Paper: Theories of International Relations and World History Lesson: World System Theory and International Relations Lesson Developer: Dr. Lianboi Vaiphei Assistant Professor, Political Science Department, Indraprastha College for Women 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter: World System Theory by Immanuel Wallerstein 1.0 Introduction 1.1 The genesis of World System Theory 1.2 Approach of World System Theory 1.3 Background Study of Immanuel Wallerstein- the main thinker 1.4 Aims of World System Theory 1.5 Theoretical Concept of the World System Theory 1.6 Key Features and its terms and definitions of the World System Theory 1.7 Temporal Dimension of World Economy 1.8 Implications of the World System Theory 1.9 Recent developments in World System Theory 1.10 Criticisms of World System Theory 1.11 Conclusions 1.12 Summary 1.13 Exercises 1.14 Glossary 1.15 Answer of Multiple Choice Questions 1.16 References 2
1.0 Introduction The International political Economy has given the perspective of understanding International Relations from its economic perspective as a result of which it has form the crux of study both in the sub discipline of Theories of International Relation as well as in International Political Economy. This development has offered new insights as well as crucial reflections in understanding the world and making sense of the global politics as it stand today. It has been observed that these developments has enriched the discipline through the economic perspective offered by the sociological understanding of the world, which has brought new ideas and interpretations through Immanuel Wallenstein s concept of World System Theory. The World System Theory is a grand sociological idea that has been inspired by Marx s concept of Dependency Theory in their approach to the study of International Politics. It has been influenced and uses Karl Marx analysis by Immanuel Wallerstein. According to Wallerstein capitalism is more than a system of economy demarcated by boundaries of nations, as he highlights class difference from the perspectives of national relations which has been influenced from the historical factors such as Colonialism. The historical development of Colonialism has led nations to develop a capitalistic economy which went on to subordinate others and link them with other countries in such a way where the subordinated nations became dependent on the dominating countries. This hampers the development of other economies as they have become dependent on the dominant countries. The World System Theory is seen as a major breakthrough in the Marxist analysis of international relations from the perspectives of analyzing the world from the different world systems that existed in the various stages of human history. This world system also goes through different phases from its beginning and gradually collapses to form the modern world system. The World System Theory thereby explores and studies the role and relationships between societies and changes that occur from their consequent interaction among societies. The theory is a byproduct of two schools of thought- one that is the neo- Marxist thought on development and the other is the French Annales School and Fernand Braudel. Although the theory was primarily developed by Immanuel Wallerstein but the other theorist such as Andre Gunder Frank, Samir Amin, Giovanni Arrighi had developed the Dependency School of Thought which worked on the similar framework in 3
conceptualizing international political economy as a result of the new developments that occurred in the capitalist world economy during the mid-1970s. It was during this period of mid-1970s, the global politics was dictated by the world economy according to Wallerstein, and sees them as the legacy of the World Empire that has been set up by Colonial countries under a centralized political system that had redistributed the resources of the periphery to the core (Misra & Shukla, 2011: p 79) Did you Know -1 The Dependency Theory has significantly influenced the Worldsystems theory which has been perceived as the neo- Marxist explanation of development processes in International Relation. It is also called as the Marxist theory of International Relation. It follows an interdisciplinary approach since it links world history with the world economy to analyse the world politics. As a result of which it is also said to be an important tool in analyzing Globalisation. 1.1 The Genesis of World System Theory The genesis from where the idea of the world-system theory germinated was when the first systematic attempt was made to apply the ideas of Marx in the international arena. It was first done as a critique against imperialism that was advanced by thinkers at the start of the twentieth century. This led to a discourse of debate that had been as influential as well as popular, emerge from the pamphlet that was written by Lenin in 1917 called as Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. The main argument made by Lenin is the same as Marx s thesis. He supported the argument that Capitalism has change its character from the time Marx first published his work called as Das Capital in 1867 (Marx 1992). According to Lenin Capitalism has reached the pinnacle which he called the highest and final stage as Monopoly Capitalism. The new stage of Monopoly Capitalism has a two-tier structure where the first tier is the dominant Core countries that exploit the less developed periphery, which is the second structure. As a result of which there is no harmony of interests among the workers of the world, since the bourgeoisie from the core countries would profits from the exploitation done in the countries of periphery and improve their own proletariat i.e from their own country. In other words, the capitalist from the core countries would develop their own proletariat by exploiting the proletariat from countries in the periphery. 4
Lenin s concept of Core and the Periphery was developed from the Latin American School of Dependency where they developed the Dependency Theory. According to Raul Prebisch the countries which are located in periphery suffers due to the declining terms of trade. The decline in trade occurs when the prices of the manufactured goods increases faster than the prices of the raw materials. For example, refrigerator would always cost more than a ton of coffee. The countries in periphery relied more on primary goods and became poorer in relation to the core countries. It is with these arguments that the Dependency School of thought emerged by thinkers such as Andre Gunder Frank and Henrique Fernando Cardoso. It is with this framework that the contemporary world system theory emerged. Test Your Knowledge-A (Multiple Choice Questions) 1. World System Theory has been conceptualized by (a) Immanuel Wallerstein (b) Ander Gunder Frank (c) Karl Marx (d) Lenin 2. World System Theory has been inspired by the political ideology of (a) Liberalism (b) Capitalism (c) Marxism (d) None of the above 3. World System Theory is related with the study of (a) World Politics (b) World Economy (c) Cultural System (d) None of the above 4. The legacy of the present world system can be traced to (a) Colonial Empire (b) Modernisation theory (c) British Empire (d) None of the above 5. The origin of the idea of World System Theory can be traced to the writings of (a) Lenin (b) Karl Marx (c) Adam Smith (d) John Locke 1.2 Approach of World System Theory The World-system theory uses an approach of macro sociology while explaining the dynamics within the capitalist world economy as a total social system. Their main emphasis is on development and it is no wonder that the development theorist and their practitioners has accepted it as it focus on the unequal opportunities across nations due to which the world-system theory has become not only a political but also an intellectual endeavour. In fact, the approach of World System Theory is a praxis in which the theory and practice intersect to reveal the hidden structures of the world and thereby accumulate knowledge of the functioning of the world system. That is how it has merged the fields of historical sociology with that of economic history. 5
The methods adopted by World-system is based on qualitative methods, although Wallerstein had earlier rejected any kind of the distinction between nomothetic and idiographic methods as a tool of understanding the world. The nomothetic methodologies are generally used in natural sciences and have a tendency to generalise as it derive the laws by using quantitative approach while the idiographic methodologies are generally used in humanities. It uses the method to describe and understand the meaning of contingent which is unique, and often subjective phenomena that uses qualitative approaches. According to Wallerstein, the world can also be quantitatively understood despite its long history. In his approach of explaining them he relies on historical methods which are associated with interpretive sociology leading his work to be in between Marx and Weber, the two thinkers with whom he has been both deeply inspired. 1.3 The profile of Immanuel Wallerstein Immanuel Maurice Wallerstein as an American sociologist is also a historical social scientist. He was born on September 28, 1930 during the two world wars. When he grew up, he served in the US army during the year 1951-53, after which he pursue his career in academics in the US University. He started his professional academic career from the Columbia University where he worked as an instructor before he became the Associate Professor of Sociology in 1958 till 1971. After which moved from New York in 1971 and later taught at McGill University, Montreal. Although he taught in US, his academic interest was not in American politics but in the politics of non-european world- his area of academic prime interest was in India and Africa. He dedicated two decades of his life as an African scholar and has contributed numerous articles in many books. His immense contribution in the area study of Africa led him to become the President of African Studies Association in 1973. Did you Know- 2 Interesting facts on Immanuel Wallerstein Immanuel Wallerstein was born on September 28, 1930 and grew up in New York City but in a communist family. He had wide interest in world affairs especially in the area of the anticolonial movements such as in India since his teenage years as it was during that time that India was struggling under the British Colonial Rule. He and during his teen age years; India was yet to gain independence. He had also served in the US Army during 1951-1953. 6
Wallerstein articulated the World System Theory first in what is now regarded as a seminal paper titled The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System: Concepts for Comparative Analysis published in 1974. After the next two years, in 1976 he published The Modern World System I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the 16 th Century in which he has made a landmark contribution in both the theory and thought of History and Sociology. His work has evoked numerous reactions which have inspired others to build from his conceptual idea of World System Theory. Figure1.1 Picture of Immanuel Wallerstein Source: www.agenceglobal.com accessed on Oct 10, 2014 Wallerstein took up research in new areas as the head of the Fernand Braudel Center for the Study of Economies, Historical Systems and Civilization at Binghamton University in New York In 1976.The center was engaging academically in analyzing the social changes on a large scale that occur over long periods of historical time. As the founding editor of the new journal Review from the same Center, Wallerstein focused on research that could invigorate sociology from its other sister disciplines, such as History and Political- Economy that influence in building the World System theory. He used the historical events to analyse the world economy and how it has shaped the current international relations as a system which he described and explained in the World System Theory, which he had developed during the 1970s. 7
Wallenstein immense contribution in Sociology made him become the President of the International Sociological Association during the year 1994-1998 and occupied the chair of the International Gulbenkian Commission on the Restructuring of the Social Sciences during 1993-1995. He retired as a distinguished Professor of Sociology at Binghamton in 1999. Test Your Knowledge-B (Select True or False) 6.The World System Theory adopts the macro-sociological approach 7. The main focus of World System Theory is on the methodology of quantitative 8.Immanuel Wallerstein is an Irish sociologist 9.Mr. Wallerstein became President of Indian Studies Association 10.The work of Mr. Wallerstein is on descriptive sociology 1.4 Aims of World System Theory The main aim of the World System Theory is to develop an alternative understanding of Development from what the Modernisation theory seeks to explain (Wallerstein, 2000). According to Theda Skocpol, the American sociologist and political scientist from Harvard University has described the World System Theory as a new theoretical paradigm which explain the emergence of capitalism in developing industrial countries and the nation states of countries (Skocpol, 1977, p. 1075). Wallerstein had conceptualised the World System Theory in his book The Modern World System, 1974 which was written in four volumes. In these books his main thesis is that the modern world system can be differentiated from erstwhile empires as it relies on the economic control of the world order with a dominating capitalist in the center of the system while in their relation are determined through the economic and political relation with the countries in peripheral to semi peripheral world. He uses the historical analyses to understand the structure of the world through the three different frameworks which he has distinguished as follows: i. the development of the modern world-system through historical methods ii. the contemporary crisis in the capitalist world-economy; iii. the structure of knowledge. According to Goldfrank, Professor Emeritus from Latin Americano and Latin Studies Wallerstein has responded to the Theory of Modernization through the World System 8
Theory as he outlines his research agenda with five major themes that touches on the following area, namely: i. Economic areas in which the systemic functioning of the capitalist worldeconomy, ii. Historical for the causal explanation in the origins of World System Theory, iii. Sociological study of the capitalist world economy from the non-capitalist countries of earlier centuries, iv. Comparative study in the alternative forms of production and v. The transition made from pre socialist economies to socialist economies (Goldfrank, 2000; Wallerstein, 1979). The Modernisation theory was used as a causal explanation to understand the process of modernization in societies as a reference for a model of a progressive transition to explain the transition from a 'pre-modern' or 'traditional' to a 'modern' society. The theory investigates the different internal factors in a country with the assumption that assistance can be used as a tool to develop the "traditional" countries to bring them on par with the developed countries. It is in this analysis, that it has identified the different social variables which contributes in the social progress of developing societies were identified in the process of social evolution. The main criticism of Modernisation Theory was on the following grounds: ii. the nation-state as the only unit for analysis iii. Assuming that all countries has to follow a single path in its evolution of development iv. Viewing transnational structures as a constrain of both local as well as national development without any regard of the world-historical development v. ahistorical explanation in the national cases of tradition versus modernity, Did you know 3 The Modern World System The present day modern world system is said to exist from the latter half of the 20 th century. It has affected integration all the remote corners of the globe. This according to Immanuel Wallerstein is because of man s ability to participate intelligently in the evolution of his own system and his perception of the system as a whole. Moreover, the ideology of liberalism, free trade, rule of law has led to the development of the global cultures in the world. The process of globalization in which the states interact with one another has led to one dominant world-system, unlike the past where separate world-systems existed simultaneously 9 in human history
1.5 The theoretical Concept of World System Theory According to Immanuel Wallerstein there are mainly two types of system in the worldthe first is the system of World Empires and second is the system of World Economies. The main difference between the two basically lies in the way decisions are taken regarding the distribution of resources. In the World Empires the presence of a centralized political system leads to the resources to be redistributed from the periphery country to the core whereas in the case of the World Economy they compete with the centers of power and the resources are redistributed not by a centralized political system but by the market. The present day system of modern world system is a suitable illustration of the world economy. Immanuel Wallerstein further illustrates that the world is connected in a network of complex relationships of economic exchange i.e., a "world-economy" or "worldsystem" where there is "dichotomy of capital and labour" with its "accumulation of capital" are in competition from the historical time and account for frictions in the international relations. Despite the conflicting forces they are held together but the tensions are tearing away from each other although they remould it eternally according to their own advantage. In one aspect, it exhibits the characteristics of an organism with a lifespan where the characteristics are changing though they remain stable in others. Wallerstein had remarked that the Life within is largely self-contained, while the dynamics of its development are largely internal" (Wallerstein, p. 347). Wallerstein traced the origin of the modern world-system to the 16th-century when West Europe and the Americas was at the beginning of Colonialism. It is a matter of time that the world system develops to form one global network or the present system as a system of economic exchange today. The process of colonialism has been widespread to encompass into every remote corner of the earth to the capitalist world economy in the 19th century. The economic system of the world was expanded due to the advantage that Europe had because of industrial revolutions. The European colonialism incorporated new zones for an effective division of labour in the world economy such as in the Indian subcontinent as well as Empires of the Ottoman, the Russian and that of West Africa. During the period 1733-1817 as a result most of the manufactured goods were in accordance to the needs of the European colonial market and labours were translated to wage labour 10
across the globe. That is why Wallerstein termed the world-system as a "world economy" in its integration with the centre as a market rather than political, since two or more regions became interdependent on basic amenities such as food, fuel and for protection and therefore compete among themselves till one country emerges as a dominant power. Wallerstein (1974) made the first definition of World System as a "multicultural territorial division of labour in which the production and exchange of basic goods and raw materials is necessary for the everyday life of its inhabitants". The division of labour is in reference to the production in the world economy as a whole, which has created a dual interdependent region of Core and Periphery. The region has been so classified as Core and Periphery because both are geographically and culturally different besides being intensified on labour and capital. This differences form the structure of the system where a buffer zone is created when a semi-peripheral state comes in between them which has a mix of both the activities and institutions that exist on them. Immanuel Wallerstein stated that the economic structures constrain politics, as the strong nations situated at the core of the system dominate over the weak countries that are located in the periphery. This is because the nation states are placed in the system of world capitalist where they can influence in their global roles. The international division of labour forms the base of the capitalist world system and determines the relations of different regions in the world as the labour conditions differ in each of the region. Wallerstein has divided the world into three categories of the regions consisting of a few countries, which is reflective of the characteristics of politics and economy determine the relative positions that in the world system. The core regions reap maximum benefit in the structure of the capitalist world. Such as countries of West Europe like England, France, and Holland who became part of the core region during the seventieth and eighteenth centuries. The dominance shifted the power to different countries in accordance to their development in the fields of technology and victory in war. The Netherlands became a hegemon during the mid-17th century while the UK became çore in the mid-19 th century and US in the mid twentieth century. That is why, during the nineteenth century the manufacturing base of US and Germany ascended to enter the Core zone. After the 11
First World War, the power of Britain and other European countries began to decline while USA took up the role of a hegemon post Second World War and emerge as the clear cut core country. Peripheral societies/ countries include countries from Asia, Africa and Latin America that are politically weak and economically poor but has rich raw materials. In the early years of the capitalist system the Eastern Europe region such as Poland, Latin America and South Asia exhibited characteristics of the peripheral countries. The labour system in peripheral countries can be distinguished from medieval Europe where their production was not for internal consumption of goods but for consumption in the capitalist countries. Besides, the bourgeoisie or class of aristocracy in the periphery-such as in East Europe or Latin America or Asia-became more wealthy since they had their own linkages with the world economy where they could receive from the core regions to maintain their control in their own country. Semi-Peripheral Countries: In between the Core and Periphery is what Wallerstein has introduced as the Semi-Periphery regions. The semi-periphery areas are represented by the core region which is in decline such as Portugal and Spain. They have limited access to international banking and they decline over a period of time. Some of the Semi-peripheral countries also include the peripheral countries that has gain their relative positions in the system of world economy. They export manufacturers and raw materials while importing manufacturers as well as raw materials. They serve as buffers zone as they are located between the core and the peripheries. Some of the semi peripheries exhibit strain in the relation between the central government and their class of local bourgeoisie. The semi periphery region unlike the Core countries do not exhibit any dominating tendency in the international trade as a result of which they also do not reap the same benefit. During the past five decades the South East Asian countries have entered the zone of Semi-Periphery. Wallerstein has explained that the semi-periphery regions were exploited by the countries of Core regions as done by the American empires of Spain and Portugal yet at the same time is exploiters in the peripheral countries themselves. For example, Spain through coercive labour practices had imported silver and gold from their American colonies which was utilized in purchasing the manufactured goods from Core countries such as England and France instead of creating a manufacturing sector in their own domestic countries. 12
Fig 1.2 Geographical dimensions of the world economy The Northwest Europe constituted the core during the first centuries of world-system development, while the semi-periphery was formed by Mediterranean Europe and Eastern Europe and the periphery was constituted by the Western hemisphere and parts of Asia which has changed in successive times. In the contemporary times, the core countries comprised of the wealthy industralised countries such as Japan and the semi periphery region included many states that had been independent for quite some time excluding the West; while the Periphery countries have recently gain independence and are poor colonies from the Colonial masters by the end of the twentieth century. Core Countries/ Region: The Core area exhibit militarily strength in relation to other countries and are independent. They only serve the interests of their own economically powerful classes or bourgeoisie and soak in any of the economic losses by maintaining the peripheral areas, for their own benefit. The semi-peripheral areas help to deflect the political pressures of groups who live in the peripheral areas but have the potential to be anti-core-states. In other words, they prevent any unified opposition. They share the ideology and commitment of ruling groups in a system as their own well-being is related to the survival of the system. On the other hand, the lower strata of the society do not 13
have any such loyalty and are automatically incorporated to form a nationally unified cultures created by the ruling groups. According to Wallerstein, all the three zones of the world economy have linkages within exploitative relations where wealth is drained from the peripheral zones into the core zones. As a result of which, the system matures only when the rich countries become richer and the poor countries become poorer. In other words, development and underdevelopment are interrelated. It is no wonder then that the capitalist world-system is not homogeneous but rather heterogeneous in terms of its characteristic exhibited in cultural, political and economy which is contoured by fundamental differences that can be seen in the different fields of social development, political power and capital. For Wallerstein these differences are only mere residues or irregularities that would be overcome when the system evolves, but rather the distinction of lasting three division of labour as structured through historical development; which characterises the World System. The most notable anti-systemic force that was present in the last two centuries was Socialism. It is through Socialism that many of the core states redistributed their wealth and led to the support of formation of new states, thereby challenging the order of the Capitalist world economy. This led to a system where one type of system transited to another due to the inherent contradictions within the system which could no longer contained and had to be transformed. The present day capitalist world economy was historically constructed and therefore is bound to be superseded by another social construction of time in history. The different crises of the global system was created and constructed by the changes that lead to a new transformation. Did you know 4 Concept of Core-Periphery Model The concept of core-periphery model was first developed by John Friedmann in 1963 where it identified the spatial distances from the core. The model of the centre periphery (or core periphery) model is a spatial metaphor to describe how they are structured between the advanced or metropolitan centre and a less developed periphery, either within a particular country, or more. The concept has been commonly applied to analyze the relations between capitalist and developing societies. It is commonly used in the study of political geography, political sociology, and studies of labour-markets. The core-periphery model works on many scales, from towns and cities, to a global scale. 14
1.6 Key Features and its terms and definitions of the World System Theory The key features of World System Theory need has been outlined by concentrating the work of its main protagonist Immanuel Wallerstein. He has marked history by the rise and demise of a series of world-systems. According to him, the modern world system is a system of production for sale in a market for profit and appropriation of this profit on the basis of either individual or collective ownership (1979:66) 1.6.1 Origin of the Modern World System: According to Wallerstein, the modern world system has emerged in Europe at the beginning of the 16 th century which later on spread to the entire world. The driving forces have led to the continuous process of expansion in the world and incorporate them within capitalism. It is within this context that all the other institutions of the social world is continuously being not only created but are also re-created. Moreover, the elements within the system changes but are bound by history and will go through the different phase; where it had a beginning with middle and will definitely have an end. It was the crisis in feudalism that motivated to seek new markets and resources. Europe with its technological advantage gave the momentum for explorations of the new markets. 1.6.2 Structures The world system within the one world market has a single division of labour within one system but has many states and cultures. This is because the world system functions as a trimodal structure with Core, Periphery and Semi-periphery countries. Labour has been divided and are defined according to its function in its own geographically distinct parts that has been arranged in a system of hierarchy according to the occupational tasks.(see Fig 1.3) Core Countries Democratic Government High Wages Import: raw materials Export: manufacturers High Investment Welfare Services Semi Periphery 15 Authoritarian governments Export: Mature
Periphery Non-democratic governments Exports: Raw Materials Import: Manufacturers Below Subsistence Wages No Welfare Services Fig 1.3 The Interrelationships of Region in the world economy The most important structure in the current world system is that of a power hierarchy with the Core, Periphery and Semi-periphery societies. Each of these trimodal structures are discussed briefly below. 1.6.3 Core societies/ state appropriate the surplus of the whole capitalist world economy with high-skill, capital intensive production and their militarily strength. They are characterized by high technology, import raw materials and export of manufacturers, high investment, higher wages and welfare services and democratic government. 1.6.4Peripheral societies/ countries are politically weak and economically poor but with untapped rich raw materials. They do not have strong central governments or rather controlled by other states. They export raw materials from the core regions while export manufactured goods. They rely on practices which coercive labour with low wages. The core countries expropriated the capital surpluses that are generated from the periphery countries through unequal and sometimes unjust trade relations, with them. 1.6.5 Semi-periphery areas or countries are countries that lie between the core and the periphery as the Semi-periphery areas or countries. He defined an intermediate semi periphery between the core and periphery, in terms of the geographical location in 16
the modern world system. According to Wallerstein the semi periphery has a role which is intermediate within the world system as they display some features of both the core and some of the periphery. At one level, they are dominated by the core economic interests but they have their own industrial base which is relatively vibrant and indigenous. In other words, the semi-periphery has a hybrid nature, which also plays an important role in the economy and politic within the modern world system. They provides labour which can counteracts any kind of upward pressure on increasing wages in the core and yet provides a source for new home industries that can function profitably for the core states such as industry of car assembly and textiles. They play a pivotal role to stablise the political structure within the world system, as they are not dependent on the core countries in comparison to the peripheral ones, yet at the same time more diversified in its economies than the stronger states. 1.7 Temporal Dimension of World Economy The best way to understand how the dynamics of their interaction occur over time is to analyse and describe the temporal dimensions of world economy needs. When the different spatial dimension of the world economy is described in isolation they provide a rather static portrayal of the world system. Wallerstein called them as the cyclical rhythms, secular trends, contradictions and crisis. He further explains that when these are combined with the spatial dimensions they determine the historical trajectory of the system. Wallerstein has given the four temporal dimensions of the world economy. 1.7.1 Cyclical Rhythm The first temporal dimension is known as the cyclical rhythm which refers to the boom and bust in a capitalist economy. The main concern is how in the capitalist world economy has a tendency of following the recurrent periods of expansion with its own subsequent contraction. This is colloquially called as the boom and bust. It is important to note that the underlying processes responsible for the growth and depression, has a cycle does not return the system to the point where it had started. 1.7.2 Secular Trends The Second Temporal dimension can be plotted when the wave reach the secular trends through t long term growth or any contraction that occurs in the world economy. 17
Fig 1.4 Wallerstein s World System Theory Model Source: http://tradeandbusinesslegacy-irbinus.blogspot.in/ 1.7.3 Contradiction The third temporal dimension refers to contradiction confronting the world system. These happen when the constraints which is imposed by systemic structures make one set of behavior to be optimal for actors in the short run while a different or even opposite set of behavior become optimal for actors in the middle run (Wallerstein 1991 a:261). The contradiction in world economy occurs because the structures of the system can lead to sensible action by individuals when they are combined over a period of time. It can result in different and lead to unwelcome outcomes from what has been originally intended. One of the central contradictions for Wallerstein is under-consumption, which refer to a situation where in the interest of the capitalist the workers need to be well paid so that they can consume the products that they produce however that would reduce their profitability and therefore needs to reduce the wages of the workers. In case if they reduce the wages of the workers in order to increase their profit it would also lead to reduction of the consumption of the goods that they produced. 18
In the context of the World System Theory, Wallerstein has reserved the term crisis to describe a period of specific temporal occurrence. Crisis constitutes as a unique set of circumstances which is manifested once in a lifetime of the world system. This occurs only when the contradictions, secular trends and cyclical rhythms are combined in such a way where the system cannot lead to its own reproduction. Hence a crisis occurs when a particular world system heralds not only their end but brings its need to be replaced by another system. 1.8 Implications of the World System Theory The first implication that can be drawn from the World System Theory is that it is a multicultural territorial division of labour in which the production and exchange of basic goods and raw materials is necessary for the everyday life of its inhabitants. The division of labour here refers to the different forces and their relations in the production of the world economy as a whole, which has led to the existence of interdependence regions, such as the core, periphery and semi-periphery. Although they have been differentiated geographically and culturally but its labour intensive differentiate them from the capital intensive production. The structural relationship of the core and periphery makes the semi-peripheral states act as a buffer between them, while they exhibit a mixture of different activities from the institutions that exist on them. The second implications that can be drawn from the World System Theory is in the relations of how states are based on power hierarchy especially between the core states and the states in periphery in the international system. That is why the core states on virtue of being powerful and wealthy dominate over the periphery states as they are weak and poor. It is important to note here that technology plays an important factor of how states are positioned in the region as regarding the categorization of states. The advanced and developed states form the core while the states which are less developed are subjugated in the periphery status. There are structural constrain in the experiences of development which subordinates their status. The differential strength of each state plays a crucial role in maintaining the system as a whole. The states in the core are strong and reinforce their status when the differential flow of surplus to the core zone increases. Wallerstein calls this as the unequal exchange as the surplus of the system is transferred from the semi-proletarian sectors in the periphery to the high technology, industrialised core. As a result of which, this leads to the process of capital accumulation which involves the appropriation and transformation of peripheral status at a global scale 19
The third implication of the World System is that international political systems are all affected. As Wallerstein says that the nation states are variable elements in the capitalist world system since at a given time the hegemonic influences a particular state with its technology and military with no single state or country dominating over the system. That is why the states in the world economy compete with each other and their interactions are shaped in the international political system to forms the different categorization as Wallerstein explain. Fourthly, Wallerstein explain through theoretical premise of how the Europeans have exploited their small advantage and have reshaped the world in the image of the capitalist in the international political system. This is the reason why the world as a whole has focused on unending accumulation and profit maximization where the market forms as the basis for exchange of goods and labour as commodities. Fifthly, Wallerstein s theory seeks to explain the Marxist proposition of the Bourgeoisie to perpetrate their own class interest in the core states and thereby reinforces Imperialism through their economic advantage by dominating over the states which are weak in the peripheral region. The dominant core states play the role of a hegemon as one of the core states temporarily outstrips the rest. In a way the hegemonic power maintains a balance of power with stability to enforce their free trade for their own advantage. However, class struggles and its diffusion make any hegemony temporary as it overlaps with the global class struggle. Sixthly, the World System explained the current world economy with its characterization of regular cyclical rhythms, which has provided the base of Wallerstein s analysis in the periodization of modern history. The last implications that can be drawn from Wallerstein s World System Theory is what has been envision as an alternative world system through the emergence of a socialist world government, which can maintain a productivity in high level but alter the patterns of distribution to integrate of the different levels of decision making in both politics and economy. 1.8 Recent developments in World System Theory The framework made by Wallerstein has led many theorist and writers to analyse the world as a system (Denemarket al.2000). The works of the three main theorists are notable, namely Christopher Chase Dunn, Andre Gunder Frank and Janet Abu-Lughod. 20
Christopher Chase Dunn had emphasized on the role that the inter-state system plays than what Wallerstein has explained as he argues that the capitalistic mode of production with its single logic where both politico-military and exploitative economic relations are taken into cognizance as they play key roles in his analysis. In a way he has attempted to bridge the gap between Wallerstein s work and that of the New Marxists by placing more emphasis on production in the world economy and how they has influence its development and the future trajectory. Andre Gunder Frank who s one of the significant Dependency School writers has critique Wallerstein s work in particular and the Western social theory in general. He has argued that the world system is far older than what Wallerstein has suggested (Frank and Gills 1996) but an offshoot from a system that originated in Asia (Frank 1998). He further argues and challenges the source from where he traced the capitalist world economy to be Europe; although it has risen within the context of an existing world-system. Janet Abu-Lughod challenged Wallerstein s account of the emergence of the modern world system in the 16 th century, by citing the fact that during the medieval period was in the periphery while the core of the world economy was the Middle East (Abu-Lughod 1989). Hence social theory include Marxism which examine Western exceptionalism and are mistaken to locate the cause for the rise in Europe. This is because the need to be located and analyse in the wider and global context. Test Your Knowledge D (Multiple Choice Questions) 16.The modern world system emerged in Europe at the turn of which century (a) 16 th century (b) 17 th century (c) 18 th century (d) 19 th century 17.The peripheral countries are politically weak and economically poor but has raw materials (a) no (b) rich (c) poor (d) none of the above 18. The motivation to seek new markets was led by (a) feudal system (b) innovation (c) capitalist system (d) economic system 19.Wallerstein give the number of temporal dimension of the world economy as (a) four (b) two (c) one (d) three 20. Wallerstein described the world economy as (a) cyclical rhythms (b) no rhythms (c) rapid rhythms (d) lack of rhythms 1.9 Criticisms of World System Theory 21
The World System Theory has had its share of criticisms as it focuses on economy in its analysis of the international political system and less on culture, besides being too statecentric. It has its own internal debates relating to their own definition of the basic perspective as well as its own empirical findings as well as the moral and political implications like any vibrant knowledge. Wallerstein himself has acknowledged its critics and has categorized the critique of the world system from the following four schools of thought, namely i. The positivists ii. The Orthodox Marxists iii. The State Autonomists iv. The Culturalist v. The Reductionist 1.9.1 The Positivists: The positivists have held position of dominance be it in the field of Social Sciences or in the nomothetic disciplines such as economics, political science, and sociology and in the disciplines of history as well since last 150 years. The positivist historians have objected to the analysis of world system as an elaborate structured vision of historical phenomena which was leading to generalizations. While the nomothetic positivists objected and critiqued for providing insufficient quantitative data. 1.9.2 The Orthodox Marxists The orthodox Marxists have asserted that world-systems analysis does not focus much on the analysis of class struggle or rather it has abandoned the analysis of historical stages of development. Besides, they have critiqued on the absence of the following variables being absent in its analysis: capital accumulation are not consider as the nonwage labor, or gave any recognition to the different modes of social grouping other than class such as race, gender, ethnicity, etc. According to them the failure to analyse them with these variables adequately has failed in giving its true and "real existing socialism." In short, the orthodox Marxists have objected as they have deviated from the true Marxist model in accordance to their Marxist intellectual traditions that prescribe i.e - the German Social-Democratic Party and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. 1.10.3 The State Autonomists The state autonomists had objected why the strong intellectual boundary between the activities of states and capitalist entrepreneurs has been eradicated. According to them the actor s basic motivation differs in accordance to different rules and pressures as there are sphere and therefore should not be club as one analysis. 22
The main critique of World System Theory - the positivists, the orthodox Marxists, and the state autonomists have objected to the basic premise of world-systems analysis as they all insisted on their own centrality of the state as their main unit of analysis. 1.10.4 The Culturalists According to the Culturalists, the analysis of the market or the state as the other main modes of social analysis do not take cognizance of its cultural sphere which is the primary locus where the social reality can be best explained. They critiqued on the fact that the world-systems analysis has generalized propositions which has neglected or made the cultural sphere as secondary role. They are particularly upset by the proposition that political, economic, and socio cultural spheres be seen as a construct of centrist liberalism. Therefore they have no utility for a lasting intellectual tradition. 1.10.5 The Reductionism The reductionism led by Theda Skocpol has criticised the World System Theory on the ground that it is too simplistic a theory as she believes that the interstate system is not just a simple superstructure in the capitalist world or economy. She has critique that the present international states system was not originally created by capitalism. Did you know 5 Theda Skocpol Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/theda_skocpol accessed on Dec 10, 2014 ThedaSkocpol is an American sociologist and political scientist at Harvard University and was born in the year of India s independence in 1947. She uses the Sociological tradition to advocate for the historical-institutional and comparative approaches, as she has made a comparative study on social 23 revolution in Russia, France and China. She is widely popular Institute among of the Lifelong academic Learning, audiences. University of Delhi
In a nutshell, most of the criticisms that have been made against the world-systems analysis have focused on their own proclamation of their own perspective. They view the World-systems analysis as not only defective but limited in its scope. All the critiques have responded with their own assertion and viewpoints. While the World System Theory seeks to offer a holistic unidisciplinary view of social reality as a tool of analysis as a part of its intellectual enquiry across disciplines and approaches, but the critiques has tried to analyse the theory in accordance to their own epistemological enquiry, disciplines and approaches. 1.9 1.10 Test Your Knowledge D (Select true or false) 21. The framework of World System Theory has often been used as a base by other theorists 22. The World System Theory has been unchallenged by others till now 23. There has been no critique of the World System Theory 24. The culturalists feel that the main mode of analysis should be the social and cultural 25. The Orthodox Marxists has supported the World System Theory 1.11 Conclusions The World System theory has attempted to explain the present international political system taking cognizance of how history has had its impact in its economy to determine the current scenario. It seeks to give a causal explanation why modernisation had different effects on the world; from the breakdown of feudalism transform the political and economic conditions of northwest Europe to be a predominant commercial and political power. Thereby the expansion of the capitalist world economy geographically is by altering the political systems and penetrating the labour conditions in different countries of the world. The relationship between the different categories of state be it core, semi-periphery or periphery remains relative and not a constant despite the fact that the functioning of the world economy has created increasing differentiation between the various types of 24
economies. The technological advantage has expanded the world economy and has precipitated changes where some of the peripheral and semi peripheral states exist. Wallerstein has analyzed the history of capitalist world system by showing a development that is skewed due to disparities in economy and society have increased within different sections of the world economy rather than providing prosperity. The capitalist markets have extended through the establishment of state systems in different regions of the world system and have reached its geographic limits in the 20 th century. It witnessed the emergence of US as a hegemonic power despite the fact that its relative economic and political strength has been diminishing since Cold war. The presence of new independent states and a communist regime has challenged the control of core countries despite the fact that economic status of some of the former peripheral countries have improved. According to Wallerstein, as the world economy gets more polarized it sets the stage for a transition where exploitations of new markets can no longer solve the new crises of contradiction and lead to a decline in the economy which will stimulate a struggle in the core countries; and its corresponding challenge in the dominance of the core countries. The absence of a globally accepted ideology with a strong hegemonic power will not only polarized the world system but leads to a breaking point, where a chaotic transition that might not necessarily lead to an Equal and Democratic World but would definitely lead to the end of a globalization of Capitalism. 1.12 Summary The World System Theory propounded by Immanuel Wallerstein is said to be a major breakthrough in the Marxist analysis of International Relations This theory studies how Colonialism has influence on the developing countries has corresponding effects on the developed countries. Besides, how the economy dictates the politics in these countries, which has an overall influences over the society Immanuel Wallerstein as an American sociologist was born in 1930 during the two world wars, and had served as an American soldier during 1951-53- during the peak of Cold War in the world affairs. 25