Intro.pdf Berenson - Heroes of Empire - Intro.pdf - Alternative Formats (2.002 MB)
- Edward Berenson, Heroes of Empire: Five Charismatic Men and the Conquest of Africa (2010) pp 1-17 + etc.
Question:
What is the 'taproot' of imperialism, according to J. A. Hobson in Imperialism: A Study (1902)? Is this the only cause of British imperial expansion in the last third of the nineteenth century, or just the most important one? If the latter, what are some of the other factors that help to explain British expansion overseas, according to Hobson? Include historical context to help explain why Hobson wrote this text when he did, and what that context has to do with the explanation he gives.
You can also use your paper to compare Hobson's theory of imperialism to those of other writers we have read, such as Hannah Arendt, Vladimir Lenin, Rosa Luxemburg, Karl Kautsky, etc. Do any of the latter reference Hobson, or share points in common with him? Where do they diverge in their explanations for the causes of imperialism?