Description
Common historical materialist accounts (Luxemburg 2003; Lenin 1917; Harvey 2017) argue that the origins of imperialism can be explained by capitalism’s need for expansion. Yet, what about empires predating capitalism, such as the Roman Empire? At the same time, realist accounts of imperial expansion typically ignore the specifically capitalist characteristics of modern imperialism and its distinctively economic dimensions (Morgenthau 1960; Cohen 1973; Snyder 1991; Copeland 2024). Therefore, we propose combining both paradigms to derive a comprehensive theory of imperialism that acknowledges the existence of and complex interactions between both 'geopolitical' and 'capitalist logics' (Arrighi 1994, p. 34). We argue that realism and historical materialism are more compatible than assumed by previous authors (Copeland 2024; Harvey 2017; Callinicos 2009; Rosenberg 1994), because both put power – of the owners of the means of production and destruction, respectively – at the centre of analysis, while explaining the systemic constraints arising from anarchy between states and firms, respectively. Understanding capitalism as a global structure existing in parallel to the anarchy of the international system, we deviate from related critiques of realism, such as Rosenberg (1994), who treats the mode of production as a matter of domestic politics. Overall, our two-systems-level theory of imperialism, grounded in a materialist, power-centred analysis, helps overcome weak points of both historical materialist and realist accounts of imperialism while taking both paradigms seriously.
