156 individualism/individualistic
tify persecuting and murdering those in religious mis-
sionary service.
Lenin and other 20th-century communists devel-
oped an elaborate theory of capitalist-imperialism.
This was partly to explain why the SOCIALISTrevolution
predicted by Marx had not occurred in the advanced
capitalist countries (Britain, Germany, the United
States). According to Lenin, capitalism survives by
“exporting” its contradictions to colonies. Colonies
serve several purposes: (1) as markets for the sale of
excess goods and production; (2) as a source of cheap
natural resources and labor; (3) as a testing or dump-
ing ground for new techniques or pollution. This eco-
nomic imperialism further corrupts the colonial
political leaders (who become the native arm of impe-
rial domination) and the domestic (imperial nation)
working class (preventing socialist revolution in the
advanced countries). So, in capitalist imperialism, the
neocolonies are so exploited that the businesses in the
advanced countries can “bribe” their indigenous work-
ers with higher wages, education, career advancement,
and unions. So, workers in Europe or the United States
live at a middle-class level, sharing the benefits of the
exploitation of Third World labor and resources. This
explains why workers in advanced countries are often
CONSERVATIVEand patriotic, leaving the radical LEFTto
exist among LIBERALmiddle-class professionals. It also,
for Marxism-Leninism, explains why the socialist revo-
lutions occurred first in the colonial nations (Russia,
China, Vietnam, Cuba) rather than the advanced capi-
talist countries. But, Lenin asserted, as more Third
World countries became socialist, expelling the impe-
rialists, the problems of capitalism would return to the
host countries, eventually leading to socialist revolu-
tions there. That this had not occurred by the end of
the 20th century contributed to the decline of commu-
nism in the SOVIET UNION, China, and the Third World.
Still, many poor African and Asian countries (for
example, in the United Nations) employ the rhetoric
of Marxism-Leninism to complain about the poverty of
their own nations and wealth of the United States and
Europe. Many Western liberals share in this perspec-
tive, blaming the prosperity of the advanced nations
on the exploitation of poorer nations.
An important component of MODERN imperialist
theory is the distinction between a colony (where the
imperial country rules politically) and a neocolony
(where imperial control, or hegemony, is informal and
economic). Much of the resentment in Southern
Hemisphere countries toward Northern Hemisphere
(imperial) nations is the suspicion that control is sub-
tle, commercial, and deceptive. This accounts for the
widespread hostility toward the United States (and the
CIA) around the world. Whether political or eco-
nomic, modern theories of imperialism always charge
that militarism accompanies foreign domination. The
two world wars are seen as conflicts between rival
imperial countries (Britain, France, Germany, Japan,
the United States), and recent military actions by
NATO (in Serbia or Iraq) are seen as evidence of West-
ern imperialism.
Historically, the colonial regions often benefit from
the legal, cultural, religious, and technological influ-
ences of advanced imperialism and eventually secure
greater independence and prosperity from the relation-
ship (as in India, the Arab Middle Eastern countries,
and the Peoples Republic of China). They then often
exercise imperial domination over their weaker neigh-
boring countries, proving that imperialism is not a
habit of only certain cultures but appears to be a fea-
ture of collective human nature.Further Readings
Brewer, A. Marxist Theories of Imperialism: a Critical Survey.
New York: Routledge, 1980.
Lenin, V. I. “Imperialism: the highest stage of capitalism”
(1916). In Selected Works,vol. I. London: Institute of Inter-
national Affairs, 1950.
Marx, K. On Colonialism and Modernization,S. Avineri, ed. Gar-
den City, N.Y.: Doubleday Anchor, 1969.individualism/individualistic
The political idea that the human individual is the
most important entity in society. The source of this
individualistic philosophy can be biological, religious,
or economic. In MODERN philosophical materialism
(the British LIBERALISM of Thomas HOBBESand John
LOCKE), the human individual is central because, bio-
logically, people are separate and autonomous and our
private, physiological senses (from which we gain all
knowledge) cannot be shared collectively. So, by
nature we are individuals, and from that condition
each possesses NATURAL RIGHTS (to life, LIBERTY, and
PROPERTY). In the religious or spiritual source of indi-
vidualism, the CHRISTIANs St. AUGUSTINE, Martin LUTHER,
and John BUNYANemphasize that God created each
individual person as unique to relate to him personally
and that salvation is individually chosen through
Christ. An economic basis of individualism (as in the
thought of Adam SMITH) says that individual invention,