{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02443609022556391, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.4156626506024095, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Imperialism: Necessary and Beneficial?—Review of the Works of Hobson, Weber, and Schumpeter

Proponents of imperialism claim that imperialism is beneficial and necessary. J. A. Hobson, Max Weber, and Joseph Schumpeter have written scholarly critiques in which they question these claims. Hobson argued that imperialism is not only unnecessary, but is pernicious. Weber acknowledged the need for an expansive foreign doctrine, but he suggested that imperialism was neither necessary nor beneficial. Schumpeter argued that the various types of imperialisms were variations on war and he concluded that there were better methods to improve a country's economic standing. The critiques of imperialism by Hobson, Weber, and Schumpeter are noteworthy for a number of reasons, among them, that Weber and Schumpeter knew Hobson's writings well, and that Weber and Schumpeter not only read each other's writings but knew each other personally. All three offer penetrating scholarly critiques that can be used as critical commentaries on contemporary claims for imperialism.