Marxist pronouncements of modern "imperialism" and "colonialism" are really hard to swallow, yet at least a *substantial* minority of people who aren't Marxists either tacitly accept it or accept it outright. Why? Am I wrong and are the Marxists right?
'Against Empire' by Micheal Parenti is kind of an overview about modern forms of first world exploitation of the third which ties into 'neo-imperialism/colonialization'. It's clearly a polemic, not a disinterested academic overview (it was written for laymen and not academic journals), but it's still well-researched. The author doesn't get muddled down in abstract theorizing but focuses on the concrete examples of how first world states & multinationals work in tandem to exert power and control over weaker & poorer nations for their own gain.
You could knock the whole book out in a couple days and I think it'll shed some light on what you're asking about. I'm sure it's available online in pdf form if you just google it.
>>3273548
Does it get really conspiratorial, like Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine"? Ever since reading David Harvey's "A Brief History of Neoliberalism" I've been reluctant to read something if the author commits the taboo of reaching too far from a set of premises or being hyperbolic for the sake of book theatre. I'm not trying to be dismissive, just wondering if anything at all strikes you as sketchy before I look into it. Thank you in advance for the recommandation.
>>3273582
It's been a while since i read it, but I don't recall any pronounced paranoid strain of thought in the book.