It is interesting to study various theories of some political leaders of the past. Lenin, a former Russian communist leader, was famous for his inadequate theories. At the end of nineteenth century there was the strengthening of European cooperation with the periphery. Inside the capital was concentrated in huge monopolistic organizations incorporated under the guidance of several major financial oligarchs.
Lenin suggested that these two events were inextricably linked. The concentration of capital created inequality. The inequality was mainly limited to the level of aggregated demand. The population at large could not absorb a lot of goods. The raise of production was achieved thanks to a higher level of technological capacity. Insufficient demand created persistent crises implementation. Raw material prices threatened further profits. The fall of the profit rates required economic expansion in new regions, where were the sources of raw materials and new markets.From the fact that the capitalist class rules the state, Lenin suggested that financial capital, the main form of the capital which is used by the state apparatus to get into the periphery. the capitalists were going to use the oppressed labor in the production of raw materials cheaply and commodities, also to create rich elites layers to the consumption of luxury imported goods, and to undermine the indigenous industry, resulting in the colony depends of the underlying investments. The desirable effect is that the main wealth is transferred from the periphery. Wealth would flow into the national economies of the major profit owners. Lenin names the collection of the circumstances imperialism. There were some specific effects. One of them, the surplus allowed the "labor aristocracy" to develop; it would be a layer of higher-paid trade workers rather loyal to the class of capitalists. Second, the national state of the imperil rivalry would intensify nationalist sentiment in the labor class, and the deviation from the class struggle. Two effects improve the functioning of the bourgeoisie in the battle against the proletariat.
While this strategy works in the short period of time, Lenin argues that in the long term, it will undermine the imperialism and capitalism. It is national rivalry between imperial wars. Costs and desolation, these wars will weaken the major nation-states, not because this losers will be in disadvantage and will need to reduce the potential exploiting the periphery, but also because of the national movement at the periphery of the anti-colonial war and undermine the potential even victorious core countries to use the periphery. After the core loses control over the empire, the colonies will stagnate in the home country. Domestic stagnation of the economy will cause conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, which can easily lead to a massive social revolution.