论文部分内容阅读
经济解释论的不够充足,多半是由于这种说法所赖以建立的前提有问题:一,有一个团结一致的实业阶级意识到一种共同的经济利益;二、就与其他民族的关系而论,这种经济利益在于促进帝国主义;三、这种实业阶级控制了国家,它们的政府官吏实际上是这个阶级的奴僕。最初步的欧洲史知识表明:所谓资产阶级在任何一个和每一个经济的或非经济的问題上意见是怎样分歧。事实上,是否是实业阶级作为一个集团来承领帝国主义的物质利益,是无关紧要的。帝国主义的动力却在于别处。帝国主义剥削包含非市场性的强迫在内。根据这一定义,剥削并不如通常断定的那样是帝国主义的普遍伴随物。注意到剥削的存在及其有利可图是一回事;而主张或假定这经常是最有报酬的可能的安排,因而它构成经济帝国主义的暗含的动机,则是另一回事。相反,有无数例子证明,由于不合算的理由而放弃统治。事实证明,国家是在实业界之手或为它们服务这个假定也是落空的。有无数例证说明,各国政府拒绝合并领土或者对较弱国家施加压力以保护或增进其国民的物质利益。人们应该把帝国主义看作对于共同机会的各种反映,这种共同机会单纯包含着力量的悬殊。因此假若人们要了解十九世纪的帝国主义,不但要考虑各种动机中较强的经济动机,而且更要考虑欧洲扣世界其余部分力量的不均等,从而产生统治机会和统治可能性。
The inadequacy of economic interpretation is mostly due to the prerequisites on which such assertions are based: First, there is a united industrial class that recognizes a common economic interest; and secondly, on the relationship with other ethnic groups This economic interest is to promote imperialism. Third, this kind of industrial class controls the state. Their government officials are in fact the servants of this class. The initial knowledge of European history shows how the so-called bourgeoisie disagree on any one or every economic or non-economic issue. In fact, it does not matter whether the industrial class as a group is to bear the material interests of imperialism. Impetus to imperialism lies elsewhere. Imperialist exploitation includes non-market coercion. According to this definition, exploitation is not a common accompaniment to imperialism as it usually is asserted. It is one thing to note that the existence of exploitation is profitable to one and that it is often the most remunerative possible arrangement to assert or assume that it constitutes the implied motive of economic imperialism. On the contrary, there are countless examples of giving up rule because of uneconomical reasons. The assumption that countries are in the hands of, or serve for, the real world has also come to nothing. There are countless examples of governments refusing to consolidate their territories or exert pressure on the weaker countries to protect or enhance the material interests of their nationals. People should think of imperialism as a reflection of common opportunities. Such common opportunities simply contain the disparity of power. Therefore, if people want to understand 19th-century imperialism, they should consider not only the stronger economic motivation among the various motives, but also the European inequality in the power of the rest of the world, resulting in the chances of reign and rule.