What do you think?
Rate this book
The Implosion of Contemporary Capitalism
Renowned political economist Samir Amin, engaged in a unique lifelong effort both to narrate and affect the human condition on a global scale, brings his analysis up to the present—the world of 2013. The key events of our times—financial crisis, the emerging nations, globalization, financialization, political Islam, Euro–zone implosion—are related in a coherent, historically based, account.
Changes in contemporary capitalism require an updating of definitions and analysis of social classes, class struggles, political parties, social movements and the ideological forms in which they express their modes of action in the transformation of societies. Amin meets this challenge and lays bare the reality of monopoly capitalism in its general, global form. Ultimately, Amin demonstrates that this system is not viable and that the implosion in progress is unavoidable. Whether humanity will rise to the challenge of building a more humane global order free of the contradictions of capital, however, is yet to be seen.
Changes in contemporary capitalism require an updating of definitions and analysis of social classes, class struggles, political parties, social movements and the ideological forms in which they express their modes of action in the transformation of societies. Amin meets this challenge and lays bare the reality of monopoly capitalism in its general, global form. Ultimately, Amin demonstrates that this system is not viable and that the implosion in progress is unavoidable. Whether humanity will rise to the challenge of building a more humane global order free of the contradictions of capital, however, is yet to be seen.
144 pages, Hardcover
First published September 1, 2013
11 people are currently reading
1247 people want to read
About the author
Samir Amin
287 books321 followersThe Arabic profile: سمير أمين
Samir Amin (Arabic: سمير أمين) (3 September 1931 – 12 August 2018) was an Egyptian-French Marxian economist, political scientist and world-systems analyst. He is noted for his introduction of the term Eurocentrism in 1988 and considered a pioneer of Dependency Theory.
Samir Amin (Arabic: سمير أمين) (3 September 1931 – 12 August 2018) was an Egyptian-French Marxian economist, political scientist and world-systems analyst. He is noted for his introduction of the term Eurocentrism in 1988 and considered a pioneer of Dependency Theory.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
April 18, 2020
Working people in the core capitalist countries have received benefits from imperialism (even if only crumbs) that workers in the rest of the world don’t receive. That dichotomy is a barrier that has hindered the building of global alliances necessary to reverse neoliberalism.
Yet an international movement that brings together the peoples of the global North and the global South, with a common goal of nationalizing the monopolies that currently have a stranglehold on the world’s economy and a commitment to “de-financialization” (a “world without Wall Street”) is not only possible but indispensable, Samir Amin argues. These would not be ends unto themselves, but rather the first necessary steps on a long road toward a sustainable and equitable future.
The “imperial rent” that accrues to the capitalist core’s monopolies mainly flows to the capitalists, but the workers of the North also benefit from it, and this creates a barrier to North-South alliance building. Workers of the South can’t help but be acutely aware of global imbalances that impoverish them, in contrast to many workers of the North tacitly embracing the relative crumbs they receive at the expense of their Southern brothers and sisters through uncritical acceptance of nationalist ideologies extolling the supposed superiority of imperial countries; this acceptance is reflected, for example, in the U.S. labor federation AFL-CIO’s decades-long uncritical embrace of Washington’s imperialist foreign policy.
Creating a better world — a world in which economic decisions are reached through democratic processes in which all affected parties have a voice and in which the economy is run for the benefit and development of all humanity rather than the private profit of capitalists — is therefore inextricably linked with providing solutions and better living conditions to the majority of the world who live in the peripheral countries.
Change must be in three “dimensions,” Dr. Amin writes — peoples, nations and states. The liberation of a nation and achievements by a state are complements to the advancements of the people; the idea that people can transform the world without taking power is “simply naïve,” the author writes. But it is the people who must be at the forefront.
Additional illusions are that the South can “catch up” with the core capitalist countries or that the maldevelopment of capitalism can be wished away through reforms. The imperialist system blocks the development of new industrial contenders; moreover, the rise of European capitalism required the “safety valve” of emigration to the New World as peasants were forced off the land. There are no new worlds that can absorb the many millions of peasants displaced and to be displaced as capitalism washes over all parts of the globe.
What Dr. Amin does advocate is “audacity, more audacity.” The proposed audacity centers on three programs: socializing the ownership of monopolies, “de-financialization,” and “de-linking” at the international level. Reversing the current social order is impossible without expropriating the power of monopolies.
Economic activity should be organized by public institutions representing groups up and down production supply chains, consumers, local authorities and citizens self-organized democratically. Management of monopolies should include workers in the enterprise as well as representatives of consumers, citizens, (democratically controlled) banks, research institutions and upstream industries. Large-scale production would continue to exist because it is unrealistic to believe that artisans and small local collectives could replace the production of large enterprises, the author writes, but production must be done on the basis of being answerable to society’s collective choices.
Crucially, this book examines the global economic system from a global perspective — and without that perspective, there can’t be a solution to the world’s ongoing economic difficulties.
Yet an international movement that brings together the peoples of the global North and the global South, with a common goal of nationalizing the monopolies that currently have a stranglehold on the world’s economy and a commitment to “de-financialization” (a “world without Wall Street”) is not only possible but indispensable, Samir Amin argues. These would not be ends unto themselves, but rather the first necessary steps on a long road toward a sustainable and equitable future.
The “imperial rent” that accrues to the capitalist core’s monopolies mainly flows to the capitalists, but the workers of the North also benefit from it, and this creates a barrier to North-South alliance building. Workers of the South can’t help but be acutely aware of global imbalances that impoverish them, in contrast to many workers of the North tacitly embracing the relative crumbs they receive at the expense of their Southern brothers and sisters through uncritical acceptance of nationalist ideologies extolling the supposed superiority of imperial countries; this acceptance is reflected, for example, in the U.S. labor federation AFL-CIO’s decades-long uncritical embrace of Washington’s imperialist foreign policy.
Creating a better world — a world in which economic decisions are reached through democratic processes in which all affected parties have a voice and in which the economy is run for the benefit and development of all humanity rather than the private profit of capitalists — is therefore inextricably linked with providing solutions and better living conditions to the majority of the world who live in the peripheral countries.
Change must be in three “dimensions,” Dr. Amin writes — peoples, nations and states. The liberation of a nation and achievements by a state are complements to the advancements of the people; the idea that people can transform the world without taking power is “simply naïve,” the author writes. But it is the people who must be at the forefront.
Additional illusions are that the South can “catch up” with the core capitalist countries or that the maldevelopment of capitalism can be wished away through reforms. The imperialist system blocks the development of new industrial contenders; moreover, the rise of European capitalism required the “safety valve” of emigration to the New World as peasants were forced off the land. There are no new worlds that can absorb the many millions of peasants displaced and to be displaced as capitalism washes over all parts of the globe.
What Dr. Amin does advocate is “audacity, more audacity.” The proposed audacity centers on three programs: socializing the ownership of monopolies, “de-financialization,” and “de-linking” at the international level. Reversing the current social order is impossible without expropriating the power of monopolies.
Economic activity should be organized by public institutions representing groups up and down production supply chains, consumers, local authorities and citizens self-organized democratically. Management of monopolies should include workers in the enterprise as well as representatives of consumers, citizens, (democratically controlled) banks, research institutions and upstream industries. Large-scale production would continue to exist because it is unrealistic to believe that artisans and small local collectives could replace the production of large enterprises, the author writes, but production must be done on the basis of being answerable to society’s collective choices.
Crucially, this book examines the global economic system from a global perspective — and without that perspective, there can’t be a solution to the world’s ongoing economic difficulties.
February 22, 2018
Amin follows Marxist economists Paul Baran, Harry Magdoff and Paul Sweezy, and more recently John Bellamy Foster, in furthering Marx’s critique, roughly from the 1970s to now. Thus a “financialization” of the economy spawns a few billionaires and many paupers in the developed nations, but also in emerging countries, a stage of capitalism that Amin terms its “senility.” For him, the current crisis of the system is “due to nothing other than its own success.” Amin seeks not to reform capitalism but to replace it with an order that benefits humanity, caught in a web of contradictions, economically and ecologically.
So-called emerging nations of the Global South can’t and won’t catch up with the Global North, Amin writes. This fact should be as plain as day. To wit, there are no places such as North America for dispossessed peasants to go and prosper as was the case during capitalist industrialization in Western Europe.
Crucially, Amin argues, the role of financial capital undermines the growth imperative of the system. Here, his analysis of European capitalism untangles how financial capital dominates the economy. Financial interests push policies of austerity. That trend attracts money away from social safety net spending toward servicing public debt, up since ordinary taxpayers bailed out private investors last decade.
In Amin’s view, the “Imperial Triad” of the U.S., Europe, and Japan requires an updating of Lenin. Recall his view of imperialism as capitalism’s highest phase. That does not go far enough for Amin. He writes that imperialism in the 21st century reveals a “permanent phase of capitalism.”
Excerpt of a review by Seth Sandronsky on the Pambazuka News webpage. You can find it here:
https://www.pambazuka.org/global-sout...
So-called emerging nations of the Global South can’t and won’t catch up with the Global North, Amin writes. This fact should be as plain as day. To wit, there are no places such as North America for dispossessed peasants to go and prosper as was the case during capitalist industrialization in Western Europe.
Crucially, Amin argues, the role of financial capital undermines the growth imperative of the system. Here, his analysis of European capitalism untangles how financial capital dominates the economy. Financial interests push policies of austerity. That trend attracts money away from social safety net spending toward servicing public debt, up since ordinary taxpayers bailed out private investors last decade.
In Amin’s view, the “Imperial Triad” of the U.S., Europe, and Japan requires an updating of Lenin. Recall his view of imperialism as capitalism’s highest phase. That does not go far enough for Amin. He writes that imperialism in the 21st century reveals a “permanent phase of capitalism.”
Excerpt of a review by Seth Sandronsky on the Pambazuka News webpage. You can find it here:
https://www.pambazuka.org/global-sout...
December 9, 2014
I actually quite liked this book. I was so disappointed with Three Essays on Marx's Value Theory that I wasn't sure that I would read Amin again. But I'm glad I did.
This book is a solid critique of capitalism, from an orthodox Marxist perspective. And he even boldly offers some advice for the 'long road to transition' organized as a "general proposal under three headings: (1) socialize the ownership of monopolies; (2) de-financialize the management of the economy; (3) de-globalize international relation" (p.136).
Amin remains critical of 'movements of individuals' as represented by Negri's Multitude. "The notion of the 'people' as being the only ones that count – the thesis of the 'movement,' which is that they are capable of transforming the world without worrying about taking over power – is simply naïve" (p.116).
I don't completely agree, as any transition will have to begin at the current level of atomization in society. Amin does add, however: "'Movement' ideology takes no notice of these challenges. But before it can return to the offensive, the left has the inescapable task of rebuilding central leaderships able to formulate its strategic objectives in coherent programmatic form" (p.32).
Always this revolutionary dynamic between the 'generalized proletariat' and the vanguard.
This book is a solid critique of capitalism, from an orthodox Marxist perspective. And he even boldly offers some advice for the 'long road to transition' organized as a "general proposal under three headings: (1) socialize the ownership of monopolies; (2) de-financialize the management of the economy; (3) de-globalize international relation" (p.136).
Amin remains critical of 'movements of individuals' as represented by Negri's Multitude. "The notion of the 'people' as being the only ones that count – the thesis of the 'movement,' which is that they are capable of transforming the world without worrying about taking over power – is simply naïve" (p.116).
I don't completely agree, as any transition will have to begin at the current level of atomization in society. Amin does add, however: "'Movement' ideology takes no notice of these challenges. But before it can return to the offensive, the left has the inescapable task of rebuilding central leaderships able to formulate its strategic objectives in coherent programmatic form" (p.32).
Always this revolutionary dynamic between the 'generalized proletariat' and the vanguard.
April 3, 2015
Compelling analysis marred somewhat by sloppy writing.
March 17, 2025
quick read outlining Amin's theories of the dominant paradigm of imperial + financial capitalism characterised by monopoly rents, oligopolistic capture of the state apparatus and depoliticisation of the masses. his descriptions of a 'media clergy' and the generalisation of political buffoons all aged well, though I regret that the material speaking to the processes themselves are done in logical and abstract ways - 'imagine department I making 20% surplus over 5 years and department 2 generating 10% over 15 years' - rather than empirical, there's no World Bank statistics or evidence behind the historical argument.
his analysis of the way forward is a nationally sovereign developmentalism which will over time create openings both for the left and the right and of these two we should choose the good one but in a sensible way. This would amount to a return to the tricontinental / Bandung / decolonisation moment of the 70s, driven by an authoritarian but progressive and pragmatic nationalism based on building up your own sustainable internal markets. This is of course distinct from World Bank-approved version of modernisation: if you have a significant increase in underemployment or slum dwellings this is lumpen-development as it ties you further into the imperialist nexus and reduces your scope of action. An account of the failures of Iran, Egypt and Turkey to pull this off follows, attributed both to the machinations of the United States but also roaders, cowards in the leadership.
China is the only project that's been successful here, but I found the chapter on it a bit muddy, and shaped to a large extent by debates with antagonists which I presume are Trots and Atlanticists but am not completely sure. In sum his line is: 'Whether or not this country is socialist or capitalist is beside the point, look at how much they've done'. His recommendations are: keep up the good work, don't let the right take over.
I was a bit surprised by how much conceptual space is granted to the nation given he argues that its been superseded by an increasingly narrow but far more enriched capitalist class. His diagnosis of the sooner-or-later collapse of the Eurozone - which seemed more proximate at time of publication than it does now - is based not on financialisation or central bank instruments eating away at social welfare regimes or increasingly managed democracies but as much about the incompatibility of distinct national cultures. Also not much on creative and productive forms of crisis management. Overall a manual for rearguard action once you're in control of the state.
his analysis of the way forward is a nationally sovereign developmentalism which will over time create openings both for the left and the right and of these two we should choose the good one but in a sensible way. This would amount to a return to the tricontinental / Bandung / decolonisation moment of the 70s, driven by an authoritarian but progressive and pragmatic nationalism based on building up your own sustainable internal markets. This is of course distinct from World Bank-approved version of modernisation: if you have a significant increase in underemployment or slum dwellings this is lumpen-development as it ties you further into the imperialist nexus and reduces your scope of action. An account of the failures of Iran, Egypt and Turkey to pull this off follows, attributed both to the machinations of the United States but also roaders, cowards in the leadership.
China is the only project that's been successful here, but I found the chapter on it a bit muddy, and shaped to a large extent by debates with antagonists which I presume are Trots and Atlanticists but am not completely sure. In sum his line is: 'Whether or not this country is socialist or capitalist is beside the point, look at how much they've done'. His recommendations are: keep up the good work, don't let the right take over.
I was a bit surprised by how much conceptual space is granted to the nation given he argues that its been superseded by an increasingly narrow but far more enriched capitalist class. His diagnosis of the sooner-or-later collapse of the Eurozone - which seemed more proximate at time of publication than it does now - is based not on financialisation or central bank instruments eating away at social welfare regimes or increasingly managed democracies but as much about the incompatibility of distinct national cultures. Also not much on creative and productive forms of crisis management. Overall a manual for rearguard action once you're in control of the state.
Read
July 6, 2019This book has me stomping around and throwing a tantrum. I don't get why we still have stagist and orthodox "inevitabilities" in the 21st century. This isn't because he's a bad economist, because he isn't. Bad economists can't explain finance capital. In any case, anti-imperialism can't just be about surplus ("not surplus value") and your anti-idpol has to be more than waving a wand claiming material analysis while supporting lopsided historiography and if it is, then I'm not in the right classroom(baby econ?) or the right sect (I'm not being nasty, but I won't be won over by the Third Internationale). Maybe I'm spoiled because I've been reading The New Left Review, but he really just makes me want to throw a brick
November 20, 2024
This book is brief, and it will enable anybody to understand the contemporary moment, from China, to Europe, to realistic ways forward, in so many enlightening ways. It is highly readable and I recommend even for introductory readers. It keeps a realistic, practicable understanding of transformation without necessarily conceding on the indispensable.
For example, it enables us to understand class structures in the North and South, or to go beyond the ossified understanding of class as merely “owners of the means of production” (ie, how is it that the majority of the wealthy (corporate executives) are waged workers, despite them earning millions?).
It’s reading of China is phenomenal.
Truly, this is so worth it. Read Samir Amin!
For example, it enables us to understand class structures in the North and South, or to go beyond the ossified understanding of class as merely “owners of the means of production” (ie, how is it that the majority of the wealthy (corporate executives) are waged workers, despite them earning millions?).
It’s reading of China is phenomenal.
Truly, this is so worth it. Read Samir Amin!
October 27, 2024
Nice little book - the writing itself is not very good and he feels no need whatsoever to back up the claims he makes, but writing at 82 with an incomprehensible pedigree and catalog merits that I guess. Nonetheless I think his conception of generalized monopoly capitalism can be a propaedeutic to theories of globalization that emphasize the return to free-market dominance in an abstract and competitive marxist model (talking to you dr. harvey) without grappling with challenges posed by enormous concentration/centralization and the very real and important political structures that emerge as a result. Need to go read Baran/Sweezy and Amin's earlier and more rigorous work now
August 31, 2018
A useful and challenging book on the economics, politics and sociology of modern 'generalised monopoly capitalism'.
October 5, 2014
An impressive global analysis of contemporary capitalism - in particular, I appreciated his chapter on China although it omits social inequality and ecological impact from its analysis of China's emergence. It also feels like Amin is addressing those already converted to a Marxist viewpoint - and perhaps that is his intention, otherwise he might have devoted more time to making a case for the unconvinced that globalized "neoliberal" capitalism is simply imperialism.
Read
January 10, 2015Excellent analysis of the current state of capitalism and the globalised financial monopolies that control it, and by extension, the lives of virtually everyone on this planet. Puts forward arguments and ideas to counteract this monopoly and power structure, that has effectively reduced democracy to a complete and utter farce.
Read
August 15, 2018https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-e...
A review of author's life from an Indian (from India) newspaper. I found this book quite stimulating.
A review of author's life from an Indian (from India) newspaper. I found this book quite stimulating.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews