Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) Journal Impact Factor & Information

Journal description

In May 1949 Monthly Review began publication in New York City, as cold war hysteria gathered force in the United States. The first issue featured the lead article Why Socialism? by Albert Einstein. From the first Monthly Review spoke for socialism and against U.S. imperialism, and is still doing so today. From the first Monthly Review was independent of any political organization, and is still so today. The McCarthy era inquisition targeted Monthly Review's original editors Paul Sweezy and Leo Huberman, who fought back successfully. In the subsequent global upsurge against capitalism, imperialism and the commodification of life (in shorthand '1968') Monthly Review played a global role. A generation of activists received no small part of their education as subscribers to the magazine and readers of Monthly Review Press books. In the intervening years of counter-revolution, Monthly Review has kept a steady viewpoint. That point of view is the heartfelt attempt to frame the issues of the day with one set of interests foremost in mind: those of the great majority of humankind, the propertyless.

Current impact factor: 0.46

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2015
2009 Impact Factor 0.467

Additional details

5-year impact 0.40
Cited half-life 0.00
Immediacy index 0.28
Eigenfactor 0.00
Article influence 0.24
Website Monthly Review website
Other titles Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949), Monthly review
ISSN 0027-0520
OCLC 1758661
Material type Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Journal / Magazine / Newspaper, Internet Resource

Publications in this journal

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Insofar as imperialism is about the struggle over and capture of economic territory (which must be broadly defined to include not just geographical territory such as land and natural resources, but also the creation of new markets, sources of labor, and forms of surplus transfer such as are reflected in intellectual property), these changes [in imperialism since the early 20th century] have created distant demands upon imperialist structures and processes…. [So] how can capital (which is increasingly global in orientation) generate the superstructures through which the transfers of value are ensured and the investment risks are moderated and contained? It will be argued that there has been an endeavor to resolve this by refashioning the global institutional architecture in ways that operate to increase the conditions of "stability" for large capital while increasing its bargaining power vis-à-vis working people and citizens, as well as nation-states and even smaller capitalist enterprises.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 07/2015; 67(3):146. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-03-2015-07_11
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: By the end of 1990, foreign direct investment—that is, investment in manufacturing, real estate, raw materials, extraction, financial institutions, etc., made by capitalists of all lands outside their national borders—reached over $1.5 trillion…. [W]hat is significant about this number is not only its size but the unprecedented speed with which it has grown in the last two decades: the amount directly invested in foreign lands nearly tripled in the 1980s alone…. This upsurge and diversification of globalization has been introducing new economic and political features in the countries of both the periphery and the core. In the periphery, foreign capital has penetrated more widely and deeply than ever before. In the core, this change of direction has helped produce in the world's key money markets an extraordinary spiraling of credit creation, international flows of money capital, and speculation.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 07/2015; 67(3):144. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-03-2015-07_10
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although medical and public health have played important roles in the growth and maintenance of the capitalist system, conditions during the twenty-first century have changed to such an extent that a vision of a world without an imperial order has become part of an imaginable future. Throughout the world, diverse struggles against the logic of capital and privatization illustrate the challenges of popular mobilization. In addition to these struggles, groups in several countries have moved to create alternative models of public health and health services. These efforts—especially in Latin America—have moved beyond the historical patterns fostered by capitalism and imperialism…. All the struggles that we describe remain in a process of dialectic change and have continued to transform toward more favorable or less favorable conditions. However, the accounts show a common resistance to the logic of capital and a common goal of public health systems grounded in solidarity, not profitability.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 07/2015; 67(3):130. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-03-2015-07_9
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Medicine and public health have played important roles in imperialism. With the emergence of the United States as an imperial power in the early twentieth century, interlinkages between imperialism, public health, and health institutions were forged through several key mediating institutions. Philanthropic organizations sought to use public health initiatives to address several challenges faced by expanding capitalist enterprises: labor productivity, safety for investors and managers, and the costs of care. From modest origins, international financial institutions and trade agreements eventually morphed into a massive structure of trade rules that have exerted profound effects on public health and health services worldwide. International health organizations have collaborated with corporate interests to protect commerce and trade. In this article we clarify the connections among these mediating institutions and imperialism.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 07/2015; 67(3):114. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-03-2015-07_8
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: When international media were broadcasting live video footage of Tunisians gathering in hundreds of thousands in front of the central office in Tunis of the long-terrifying ministry of home security, chanting in one voice "the people want to bring down the regime," something had already changed: ordinary people realized they could make huge changes. Weeks later, the Egyptian uprising removed the Mubarak regime that had been entrenched in power for over thirty years…. The neoliberal forms of imperial rule that had destroyed the hopes of the liberation movements were under attack. In order to counter the possibilities for a massive breakthrough at the popular level, the Western forces mounted an invasion of Libya using the mantra of humanitarianism to disrupt, militarily, political and economic life in Africa. Later in collusion with the counter-revolutionary forces in the Egyptian military, Western imperialism sought to roll back the gains of people in the streets of Tunis and Cairo.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 07/2015; 67(3):98. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-03-2015-07_7
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The globalization of production and its shift to low-wage countries is the most significant and dynamic transformation of the neoliberal era. Its fundamental driving force is what some economists call "global labor arbitrage": the efforts by firms in Europe, North America, and Japan to cut costs and boost profits by replacing higher-waged domestic labor with cheaper foreign labor, achieved either through emigration of production ("outsourcing," as used here) or through immigration of workers. Reduction in tariffs and removal of barriers to capital flows have spurred the migration of production to low-wage countries, but militarization of borders and rising xenophobia have had the opposite effect on the migration of workers from these countries—not stopping it altogether, but inhibiting its flow and reinforcing migrants' vulnerable, second-class status.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 07/2015; 67(3):82. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-03-2015-07_6
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Capitalism is preeminently a money-using system where a large part of wealth is held either in the form of money or as money-denominated assets, namely financial assets. For the system to work, it is essential that the value of money should not keep declining against commodities; otherwise people would move away from holding money, and it would cease to be not just a form of wealth, but even a medium of circulation.… Hence, capitalism seeks to ensure the stability of the value of money in a number of ways. One is the maintenance of a vast reserve army of labor, not just within the metropolis but also in the third world.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 07/2015; 67(3):68. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-03-2015-07_5
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this article, we aim to demonstrate that the low prices of goods produced in the global South and the attendant modest contribution of its exports to the Gross Domestic Product of the North conceals the real dependence of the latter's economies on low-waged Southern labor. We argue that the relocation of industry to the global South in the past three decades has resulted in a massive increase of transferred value to the North. The principal mechanisms for this transfer are the repatriation of surplus value by means of foreign direct investment, the unequal exchange of products embodying different quantities of value, and extortion through debt servicing.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 07/2015; 67(3):54. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-03-2015-07_4
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Globalization is not a novel development in the history of capitalism. In his final Monthly Review article, Paul Sweezy argued that globalization is a process, and that it has been occurring for a long time.… The accumulation of capital…has always meant expansion. Furthermore, this very process of growing and spreading is global in scope and, most importantly, imperialistic in its characteristics. Marxist scholars have long argued that imperialism has always accompanied capitalism…. Nevertheless, even if we start with the idea that globalization—or global capitalist expansion—is not novel, this does not trample the argument that the development of such expansion is marked by new characteristics in certain periods. Examining these historically specific characteristics can highlight the imperialistic "nature" of capitalism throughout history, including the development of our current global economy, which will be the focus of this essay.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 07/2015; 67(3):37. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-03-2015-07_3
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lenin, Bukharin, Stalin, and Trotsky in Russia, as well as Mao, Zhou Enlai, and Den Xiaoping in China, shaped the history of the two great revolutions of the twentieth century. As leaders of revolutionary communist parties and then later as leaders of revolutionary states, they were confronted with the problems faced by a triumphant revolution in countries of peripheral capitalism and forced to "revise"…the theses inherited from the historical Marxism of the Second International.… With the benefit of hindsight, I will indicate here the limitations of their analyses. Lenin and Bukharin considered imperialism to be a new stage ("the highest") of capitalism associated with the development of monopolies. I question this thesis and contend that historical capitalism has always been imperialist, in the sense that it has led to a polarization between centers and peripheries since its origin (the sixteenth century), which has only increased over the course of its later globalized development.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 07/2015; 67(3):23. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-03-2015-07_2
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: It is now a universal belief on the left that the world has entered a new imperialist phase.… The challenge for Marxian theories of the imperialist world system in our times is to capture the full depth and breadth of the classical accounts, while also addressing the historical specificity of the current global economy. It will be argued in this introduction (in line with the present issue as a whole) that what is widely referred to as neoliberal globalization in the twenty-first century is in fact a historical product of the shift to global monopoly-finance capital or what Samir Amin calls the imperialism of "generalized-monopoly capitalism."Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 07/2015; 67(3):1. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-03-2015-07_1
  • Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 06/2015; 67(2). DOI:10.14452/MR-067-02-2015-06_4
  • Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 06/2015; 67(2). DOI:10.14452/MR-067-02-2015-06_1
  • Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 06/2015; 67(2). DOI:10.14452/MR-067-02-2015-06_3
  • Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 06/2015; 67(2). DOI:10.14452/MR-067-02-2015-06_2
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: When I walked the thousand-year-old route of the Camino de Santiago in northern Spain in September and October 2014, I expected to discuss questions of health with fellow travelers. I assumed that an ancient pilgrimage would be full of walkers pondering health issues and would provide an ethnographer's panacea for "getting in." I was wrong. I was surrounded by walkers from all parts of Europe, but they were pondering the meaning of work, capitalism, and their lives. I found I was seeing a profound crisis of capitalism and individuals struggling with alienated labor as discussed by Karl Marx.&hellp; [W]hat I saw on the Camino de Santiago was certainly not a revolutionary movement. Envisioning satisfying work, however, helps change the shared conception of what work is. Raul Zibechi argued that as we struggle both individually or collectively, we engage in an emancipatory process that, as the Zapatista's Subcomandante Marcos notes, "builds, includes, brings together and remembers whereas the system, separates, splits and fragments."&hellp; Awareness of alienated labor and struggle against crisis, whether individual or collective, does seem to create imaginative space for change even if it does not necessarily reflect what has been thought of as revolutionary struggle.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 05/2015; 67(1):52. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-01-2015-05_6
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Like many other leftists working in labor or community organizations, I have long struggled to understand the role I can play in building a larger left movement. I have spent nearly a decade organizing for the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and have only recently caught a glimpse of what a vibrant and popular leftist practice could look like.&hellp; In this analysis, I take inspiration from Antonio Gramsci's ideas. He described a "war of position"—a protracted revolutionary effort to create an anti-capitalist hegemony—as a methodology for anti-capitalists in advanced industrial countries. Counter-hegemony is a process, built by concrete effort both through political education and political action. As a labor union organizer, I have become quite skilled at political action, but not at political education.&hellp;One alignment of organizations in Minnesota—Minnesotans for a Fair Economy (MFE)—has the potential to be part of such a counter-hegemonic process. On a day-to-day basis, member organizations of MFE organize people to confront their bosses and banks, as well as the corporations holding back their communities. On a sporadic basis, the member organizations come together to create a new narrative of what kind of a world we want.&hellp; It was in a MFE "week of action" that I first began to understand how the process of creating a counter-hegemony might play out in practice.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 05/2015; 67(1):41. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-01-2015-05_5
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Auto companies shield their low-tech exploitation of workers behind high-tech displays of mechanical prowess. The less a consumer knows about the blood and guts of manufacturing, the easier it is to buy the dream. So how does America think all this crap gets built?&hellp; Last summer, in a desperate attempt to entice young viewers to buy grandpa's dream car, General Motors (GM) ran a TV ad that featured a chorus line of robot arms dancing to techno music around a series of Cadillacs strutting like runway models on chrome-plated wheels.&hellp; Don't let yourself be seduced and deluded. The auto industry's master talent isn't robotics, it's the ability to automatize humans—including drivers.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 05/2015; 67(1):36. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-01-2015-05_4
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Analyzing the Brazilian economy is a difficult and complex task; the current indicators register results ranging from excellent to mediocre and worrisome, depending on the variable observed. For example, the nation has advanced into modernity in a few sectors, while at the same time, in recent years, new forms of dependency from the center of capitalism deepened. Further complexities arise when, beyond the economy, one takes into consideration not only the results of so-called "inclusion" policies and the popularity of President Dilma Rousseff (popularly referred to as "Dilma"), but also the number of strikes and public displays of disenchantment that are emerging in every corner of the country.&hellp; To summarize some of the conclusions: since the government of Luis Inácio Lula da Silva ("Lula"), the Brazilian economy has widened its internal market through policies that have raised the minimal wage, transferred income to the poorest within the nation, increased the availability of credit to the low and middle segments of the population, and reduced taxation (mainly on manufactured goods in the essential consumption basket). Such widening of the market, with a low impact on imports, would in theory ensure the maintenance of a certain level of growth, regardless of the international dynamics, and, indeed, it has helped Brazil reach a positive economic performance during the worst of the recent global economic crisis and its aftermath.&hellp; Nonetheless, when the impacts of the global recession deepened with the sovereign debt crisis in Europe, these macroeconomic policies did not yield the same effect, at most achieving modest growth.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 05/2015; 67(1):17. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-01-2015-05_2
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In a letter to Vietnam War veteran Charles McDuff, Major General Franklin Davis, Jr. said, "The United States Army has never condoned wanton killing or disregard for human life." McDuff had written a letter to President Richard Nixon in January 1971, telling him that he had witnessed U.S. soldiers abusing and killing Vietnamese civilians and informing him that many My Lais had taken place during the war. He pleaded with Nixon to bring the killing to an end. The White House sent the letter to the general, and this was his reply.&hellp; McDuff's letter and Davis's response are quoted in Nick Turse's Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam, the most recent book to demonstrate beyond doubt that the general's words were a lie.&hellp; In what follows, I use Turse's work, along with several other books, articles, and films, as scaffolds from which to construct an analysis of how the war was conducted, what its consequences have been for the Vietnamese, how the nature of the war generated ferocious opposition to it (not least by a brave core of U.S. soldiers), how the war's history has been whitewashed, and why it is important to both know what happened in Vietnam and why we should not forget it.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.
    Monthly review (New York, N.Y.: 1949) 05/2015; 67(1):1. DOI:10.14452/MR-067-01-2015-05_1