Dear all,
For now, I'll use memo-writers' initials to preserve some degree of anonymity. We can discuss whether we should use full names or not in class this week. I don't want to violate anyone's privacy, but on the other hand, for purposes of class discussion it's good to know whose opinion is whose.
GI
S K
Spring 2008
Response Paper 1
The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System: Concepts for Comparative Analysis
The first and foremost question that needs to be asked in the context of globalization is application of Immanuel Wallerstein’s theory of world-systems. Reflecting on the assigned readings I believe Wallerstein is complex and difficult to analyze. Background research did guide me to a more simplified understanding of the premises of his theory. In the 1970s Wallerstein made efforts to extend classical Marxist thinking to the present contemporary form of capitalist society. Wallerstein offers a critique of capitalist exploitation within relations of production by declaring it as a mode of externalizing costs of production onto the periphery. In order to understand Wallerstein’s arguments I believe he revises not just Marx but Fernand Braudel’s framework. Appropriating a societal analysis within his theory he discusses totalities of world–systems. He weaves in economic development and changes in social organization that took place in world development.
As indicated in the article Marx’s influence on Wallerstein is evident. Marx was reductionistic in his theorizing. Whereas Wallerstein broadly sets out to theorize of capitalist world-systems. As he begins to discuss concentration of core countries of the capitalist world-economy he reverts to history to analyze sources, causes, and conditions that occurred in patterns and structures of society. Wallerstein refers to the approach of critical schools in revising the Marxian models. Wallerstein argues capitalism has a specific history. And that history had real effects that have crucially determined capitalism’s global culture.
Premising his theory as stages of development in social structure he addresses shifts or transition from the feudal economy to a capitalist economy. Central to his theory is his idea of stages of social system i.e. of totalities. Tracing origin of totalities in existing historical systems Wallerstein refers to mini-systems and world-systems. He does go back to the 16 th century world-empires or economies as he comments on the existence of one world-system, the capitalist world-economy. Going back to Marx he addresses the concept of division of labor as a characteristic of a social system. The mini-system includes within it a complete division of labor and a single cultural framework. Example of a mini-cultural system includes simple agricultural or hunting or gathering societies. These do not exist as they have become incorporated into other systems.
Wallerstein then discusses world-systems in his theory and designates them as world-empires and world-economies. Tracing origin of the world-economy in 16 th century Western Europe, the concept of a capitalist world-economy emerges. Wallerstein in his theory of world systems analyzes 3 structural positions in the world economy: core, periphery, and semi-periphery viz. hierarchies of production and exchange.Capitalism is defined more broadly. For it involves not only appropriation of the surplus-value by an owner from a laborer but an appropriation of the surplus of the whole world-economy by core areas. I believe this is the crux of his world-systems theory.
I believe as Wallerstein sets out to bring an economic analysis to his theory he is calling attention to unequal exchange that has occurred over time due to scarcity of production processes or the transfer of total profit or surplus that occurred between the periphery and core Part of his theory brings to light the fact that unequal exchanges is an outcome of differing wage levels in distinct parts of the world-economy where a peripheral worker needed to work many hours at a given level of productivity to obtain a product obtained by a worker in a core country in on hour. This explanation helps me understand how producers in core zones gain competitive advantages over existing products through mechanization. Wallerstein states capital has historically been a manipulable tool by capitalists located in states which are at one level below high point of strength in the system for eg. the case of U.K versus the Netherlands in 1660-1715 and U.S.S.R vis-à-vis the U.S. in the twentieth century. Wallerstein analyzes how political demands by a class of capitalists sought to maximize profits in the existing economic market particularly in the world-economy.
Interestingly Wallerstein sets out to question the role of the semi-peripheral areas in concepts of core and periphery. He maintains the presence of semi-peripheral areas are essential to allow for a favorable allocation of the surplus of the world-economy. As he concludes his article by discussing the contradictions in the working of the capitalist world-system, he states that today there is only one world-system which is a world-economy which is capitalist in its form. I believe he is in favor of his model of the world systems. Last but not least Wallerstein touches on the issue of a how a third-world socialist economy like China can become integrated into a global economic system in spite of its efforts to retain its ideological and political self-identity. Overall, Wallerstein was difficult to understand. I believe his theory is grounded in economics and macro-sociology. But it is meant for an audience at Harvard. I believe the future of the world-capitalist system appears to be of value for Wallerstein.