Why Isn't China Imperialist (Yet)?

• In Event: 41020 - Section on Political Economy of the World-System Roundtables
  In Refereed Roundtable (60 minute): Table 2: Hegemony and its Decline

Abstract

Sociologists have predicted that China should become an imperialist power for almost two decades (Arrighi 2005; Hung 2022). This prediction is based on the presence of classical-theoretical drivers of imperialist expansion in China: domestic underconsumption (Luxemburg 2004) and industrial overcapacity (Lenin 1975). Considering this prediction, it is puzzling that China has not yet emerged as an imperialist power. Why is China not (yet) imperialist despite presence of the classical drivers of imperialism? I argue that China's unique developmental path has dictated that domestic underconsumption and industrial overcapacity are not decisive blocks to capital accumulation. Instead, the decisive factor is anything that harms China's global price advantage on world commodity markets. Because China's global price advantage is largely predicated on low industrial wages, the biggest such threat comes from successful working-class mobilization for higher wages and benefits. Therefore, China is unlikely to initiate an imperialist project until its working class achieves material gains through a self-conscious labor movement independent of the state. What explains the lack of imperialist expansion so far is China's highly effective domestic repression apparatus which has kept working-class mobilization from making significant material gains. Under the conditions of China's unique developmental path, its strong domestic repressive apparatus explains its lack of imperialism. My analysis implies that, paradoxically, to the extent China's working class makes gains in China, the working classes of other territories may find them suffering under China's imperialism.

Author

• William Welsh, University of California-Berkeley