Semi-colony

Template:Short description Template:More citations needed Template:Imperialism Studies sidebar Template:Marxian critique of political economy sidebar In Marxist theory, a semi-colony is a country which is officially recognized as a politically independent state and as a sovereign nation, but which is in reality dependent on and/or dominated by another (imperialist) country (or, in some cases, several imperialist countries or corporations).<ref>Ronaldo Munck, "Dependency and imperialism in Latin America: new horizons", in: Ronald H. Chilcote (ed.), The Political Economy of Imperialism. London: Bloomsbury, 2000. "Belgian financial domination of the Congo, because of the close connections of Belgian banking institutions with such international houses as Rothschild, Lazard Frères, and Schroder in their turn linked with the Morgan and Rockefeller groups, was shared with British, French and American finance." Kwame Nkrumah, Neo-colonialism: the last stage of imperialism. London: Thomas Nelson Sons, 1965, p. 40.[1]</ref>

Forms of dependence and domination

The dependence or domination of a semi-colony could take different forms:

• economic - foreign control over the supply of capital, technology and/or essential imported goods; and foreign control over strategic assets, industrial sectors and/or foreign trade.
• political - legal agreements and contracts defining government policy, or the direct intervention by the imperialist country in the political affairs of the semi-colony, to secure client-regimes.
• military - the presence or control exercised by foreign troops, or foreign surveillance.
• cultural/ideological - the imposition of a foreign culture or foreign religion on the local population through the media, education and foreign consumer products.
• technological - the dependence on foreign technology, or the technological domination by a foreign country.
• demographic - the immigration into the semi-colony of large numbers of settlers from other countries, which dominate the indigenous population of the semi-colony; the expulsion or killing of indigenous people; and/or the imposition of controls over inward and outward migration.

Semi-colony and neo-colony

The term "semi-colony" is often used interchangeably with neo-colony. The term "neo-colony" usually refers to a country which originally was a colony but later became a formally sovereign country, although de facto it remained dominated by another country. In this case, there exists a "new" type of (informal) colonialism replacing the old colonialism, despite formal independence.<ref>Jack Woddis, An introduction to neo-colonialism. London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1967.</ref> A colony in this sense could have "semi-colonial" status after it formerly obtained sovereign political independence while it remained in many important respects dependent on other countries. Many semi-colonies in Africa, Asia and Latin America are, according to some analysts, still dominated by the imperialist countries which once colonised them, or by other imperialist powers.<ref>For example, Ronaldo Munck, "Dependency and imperialism in Latin America: new horizons", in: Ronald H. Chilcote (ed.), The Political Economy of Imperialism. London: Bloomsbury, 2000; Bruce Berman, Control & Crisis in Colonial Kenya: The Dialectic of Domination. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 1990.</ref> The suggestion is often that there is the "formality" of sovereignty, but not real sovereignty. A semi-colony could be a "partly colonized country" or a "partly decolonized" country.

According to Michael Barratt Brown,

Gradations of colonization

The term "semi-colony" is also used for countries which, although they officially never became full-scale colonies, or were not colonized on a very large scale, were nevertheless dominated by and/or dependent on other (imperialist) countries.<ref>Taoyu Yang, "Redefining Semi-Colonialism: A Historiographical Essay on British Colonial Presence in China". Journal of Colonialism and Colonial History, volume 20, issue 3, 2019; Bruce Berman, Control & Crisis in Colonial Kenya: The Dialectic of Domination. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 1990.</ref> In this case, there can exist national characteristics analogous to colonial dependence and domination alongside a prior tradition of national sovereignty or political independence (cf. Persia, China, Thailand, Afghanistan, Yemen, and Ethiopia in the 19th century and early 20th century<ref>John Scott, A Dictionary of Sociology, 4th edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014, p. 933.</ref>). Countries without colonial past could nevertheless be dominated by a superpower such as the United States, or were dominated by the Soviet Union (see American imperialism, Soviet empire and Russian imperialism). A semi-colonial status is sometimes ascribed to a country, simply because it lacked much capitalist industrial development in its economy, which made the country dependent on other (industrialized) countries for importing modern technology, modern consumer goods and knowledge.

Some semi-colonies were originally "settler colonies" attracting large numbers of foreign immigrants,<ref>David Bedggood, "New Zealand's Semi-Colonial Development: A Marxist View". Journal of Sociology, volume 14, issue 3, 1978.</ref> while in other semi-colonies, the indigenous population always remained the vast majority of the population (see also dominant minority).<ref>Donald Denoon, Settler Capitalism: The Dynamics of Dependent Development in the Southern Hemisphere. Oxford University Press, 1983; Sai Englert, Settler Colonialism: An Introduction. London: Pluto, 2022.</ref>

There have been many different types, histories and gradations of colonization, and consequently also many different types, histories and gradations of decolonization.<ref>Stanley L. Engerman & Kenneth L. Sokoloff, Colonialism, inequality, and long-run paths of development. Cambridge, MA : National Bureau of Economic Research, 2005.</ref> Colonization and decolonization processes in different places usually had both some common characteristics and some unique characteristics. Some analysts suggest that the general colonization and decolonization process can be periodized as a sequence of common "phases" or "stages". Others argue that there is not really any substantive evidence for a universal sequence of events; each country has its own developmental path, influenced by national peculiarities and its position in the world capitalist order.<ref>Michael Löwy, The politics of uneven and combined development. London: Verso, 1987.</ref>

In many cases, there is no consensus or broad agreement among historians and social scientists about how exactly the terms "colony", "neo-colony" or "semi-colony" should be applied to a given dependent country.<ref>For example, Prabhakar Singh, "Of International Law, Semi-colonial Thailand, and Imperial Ghosts". Asian Journal of International Law, Vol.9, No. 1, 2018, pp. 1-29.</ref> To some extent, the descriptions can remain controversial or contested.<ref> Ronald H. Chilcote, Imperialism: Theoretical Directions. Humanities Press, 2000; Ronald H. Chilcote (ed.), The Political Economy of Imperialism. London: Bloomsbury, 2000.</ref>

Client relationship

The relationship between the semi-colony and the country (or countries) dominating it is said to benefit:

• the position of semi-colonial elite or ruling class (which serves both its own interest and the interests of foreign investors and creditors).
• the imperialist country or its multinational corporations, which obtain profits and cheap resources from their investments in the semi-colony.
• employees in the "advanced" foreign-owned industrial sectors within the semi-colony, which often offer better wages and conditions to skilled industrial workers, as compared to labourers and farmers working on the land.

The semi-colonial predicament however mainly disadvantages the majority of the working population, insofar as balanced economic development is impossible - that is, only those industries and institutions are developed which mainly benefit foreign investors, or which mainly benefit/support the export trade (usually extractive mineral and foodstuff industries).<ref>*Ronald H. Chilcote, Dependency and Marxism: Toward a Resolution of the Debate.</ref>

Social structures, ethnic composition and political trajectories

The class structure of a "typical" or "classical" semi-colony features a large mass of peasants and unemployed, a relatively small urban working class and middle class, a class of landowners, and an urban comprador bourgeoisie. However, a variety of different class structures, ethnic compositions and complex political trajectories<ref>James Minahan, Encyclopedia of the stateless nations: ethnic and national groups around the world (4 vols.). Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 2002.</ref> are possible in semi-colonial countries. For example,

• During the 19th and early 20th centuries, the British colony of New Zealand (since 1907 a dominion of the British Empire) engaged in imperialist interventions and annexations in the Pacific.<ref>Nicholas Hoare, New Zealand's ‘Critics of Empire’: Domestic Opposition to New Zealand's Pacific Empire, 1883-1948. Masters Thesis, Victoria University of Wellington (New Zealand), 2014.[2]</ref> Today, New Zealand is a major aid donor in the South Pacific, and a large number of Pacific Islanders now live in New Zealand.

• In what is now Israel, a new colonial settler state arose out of a Jewish insurgency against British rule in Mandatory Palestine during the late 1940s, as well as the 1948 Palestine war against the Palestinians; the state of Israel continues to expand its territory via annexations and depends heavily on military, economic and political support from the federal government of the United States, as well as on private U.S. investors/donors.<ref>Maxime Rodinson, Israel: a colonial-settler state?. New York: Monad Press, 1973.</ref>
• In the American Revolutionary War, armed forces commanded by George Washington engaged in eight years of conflict with the British which ultimately led to Britain recognizing the sovereign independence of the United States. At the same time, the American government mostly denied the sovereignty of American Indians over their ancestral lands, and not infrequently tried to exterminate the Indians, and/or relocate them to reservations set aside for Indians. It was characteristic of American political thinking, that sovereignty was not necessarily regarded as a good thing or as a bad thing, and that a people or a nation was not automatically entitled to sovereignty and territory because they lived somewhere, and had lived there for a long time. It all depended on the interests that were at stake, what the balance of power happened to be, and what was regarded as a "progressive" policy (see also: United States involvement in regime change and Foreign interventions by the United States).

Origins of the term

In his pamphlet on imperialism (1917), V.I. Lenin wrote:

The critical concept of a "semi-colony" was popularized in the earlier years of the Communist International,<ref>Report of the Commission on the national and the colonial questions at the Second Congress of the Communist International, 26 July 1920; The Communist International, 1919-1943; documents, selected and edited by Jane Degras. Oxford University Press, 1956-65; Oleksa Drachewych, "Settler Colonialism and the Communist International", in: Immanuel Ness & Zak Cope (eds.), The Palgrave encyclopedia of imperialism and anti-imperialism, 2nd edition. Cham: Springer Nature, 2021, pp. 2417-2423.</ref> which classified the countries of the world as being either imperialist countries, or semi-colonies, or colonies. From that definition followed a political strategy for the labour movement in each type of country (for example as regards nationalisation of industry, workers' rights, democratisation, the ownership of land).<ref>Communist International, The revolutionary movement in the colonies: theses on the revolutionary movement in the colonies and semi-colonies. New York: Workers Library, 1929; William Henry Tobin, The communist theory of revolution in colonial and semi-colonial countries; its origin and early execution in the Chinese Revolution, 1920-1927. Phd dissertation, Harvard University, 1968.</ref> The general perspective of the Communist International was that it was impossible for semi-colonial countries to achieve substantive industrialisation, agrarian reform and the transformation of property relations without a socialist and democratic revolution. In other words, the power of semi-colonial elite had to be overthrown by the workers and peasants, to liberate the country from its client-relationship with foreign powers, and make comprehensive local economic development possible.

The category of "intermediate countries" was officially added in the later 1920s. Thus, for example, at the 15th Congress of the CPSU in 1927, Stalin stated: Template:Quote Usually the "intermediate countries" were independent nations lacking colonies (or without significant foreign territories), with some industrial development as well as a traditional agricultural sector.

Subsequently, the theoretical discussion about the concept of a semi-colony was influenced by historical studies about semi-colonialism in pre-revolutionary China.<ref>Jürgen Osterhammel, "Semi-Colonialism and Informal Empire in Twentieth-Century China: Towards a Framework of Analysis". In: Wolfgang J. Mommsen, Imperialism and after: continuities and discontinuities. London: Allen & Unwin, 1986, pp. 290-314; Nicholas Zeller, "Semi-colonialism in China". in: Immanuel Ness & Zak Cope (eds.), The Palgrave encyclopedia of imperialism and anti-imperialism, 2nd edition. Cham: Springer Nature, 2021. pp. 2383-2396.</ref>

In his 1940 article On New Democracy, Mao Zedong wrote:

Debates and contemporary relevance

With the expansion of the world market and globalisation especially from the 1970s onwards, the "semi-colonial" status of particular countries became more ambiguous because a number of them (such as the Four Asian Tigers, and the BRICS countries) were able to industrialize to a significant extent within the capitalist world market and without overthrowing the capitalist state, becoming at least "semi-industrialized" or even fully industrialized countries (see also newly industrialized country).<ref>Ernest Mandel, "Semicolonial Countries and Semi-Industrialized Dependent Countries", New International (New York), No.5, 1985, pp. 149–175); Nigel Harris, The end of the third world: newly industrializing countries and the decline of an ideology. London: Penguin Books, 1990.</ref> They gained more financial, political and cultural autonomy, they abandoned the old colonial culture, and the local elite became a major foreign investor in its own right. They were no longer clearly under the control of another foreign country, although to a considerable extent still dominated or politically influenced by wealthier countries and international financial institutions.

In the global perspective of the Communist International, each country in the world could be categorized and ranked according to its place in the hierarchy of the capitalist world order, and a correct political strategy could be defined accordingly, for each country. This approach was based on a specific Leninist interpretation of global imperialism and the division of the world into spheres of influence. However, across a hundred years of world development, all sorts of changes have taken place in how countries are positioned in the world economy and in global geopolitics. The majority of countries no longer have the same position that they used to have. This raises the question of whether the critical concept of a "semi-colony" is still relevant, or whether it has become an outdated, archaic concept that cannot accurately describe current realities in world society anymore.<ref>John Bellamy Foster, "The New Denial of Imperialism on the Left". Monthly Review (New York), Vol.76, No. 6, November 2024.[3]</ref>

For example, Australia (previously a colony, since 1901 a dominion of the British Empire, and since 1986 fully independent) has been described as a "client state"<ref>Greg Crough and Ted Wheelwright, Australia: A Client State. Ringwood, Victoria: Penguin Books, 1982.</ref> but also as an "imperialist" country.<ref>Tom Bramble, "Why Australia is an imperialist country". Red Flag (Socialist Alternative), 18 February 2018.[4]</ref> (see also Territorial evolution of Australia). Some scholars prefer to use the world-systems theory labels of "core", "semi-periphery" and "periphery" to describe the structure of the capitalist world order. Other scholars regard the Wallersteinian "world system" classifications to be outdated in the new multipolar world order. Martin Wolf distinguishes between stagnant "low-income countries" and developing "low-income turned into middle-income countries"; he emphasizes the economic divergence of the two in the 21st century.<ref>Martin Wolf, "The case for persisting with foreign aid". Financial Times, 11 february 2025.</ref> Whatever the case, the definition of a country as a "semi-colony" usually refers to a specific critical analysis of its place in the world economy, world trade and the world political order, as well as to its local political/economic culture and social structure.

Far Left views

The concept of "semi-colony" is still used in later Maoist movements, including the Shining Path in Peru, the Communist Party of India (Maoist) and the Communist Party of the Philippines which regard their respective countries as "semi-colonies". Some contemporary Trotskyist groups, such as the League for a Fifth International interpret Lenin's analysis of imperialism in a way which defines the vast majority of states in the world as semi-colonies, including all of Eastern Europe.<ref name=":0">SWP and imperialism Template:Webarchive</ref> According to the revolutionary communist Michael Pröbsting, Greece has become a semi-colony.<ref>Michael Pröbsting, Greece: A Modern Semi-Colony. The Contradictory Development of Greek Capitalism and Its Failed Attempts to Become a Minor Imperialist Power. Vienna: Revolutionary Communist International Tendency, 2015.</ref>

See also

• Aid
• Aid effectiveness
• Client state
• Colony
• Commonwealth of Nations
• Dependency theory
• Development aid
• Dominion
• East–West dichotomy
• Fourth World
• Global North and Global South
• Imperialism
• International financial institutions
• List of colonies
• List of countries and dependencies by area
• List of countries that have gained independence from the United Kingdom
• List of empires
• List of former European colonies
• List of largest empires
• National question
• Neocolonialism
• New imperialism
• Non-Aligned Movement
• North–South model
• Satellite state
• Sovereignty
• Theories of imperialism
• Three-world model
• Unequal exchange
• Uneven and combined development
• United Nations list of non-self-governing territories

External links

• The relationship between semi-colonialism and semi-feudalism
• Capitalist or semi-feudal semi-colonial countries?
• Wikimedia Commons Atlas of Colonialism
• World Population Review country rankings for semi-periphery countries
• The Global Capital Allocation Project research website
• Former colonies in North America