The Crisis of the Neoliberal Global Order from the Perspective of the Critique of Political Economy

Lenin, based on the categorical determinations of Marx’s critique of political economy, grasped the economic essence of imperialism as monopoly, which is built on free competition and grows out of it. Free competition, as the highest, most developed, and final form of private ownership, eliminates small monopolies based on natural ties and, on the premise that comprehensive social relations among people operate more freely and universally, establishes a fundamental monopoly over the conditions of material production. Consequently, free competition necessarily turns into the substantive antithesis of monopoly, or rather, the coexistence of free competition and monopoly constitutes the deepest and most fundamental contradiction of capitalist private ownership of the means of production. In the 21st century, Russian scholars have continued the critical trajectory of Lenin’s theory of imperialism. By analyzing the deep structural contradictions of imperialism in the 21st century and the conditions for their transformation into their opposite—based on the striking restoration of the competitive compulsion, as a special law of capitalist economic motion, into monopoly—they reveal, from the perspective of the critique of political economy, the monopolistic nature and crisis tendencies of the neoliberal global order.

列宁基于马克思政治经济学批判的范畴规定，将帝国主义的经济实质把握为垄断，由于垄断建立在自由竞争的基础上，而且从自由竞争中生长起来。自由竞争作为私有制最高的、最发达的以及最后的存在形式，消灭了建立在自然联系基础上的小的垄断，并以人与人之间全面的社会联系更自由、更普遍地发挥作用为前提，建立起了对于物质生产条件的根本性垄断。因而，自由竞争必然转向垄断的实质性对立，或者说自由竞争与垄断并存构成了资本主义生产资料私人占有制最深刻、最根本的矛盾。21世纪俄罗斯学者延续了列宁帝国主义理论的批判路径，基于作为资本主义经济运动特殊规律的竞争强制向着垄断的惊人恢复，分析帝国主义在21世纪的深层结构性矛盾及其向对立面的转化条件，在政治经济学批判视域中揭示新自由主义全球秩序的垄断性质与危机趋势。

Competitive Compulsion and Monopoly: The Mode of Realization of Capital’s Inherent Tendency

竞争强制与垄断：资本内在趋势的实现方式

Clarifying the basic laws of capitalist competition and the tendency of the average rate of profit to fall is a necessary prerequisite for Marx’s overall examination of the process of capital’s movement and his revelation of the reified essence and mystification of the reproduction of capitalist relations of production. In Marx’s view, the basic laws of capitalist competition and their mode of operation need to be elucidated within specific conditions of material production and the corresponding relations of intercourse. Capitalist production, based on exchange value, realizes individual private interests and material means precisely through free competition, which becomes an independent force for each individual. “Only with the development of free competition do the inner laws of capital—which in the preparatory historical stages of capital’s development appear merely as tendencies—become established as laws.” [1]1 Karl Marx, *Grundrisse der Kritik der politischen Ökonomie* (Berlin: Dietz Verlag, 1953), p. 544. (Chinese translation: *Zhengzhi jingxue pipan daolun*, in *Makesi Engesi quanji*, vol. 46, part 1, p. 397.)

阐明资本主义竞争的基本规律与平均利润率下降趋势，是马克思从整体上考察资本运动过程、揭示资本主义生产关系再生产的物化本质及其神秘性的必要前提。在马克思看来，资本主义竞争的基本规律及其作用方式需要在特定物质生产条件以及与之相适应的交往关系中得到阐明，建立在交换价值基础上的资本主义生产，正是通过自由竞争成为各个人实现私人利益的独立力量和物质手段，“只有随着自由竞争的发展，资本的内在规律——这些规律在资本发展的历史准备阶段上仅仅表现为一些倾向——才确立为规律”。

To overcome the categorical confusion of classical economics, which limits itself to the external relations of competition regulating supply and demand and market price fluctuations, Marx, through the dialectical movement of “capital in general” and “many capitals,” reveals the inner laws of capitalist production hidden behind the appearance of competition and their mode of realization. “Capital in general,” as the inner nature or abstract form of capital, implicitly contains the necessary tendency to split into many capitals; the actual movement or real process of the interaction of “many capitals” presupposes a certain degree of development of competition and the actual existence of prices of production as its real premise. The inherent tendency of capital to expand itself becomes, through competitive compulsion, an external necessity for individual capitals. Individual capital exists only as a part of total social capital and, according to its proportion in that total, shares equally in the total surplus value extracted by total social capital. However, the specific proportion of distribution is entirely determined by the contingency of competitive compulsion; the universal notion based on the equalization of profit appears as the most direct and most taken-for-granted motive of action for the individual capitalist.

为了克服古典经济学局限于竞争调节供求关系与市场价格变动的外部联系所造成的范畴混乱，马克思通过“资本一般”与“许多资本”的辩证运动，揭示隐藏在竞争假象背后的资本主义生产内在规律及其实现方式。“资本一般”作为资本的内在本性或抽象形式，潜在地包含着分化为许多资本的必然趋势；“许多资本”相互作用的现实运动或实际过程，是以一定程度的竞争发展与生产价格的实际存在为现实前提的，资本扩大自身的内在趋势通过竞争强制成为单个资本的外在必然性。个别资本只是作为社会总资本的一部分，并且按照自己在其中所占的比例平均分配社会总资本榨取的总剩余价值。然而一定的分割比例则完全取决于竞争强制的偶然性，以利润平均化为基础的普遍观念，表现为个别资本家最直接、最理所当然的行为动机。

In the equalizing tendency of the law of the average rate of profit, many individual capitals mutually repel and attract each other. “The essence of capital—this must be explained in more detail when examining competition—is self-repulsion, that is, many capitals that are completely indifferent to one another.” [2]2 Karl Marx, *Theories of Surplus Value*, part 2 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1968), p. 528. (Chinese translation: *Shengyu jiazhi lilun*, in *Makesi Engesi quanji*, vol. 26, part 2, p. 575.) The interaction of many capitals, along with the relations of production and intercourse determined by capital, necessarily leads to the bankruptcy of small capitals, the accumulation and concentration of large capitals, and a polarizing tendency toward the opposite of free competition, i.e., monopoly. Lenin’s theory of imperialism concretizes the law of competition among many capitals within the world political-economic system of the early 20th century, analyzing the complex international relations and multiple contradictions of competitive state capitals dividing up the world market.

在一般利润率规律的平均化趋势中，许多单个资本相互排斥与吸引，“资本的本质——这要在考察竞争时更详细地加以说明——就是自相排斥，也就是许多彼此完全漠不关心的资本”。许多资本以及由资本决定的生产关系和交往关系相互作用，必然形成小资本破产、大资本积聚与集中，以及向着自由竞争的对立面即垄断发展的两极分化趋势。列宁的帝国主义理论则将许多资本相互作用的竞争规律具体化在20世纪初世界政治经济体系之中，分析竞争性国家资本瓜分世界市场的复杂国际关系及其多重矛盾。

Classical economics, without examining the premise of capitalist private ownership or the monopoly of private property, extols free competition as the fundamental driving force for realizing private interests and wealth growth, uncritically treating the freedom of competition as the absolute premise of other economic laws. Neoliberalism is not merely a theoretical continuation of classical economics; it also constitutes the theoretical foundation and strategic proposition of the institutional framework of globalization that transitioned from Fordism-Keynesianism in the 1970s to post-Fordism-post-Keynesianism. Contemporary Russian left-wing scholars such as Buzgalin and Kolganov argue that restoring the critical logic of Lenin’s theory of imperialism regarding the transformation of free competition into its opposite is of fundamental methodological importance for grasping the monopolistic nature of 21st-century imperialism and its transformative tendencies.

古典经济学在不考察资本主义私有制或私有财产垄断的前提下，将自由竞争奉为实现私人利益与财富增长的根本动力，无批判地将竞争的自由作为其他经济规律的绝对前提。新自由主义不仅仅是古典经济学的理论赓续，而且构成了20世纪70年代福特制—凯恩斯主义转向后福特制—后凯恩斯主义全球化制度框架的理论基础与策略主张。布兹加林、科尔加诺夫等当代俄罗斯左翼学者认为，恢复列宁帝国主义理论关于自由竞争向自身对立面转化的批判逻辑，对于把握21世纪新帝国主义的垄断性质及其转化趋势具有根本重要的方法论意义。

Buzgalin argues that with the comprehensive development of the internationalization of capital, the peoples of various countries are drawn into the world market. In the actual process of free competition, international trade and the international division of labor increasingly become subordinate to the mode of realization of capital’s inherent tendencies. Within the liberal economic principles of comparative advantage and optimal resource allocation, the exploitative essence of globalization as the reproduction of capitalist relations of production is obscured. “The international movement of capital has shifted from the sphere of circulation in the past to the sphere of production, achieving the internationalization of the entire process of social reproduction. That is, from a past where the process of capital production occurred domestically and the process of circulation occurred abroad (purchase of raw materials and sale of products abroad, processing and production at home), it has developed into a situation where capital carries out the process of production and circulation, the process of valorization and realization, and the circuit and turnover of capital in its various functional forms across the entire world.” [3]3 A. V. Buzgalin and A. I. Kolganov, *Global’nyi kapital* (Moscow: URSS, 2004), p. 112. (Chinese translation: *Quanqiu ziben*, p. 112.)

布兹加林认为，随着资本国际化的全面发展，各国人民被卷入世界市场，国际贸易与国际分工在自由竞争的实际过程中日益从属于资本内在趋势的实现方式，在比较优势与资源优化配置的自由主义经济学原理中，全球化作为资本主义生产关系再生产的剥削本质被遮蔽了。当“资本的国际运动由过去的流通领域也进入生产领域，实现了整个社会再生产过程的国际化，即由过去的资本生产过程在国内和流通过程在国外（原料购买和产品销售在国外，生产加工在国内），发展为资本在整个世界范围内进行生产过程和流通过程、价值的增殖过程和实现过程以及各种职能形式资本的循环和周转过程”。

Economic globalization, dominated by the reproduction of capitalist relations of production, increasingly manifests itself as competitive freedom. In essence, the world market is not, as neoliberalism proclaims, a completely open, free, and equal sphere. Free competition, premised on and having the world market as its real foundation, must be grasped as a means for the capitalist mode of production to impose itself, embodying the contradiction between capitalist private ownership of the means of production and socialized production. The uneven development and structural conflicts of the neoliberal global order manifest as follows: on the one hand, capitalist monopoly alliances compete for transnational monopoly profits through technological monopoly, financial monopoly, rule monopoly, and military monopoly, leading to stagnation in social progress in most countries; on the other hand, the development of globalization and socialization trends gives rise to anti-systemic forces that grow in tandem with the global monopoly order.

由资本主义生产关系再生产所主导的经济全球化日益表现为竞争性的自由。就本质而言，世界市场并非如新自由主义所宣扬的是一个完全开放、自由和平等的领域，以世界市场为前提和现实基础的自由竞争，必须被把握为资本主义生产方式贯彻自身的手段，资本主义生产资料私人占有制与社会化生产之间的矛盾。新自由主义全球秩序的不平衡发展与结构性冲突表现为，一方面，资本主义垄断同盟通过技术垄断、金融垄断、规则垄断、军事垄断争夺跨国垄断利润，大多数国家的社会进步出现停滞；另一方面，全球化与社会化趋势的发展，造就着与全球垄断秩序同步增长的反体系力量。

The Monopolistic Nature of the Neoliberal Global Order and Its Transformative Tendencies

新自由主义全球秩序的垄断性质及其转化趋势

After the end of the 2008 global financial crisis, the world economy fell into recession. With the slowdown of globalization, contradictions within the capitalist world system intensified, protectionism rose, and the economic security of some countries and regions was undermined. Contemporary Russian left-wing scholars grasp the trend of deglobalization emerging in the 21st century as a result of the deep expansion of imperialist contradictions on a global scale. They argue that deglobalization is not an accidental state of the world economy’s shift but a process consistent with the cyclical nature of globalization, that is, the systemic cyclical changes in technological order and capital accumulation described by Giovanni Arrighi. [4]4 Giovanni Arrighi, *The Long Twentieth Century: Money, Power, and the Origins of Our Times* (London: Verso, 1994). Arrighi analyzes long cycles of capitalist accumulation, each associated with a hegemonic power and a specific technological-financial regime.

2008年全球金融危机结束后，世界经济陷入衰退。随着全球化进程的放缓，资本主义世界体系内部矛盾加剧、保护主义抬头，一些国家和地区的经济安全遭到破坏。当代俄罗斯左翼学者将21世纪所展现出来的逆全球化趋势，把握为帝国主义矛盾在全球范围内深度扩张的结果，认为去全球化并非世界经济转向的偶然状态，而是一个合乎全球化周期性的过程，即乔瓦尼·阿锐基所描述的技术秩序和资本积累的系统周期变化。

The further development of financial monopoly capitalism in the stage of neoliberal globalization has led to a regression in socio-economic and political-ideological conditions, revealing the monopolistic nature of the global order and its transformative tendencies. On the one hand, the global production system is subject to the power of financial monopoly capital, intensifying political-economic conflicts and historical regressive tendencies within the world system. On the other hand, the continuous increase in the degree of socialization of production develops the transitional tendency from the “realm of necessity” to the “realm of freedom” [5]5 The “realm of necessity” and “realm of freedom” are categories from Marx’s *Capital*, volume 3, where the former refers to the sphere of material production governed by natural necessity and the latter to the sphere of human self-development beyond it, achievable only under communism. and the latent elements of socialism.

金融垄断资本主义在新自由主义全球化阶段的进一步发展导致了社会经济与政治意识形态的倒退，全球秩序的垄断性质与转化趋势呈现出来。一方面，全球化生产体系受制于金融垄断资本权力，世界体系内部政治—经济冲突与历史倒退趋势加剧。另一方面，生产社会化程度不断提高，“必然王国”向“自由王国”的过渡趋势与社会主义的潜存要素发展起来。

Buzgalin divides the developmental tendencies of monopoly capitalism since the 20th century into the imperialist stage of the early 20th century, the stage of social reformism after the Second World War, and the stage of neoliberal globalization after the 1970s. Each stage, as a mode of realization of capital’s inherent tendency, possesses the universal form of the reproduction of capitalist relations of production while simultaneously, in a negative manner, moving toward its own opposite. In the dialectical movement of the negation of the negation, neoliberal globalization is reverting to the earlier imperialist stage, and the global production system is increasingly subordinated to the narrow rule of financial monopoly capital.

布兹加林将20世纪以来垄断资本主义的发展趋势划分为20世纪初的帝国主义阶段、第二次世界大战后的社会改良主义阶段、70年代之后的新自由主义全球化阶段。每一阶段作为资本内在趋势的实现方式，具有资本主义生产关系再生产的普遍形式，同时以否定的方式走向了自身对立面。在否定之否定的辩证运动中，新自由主义全球化正向着之前的帝国主义阶段恢复，全球化生产体系日益从属于狭隘的金融垄断资本统治。

Following the above judgment, Buzgalin concretely analyzes the forms of manifestation and transformation trends of contemporary monopoly capitalism. First, the manipulation of public life by large corporations has gained further development, expanding from production, distribution, exchange, and consumption to fields such as interpersonal relations, culture, education, and science. This allows the market principle to penetrate deeply into the socioeconomic and everyday spheres; market liberalization is both extensive and totalitarian, with market participants completely manipulated by large corporations and increasingly losing economic freedom. At the same time, the atomization of market participants combines with a new form of competition, in which monopoly corporations suppress foreign competitors through sanctions and open hostile actions. Second, the production and sale of simulacra-commodities [6]6 "Simulacra-commodities" (拟仿商品) refers to goods whose value derives primarily from symbolic or simulated qualities rather than material use-value, a concept drawn from critical theory (e.g., Baudrillard) and used here to describe a feature of late capitalism. continuously expand and increasingly become a source of super-monopoly profit. Third, an enterprise ecosystem aimed at manipulating market participants (consumers, etc.) has formed; financialization in the 21st century manifests as the development of the speculative sphere, giving rise to a financial ecosystem that dominates the real sector, with virtual financial capital towering over the economy and society. Fourth, the trend of desocialization intensifies; the social foundation of the capitalist market economy is continuously undermined, and even the capitalist relations of production—i.e., the relationship between wage labor and capital—are being destroyed. Fifth, geopolitical-economic contradictions are constantly escalating.

依循上述判断，布兹加林具体分析了当代垄断资本主义的表现形式及其转变趋势。第一，大型公司企业操纵公共生活的形式获得了进一步发展，从生产、分配、交流和消费拓展至人际关系、文化、教育、科学等领域。这使得市场化原则在社会经济和日常生活领域深度扩张，市场的自由化既广泛又极权，市场参与者完全被大型公司企业操纵，越来越失去经济自由。与此同时，市场参与者的原子化与一种新的竞争形式结合起来，即垄断公司企业通过制裁、采取公开敌对行动来打压外国的竞争对手。第二，拟仿商品的生产和销售不断扩大，并且越来越成为超额垄断利润的来源。第三，形成了以操纵市场参与者（消费者等）为目的的企业生态系统，21世纪的金融化表现为投机领域的发展，形成了主导实体部门的金融生态系统，虚拟金融资本凌驾于经济和社会之上。第四，去社会化趋势加剧，资本主义市场经济的社会基础不断被瓦解，甚至资本主义生产关系即雇佣劳动与资本的关系也遭到了破坏。第五，地缘政治—经济矛盾不断升级。

The contemporary Russian Marxist path of capitalist critique, to a certain extent, inherits the intellectual legacy of Soviet political economy, treating the decay and socialization of monopoly capitalism as two parallel and mutually offsetting internal trends. Buzgalin emphasizes that greater attention must be paid to another trend accompanying the monopolistic nature of the global order: the progress of socialization since the 20th century has promoted the development of socialist elements within capitalism, undermining the formal subsumption of labor under capital. Trade unions representing workers' interests have gained a certain power to limit capital through class struggle; public sectors dominated by state capital have assumed certain socioeconomic management functions, forming redistribution mechanisms favorable to wage labor as well as social services such as free education and healthcare. The development of productive forces, especially the progress of creative labor, has led to changes in the content of labor and forms of employment. On the one hand, it strengthens the subsumption of labor under capital (the precarious stratum). On the other hand, for creative workers who are breaking free from their attachment to machinery, it partially eliminates the real subsumption of labor under capital, while a new form of exploitation emerges—rent-seeking not only from workers but from the entire cultural and intellectual creation of humanity.

当代俄罗斯马克思主义的资本主义批判路径在一定程度上接续了苏联政治经济学的思想遗产，将垄断资本主义的腐朽性与社会化作为并行发展、此消彼长的两种内在趋势。布兹加林强调，必须更加关注与全球秩序垄断性质相伴而生的另一种趋势，即20世纪以来的社会化进步推动了资本主义内部的社会主义因素发展，破坏了劳动对于资本的形式从属。代表工人利益的工会组织在阶级斗争中获得了一定限制资本的权力，国有资本主导的公共部门承担起了某些社会经济管理职能，形成了有利于雇佣劳动的再分配机制以及免费教育、医疗保健等社会服务。生产力的发展，尤其是创造性劳动的进步，导致劳动内容和就业形式等方面的变化。一方面，加强了劳动对资本的从属（不稳定阶层）。另一方面，对于正在摆脱机器附属性的创造性工人来说，部分地消除劳动对资本的实际从属，同时出现了一种新的剥削形式，即不仅是对工人而且是对整个人类文化与智力创造的寻租。

The progress of socialization on a global scale unfolded within the political-economic framework inaugurated by the Soviet socialist revolution and the world socialist movement in the early 20th century. Under pressure from the socialist left-wing movement, developed capitalist countries carried out socialist-oriented social reforms; socialization became the only possible and effective means of strengthening and developing monopoly capital, giving rise to new forms of monopoly capital. The development of socialization also profoundly undermined the exploitative basis for the reproduction of capitalist relations of production. However, after entering the 1970s, the limited regulatory model of advancing monopoly capitalism through the progress of socialization increasingly approached its own limits. The socialist elements developed from within capitalism increasingly became fetters on monopoly capital's extraction of super-profits. The negative way out of the above contradictions within the limits of the capitalist social system was a restoration of monopoly.

全球范围内的社会化进步是在20世纪初苏联社会主义革命与世界社会主义运动所开创的政治经济格局中展开的，发达资本主义国家在社会主义左翼运动的压力下以社会主义为导向进行社会改革，社会化成为加强和发展垄断资本唯一可能和有效的手段，形成了新的垄断资本形式，社会化的发展同样深刻地破坏了资本主义生产关系再生产的剥削基础。然而，进入20世纪70年代后，以社会化进步推进垄断资本主义发展的有限调节模式不断接近自身的极限，从资本主义内部所发展起来的社会主义要素越来越成为垄断资本攫取超额利润的桎梏，在资本主义社会制度的界限内克服上述矛盾的消极出路便是向着垄断的恢复。

In Buzgalin's view, for the increasingly deadlocked neoliberal global order, either a qualitative change in social relations is sought in the socialist direction, or pre-capitalist elements are used to supplement free capitalism. The major powers have adopted a program of restoring monopoly, desocialization, and militarization, even strengthening the role of military-political means in solving economic and social problems. A new imperialism has formed in the geopolitical-economic sphere, in which countries and regions in a (semi-)peripheral position and formally independent are economically and politically subordinated to the core countries as an alliance of monopoly capital. 21st-century capitalism, by resorting to non-economic means—i.e., through protectionism—regresses geopolitically toward pre-capitalist conquest of territory. The new imperialism not only breaks with free trade but also breaks with the socializing trend of jointly solving the global problems facing humanity. Using geopolitics as a means to expand or maintain the dominance of core countries comes at the expense of ideology, culture, and education; one of its consequences is that the social sciences increasingly emphasize geopolitical issues while deviating from socioeconomic analysis and social class analysis.

在布兹加林看来，对于新自由主义全球秩序日益陷入的僵局而言，要么在社会主义方向上寻求社会关系的质变，要么以前资本主义要素对自由资本主义进行补充，而主要大国采取了恢复垄断、去社会化、军事化方案，甚至加强军事政治手段在解决经济和社会问题中的作用。在地缘政治经济领域形成了新的帝国主义，即处于（半）边缘地位并在形式上独立的国家和地区在经济和政治上从属于作为垄断资本同盟的中心国家。21世纪资本主义借助于非经济手段，即通过保护主义向着前资本主义以征服领土为目的的地缘政治倒退，新帝国主义不但脱离自由贸易，而且脱离了共同解决人类面临全球性问题的社会化趋势。以地缘政治为手段扩大或保持中心国家的统治地位，是以牺牲意识形态、文化和教育为代价的，其后果之一表现为社会科学越来越强调地缘政治问题，而偏离了社会经济分析和社会阶级分析。

The restoration of monopoly in 21st-century capitalism is fundamentally directly related to changes in the global production system. On the one hand, the hegemony of financial monopoly capital dominates the neoliberal global order; on the other hand, the financialization of core countries provides space for the development of the real economy in (semi-)peripheral countries and regions, which gradually rise to the level of competing with core countries for capital on a global scale. Consequently, the latter turn to protectionist policies, defending their dominant position through economic, political (sanctions, etc.), and military means, leading to intensified contradictions among the main participants in the world economy (states, transnational corporations, NATO, the International Monetary Fund, etc.) and a shift toward non-economic struggle. In Buzgalin's view, within the framework of financial monopoly capitalism, it is impossible to resolve the series of extreme problems exposed by the 21st-century global financial crisis, the intensification of global problems, and geopolitical and economic competition.

21世纪资本主义向着垄断的恢复，在根本上与全球生产体系的变化直接相关。一方面，金融垄断资本霸权支配着新自由主义全球秩序；另一方面，中心国家的金融化为（半）边缘国家和地区的实体经济发展提供了空间，并逐渐上升到与中心国家在全球范围内展开资本竞争的水平。因此，后者转向了保护主义政策，通过经济、政治（制裁等）和军事手段捍卫其主导地位，导致世界经济的主要参与者（国家、跨国公司、北约、国际货币基金组织等）之间的矛盾加剧，并转向了非经济斗争。在布兹加林看来，在金融垄断资本主义的框架内，不可能解决21世纪全球金融危机、全球性问题加剧以及在地缘政治和经济竞争中所暴露的一系列极端问题。

The contemporary Russian left-wing scholars' analysis of the forms of manifestation and inner essence of the new imperialism of the 21st-century global order, to a certain extent, takes the restoration of Lenin's theory of imperialism and Marx's critique of political economy as its theoretical basis. Following the laws of capitalist competition and monopoly, it establishes a dual critical path of concept and reality: on the one hand, it removes the ideological veil of neoliberal ideology over the logic of capital in economic globalization; on the other hand, it reveals the structural conflicts caused by the global expansion of the fundamental contradictions of capitalism, along with their inevitable trends and conditions for transformation. At the same time, starting from the internal and external contradictions of Russia as a (semi-)peripheral capitalist social formation within the modern world system, it uses geopolitical logic and the logic of capital to analyze the deep causes of and possible ways out of the crisis of the neoliberal global order, providing a unique theoretical perspective for understanding and grasping the future direction of the changes unseen in a century in the world.

当代俄罗斯左翼学者对于21世纪全球秩序新帝国主义表现形式与内在本质的分析，在一定程度上以恢复列宁的帝国主义理论以及马克思政治经济学批判为理论根据，依循资本主义竞争与垄断规律建立观念与现实的双重批判路径，一方面去除新自由主义意识形态对于经济全球化资本逻辑的遮蔽，另一方面揭示资本主义基本矛盾的全球性扩张所造成的结构性冲突及其必然趋势、转化条件。与此同时，从俄罗斯作为（半）边缘资本主义社会形态在现代世界体系中的内外部矛盾出发，运用地缘政治逻辑与资本逻辑分析新自由主义全球秩序危机的深层原因与可能性出路，为理解和把握世界百年未有之大变局的未来走向提供了独特的理论视域。

Web editor: Paul

网络编辑：保罗