Do left communists think that all bourgeois states today are imperialist? This is something "anti-imperialists" accuse sometimes. I'd be glad if someone pointed out any good text on imperialism apart from Lenin's book.
I think this is a good beggining; http://en.internationalism.org/wr/29...is-imperialism However you can check for Rosa Luxemburg's, Accumulation of Capital, Anti-Critic, Junius Pamphlet and also Bukharin's book on imperialism for more detailed and core approaches. I also suggest this; http://en.internationalism.org/ir/019/on-imperialism This article is a very good intro for a debate on differences in approaches to imperialism iside marxism
I think the main answer to your question is that Left Communists do not differentiate between "Imperialist" and "Non-Imperialist" states. There are no "progressive states", no regimes to support, no national liberation struggles to support. The USA is clearly an Imperialist state - but so is every dictatorship in Africa if only they got the opportunity. A better question from you might be how does Russia attempt to regain Imperilaist leadership within her region, and how does China challenge USA to become Imperialist Super power in her region?
As Rowntree says, all nation states today are imperialist. To this, we could add movements like Bin Laden's pan-Islam, etc which, although they don't necessarily attach to a particular nation state, has as their aim the overthrow of "corrupt" nations of the Arab world and create genuine "Islamic" states. Imperialism is not a policy-choice made by this or that nation state: “Imperialism is not the creation of one or any group of states. It is the product of a particular stage of ripeness in the world development of capital, an innately international condition, an indivisible whole, that is recognisable only in all its relations, and from which no nation can hold aloof at will.” (Rosa Luxemburg, The Junius Pamphlet, 1915). My personal recommendation would be our Nation or Class pamphlet which goes into these questions in some detail.
Nation and Class and The Junius Pamphlet. Also the debate on the national question among revolutionaries during the 20s in International Review no. 34, as well as Luxemburg's critique of the Bolsheviks on the ICC's website. Also, for its importance in analysing imperialism in the 'New World Order' after the collapse of Russian imperialism in 1989 and the consequences on the western bloc, the ICC's Theses on Decomposition in International Review no. 107, Winter 2001.
Thanks to all for those references
This is something "anti-imperialists" accuse sometimes. I'm not quite sure why they'd "accuse" the Communist Left of something like this...most Left Communists state as much quite explicitly, not to mention loudly.
You can't have imperial war without the state.
These documents are very interesting. The basis for a new revolutionary movement, antagonics to stalinism and all the stuff. But "lefties" doens't learn, now they are supporters of this fucking Zelaya. Long live to Internationalism.
Apparently cheerleading for a developing, if weak and unstable, imperialist front in South America counts as "leftism" these days. It's almost sad to see how they attempt to make their mystifications seem tangible...
