Compare the arguments of Hobson and Lenin on the effects of capitalism and imperialism

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Hobson studied the effects of British imperialism and argued in Imperialism: A Study that its expansion was a short-term attempt to avoid social conflict. He warned that in the short run, workers in Britain would benefit from the availability of cheap manufactured goods, but they would ultimately bear the brunt of an expanded pool of labor that would drive down their wages. He said that the cause of imperialism was the search for market opportunities and foreign investment. This undercut any argument about spreading civilization, and he pointed out the inherent contradictions and hypocrisy of imperialism. Finally, analyzing the effects of imperialism abroad, he pointed out that it created a false sense of hierarchy among British workers by placing someone else at the bottom of the hierarchy, which would leave them unmotivated to improve their own conditions. Lenin, in Imperialism: The Highest State of Capitalism, supported some of Hobson's criticisms, but said that the larger problem was not the short-term effects of local economics, but the larger and long-term problem of capitalism. He anxiously awaited the socialist revolution that would overthrow capitalism and lead the way to pure communism. At that point, he said, not only would imperialism be destroyed, but so would capitalism. Lenin's exposure of imperialism as an economic, political, and moral dead end seemed convincing to many contemporary Europeans.