ABSTRACT
The implosion of global imperialist governance in almost every sphere of cooperation has made developing countries question the fairness of the US-led world order. From a Marxist perspective, the challenge of the BRICS and other contenders of US imperialism does not really represent a firm expression of anti-imperialism. In this framework, certain Marxist observers brought to the fore Ruy Mauro Marini’s subimperialism thesis to explain the status of these contenders. Do the BRICS countries really represent the authority of global corporations and advance the cause of neoliberalism as American satellites? How tenable is the Marinian argument that the BRICS as a subimperialist power is only interested in preserving the prevailing power relations in world politics? My arguments proceed as follows. Anti-imperialism cannot really reflect the actual reality about the transformation of the imperialist system under multipolarity. The contenders of the imperialist system do not call for a frontal attack on the US and have failed to definitively break with neoliberalism. This being said, it would also be too simplistic to brand the BRICS and other semi-periphery countries alienated from US imperialism as “subimperialist”. Considering the contradictory nature of this situation, “post-hegemonic multipolarity” seems to provide a more nuanced account of how contemporary imperialism is challenged by contender states. This concept alludes to the multiplex, unfolding, and still uncertain character of the present situation.
