Wallerstein Theory

In this work we look for the historical structures in ancient Rome: "the coral reefs of human relations, which have a stable existence for a relatively long period of time [---] that are born, develop and die" (Wallerstein) . From this macrohistorical perspective, we analyze the Roman imperialist system of agricultural and mercantile base, although not always slavery, which presents a complex evolution from the initial imperialism (ss. III– ½ I BC), to its phase of decline and transformation (2nd ½ s. III– s. V AD). In this book we focus on the intermediate period: polycentric imperialism (2nd ½ s. I BC – ½ s. III AD), in which Rome ceases to be a traditional empire, responding neither to redistributive-tributary models, nor to capitalists.


En esta obra buscamos las estructuras históricas en la antigua Roma: “los arrecifes de coral de las relaciones humanas, que tienen una existencia estable durante un período relativamente largo de tiempo [---] que nacen, se desarrollan y mueren” (Wallerstein). Desde esta perspectiva macrohistórica, analizamos el sistema imperialista romano de base agrícola y mercantil, aunque no siempre esclavista, que presenta una evolución compleja desde el imperialismo inicial (ss. III– ½ I a.C.), hasta su fase de declive y transformación (2ª ½ s. III– s. V d.C.). En este libro nos centramos en el periodo intermedio: el imperialismo policéntrico (2ª ½ s. I a.C.–½ s. III d.C.), en el que Roma deja de ser un imperio tradicional, sin responder ni a modelos redistributivo-tributarios, ni a capitalistas.

The problem of correlation between the processes of integration and modernization has been considered by the example of the historical experience of Russia. The features and consequences of their interaction have been identified. The study of the Russian experience of interaction for processes of integration and modernization suggests that the integration of the joining of the territories to the imperial center almost always ahead of modernization, often becoming its consequence. It was traced to the period 1480-1605, with 1613 and during the XVII century, and after the formation of the USSR in the 1920-1930s. Sometimes these two processes simultaneously: the reign of Peter I and Catherine II in the XVIII century, Alexander II in the XIX century. Rarely modernization preceded integration or was without it (from the beginning of the XX century before the World War I, in the period of "perestroika" 1985-1991). It is significant that for the beginning of the effective modernization in the form of multilateral reform is almost always required to state the relative stability of the imperial center, that has been achieved after the social and economic and the military and political coalescence of integrated lands with it. Modernization is inconceivable in conditions of instability and disintegration. And integration could occur even in a period of social and economic weakness of the imperial center, this was the forerunner of further reforms or flowing parallel with these reforms.
Keywords: Russia, integration, modernization, correlation, process.

Abstract: There is no accepted, unified, politico-economic theory of development. In critical development studies, there is a general agreement that two counter-posing theories of political economy, modernization and dependency, were most prominent in the three decades following World War II. Both of these schools of thought fell out of popularity in the mid-1970s, though some of their core temporal and spatial assumptions live on today. In Section One of this paper, I analytically reflect on the modernization/dependency debate to lay a foundation for a discussion in Section Two on the timing of development and of modernity. Timing is an area of debate that goes to the heart of modernization and dependency theories, development practice, and critical development studies. World-systems analysis (WSA) is one of the approaches involved in the space/time debate in critical development studies. In Section Three, the final analytic section, I explore WSA as a school of thought currently in vogue in critical development studies, though not without some controversy. I show that WSA's theory of the subject is Eurocentric.

В статье рассмотрены исторические циклы модернизации России. Показано, что первый цикл продолжался с конца XVII до начала второго десятилетия XIX в. В это время модернизация в форме «вестернизации» способствовала тому, что в XVIII в. (в период между правлениями Петра I и Екатерины II) Россия интегрировалась в мировую капиталистическую систему, позиционируясь как полупериферия. Но по своим характеристикам она являлась империей, проводя активную внешнюю политику. А ее стремление преодолеть периферийные процессы и приблизиться к ядру мир-системы обусловило «догоняющий» характер модернизации российского общества. Победа России в Отечественной войне 1812 г. характеризует в целом позитивный для нее итог данного цикла модернизации. Второй цикл датируется концом 50-х гг. XIX – началом XX в., демонстрируя либеральную модель модернизации. В итоге недостаток экономических ресурсов, «националистический консерватизм» властей, «бюрократически направляемая индустриализация» и форсированная модернизация приводят к трагедии России в Первой мировой войне и революционным событиям 1917 г. Выбор в пользу автаркии был сделан в конце 1920-х – начале 1930-х гг., положив начало третьему циклу модернизации России в форме индустриализации, которая все же дала свои результаты. Экономический рост продолжился и после Второй мировой войны вследствие выполнения пятилетних планов. Четвертый цикл российской модернизации характеризовался событиями «перестройки» второй половины 1980-х и периодом постсоветской России 1990-х гг. Вследствие этого Российская Федерация оказывается в положении полупериферии, а большинство новых независимых государств – периферии в рамках мировой капиталистической системы. Обосновано, что первый и третий циклы относились к имперской модели модернизации, а второй и четвертый – к либеральной. Проанализированы последствия выделенных циклов.
Ключевые слова: Россия, мир-системный анализ, циклы модернизации, имперская модель, либеральная модель, периферия, полупериферия, ядро.

The article describes the historical cycle of Russian modernization. It is shown that the first cycle lasted from the late XVII before the second decade of the XIX century. At this time modernization in the form of «westernization» contributed to the fact that in the XVIII century (in the period between the reigns of Peter I and Catherine II) Russia integrated into the world capitalist system and she was positioned as semi-periphery. But Russia was an empire in her characteristics also she has been active in foreign policy. And her desire to overcome the peripheral processes and closer to the core of the world-system resulted in «catch-up» nature of modernization of Russian society. Russia’s victory in the Patriotic War of 1812 characterizes the overall positive outcome for her of this cycle of modernization. The second cycle dates from the late 50’s XIX – beginning of XX century. It was an example of the liberal model of modernization. As a result the lack of economic resources, «the nationalist conservatism» of the authorities, «bureaucratically directed industrialization» and accelerated modernization led to the tragedy of Russia in World War I and the revolutionary events of 1917. The choice in favor of self-sufficiency was made in the late 1920’s – early 1930’s, this marked the beginning of the third cycle of modernization of Russia in the form of industrialization, which has produced results. Economic growth continued after World War II as a result of implementation of five-year plans. The fourth cycle of Russian modernization characterized the events of «perestroika» the second half of the 1980’s and the period of post-Soviet Russia of the 1990’s. Consequently, Russian Federation is in a position semi-periphery, and most of the New Independent States – within the periphery of the world capitalist system. It is proved that the first and third cycles belonged to the imperial model of modernization, and the second, and fourth – to the liberal model. The consequences of these cycles were analyzed.
Keywords: Russia, world-system analysis, cycles of modernization, imperial model, liberal model, periphery, semi-periphery, core.

Based on the work of Immanuel Wallerstein, who studied the formation of the world system, and the world’s division into three hierarchical levels - central, periphery and semi-periphery -, this article aims to explain Wallerstein´s World System Theory (WST), making an aggiornamento in its validity for understanding the structure of today’s world, as well as to verify the extent to which WSM is still valid as an analytical category in today’s global society in its social, political and economic relations. It is our view that all social theory, as this of Wallerstein´s, has to contribute to the understanding of reality, especially the asymmetrical relations of the globalized world. Thus, based on TSM, we found that the world has been structured to replicate the world-system, through institutions such as the World Bank, IMF, IDB, UN, among others, and we analyzed the consequences of this structure manifested in the international division of labor in exploitation of natural resources, labor, capital and the liberal peace model.

Keywords: World-System, globalization, international division of labor, outsourcing, liberal peace.

Wallerstein kitabında Amerikan gücünün sürekli bir gerileme içerisinde olduğunu savlıyor ve bu savını Vietnam savaşı, Balkanlardaki savaşlar, Somali ve Irak müdahalelerinde ABD’nin önüne koyduğu hedefleri tam anlamıyla gerçekleştirememesi üzerinden temellendiriyor. Wallerstein yazısı boyunca dış politikaya odaklanıyor ve zannımca işin ekonomik boyutunu haddinden fazla göz ardı ediyor.

El siguiente ensayo analiza la decimoquinta Conferencia Internacional sobre el Cambio Climático, también conocida como COP 15, haciendo hincapié en la posición de los principales actores involucrados en dicho acontecimiento, así como los resultados obtenidos luego de las negociaciones. Evaluaré cuáles han sido los límites y restricciones a la hora de llegar a un acuerdo. Asimismo, se considerará el marco teórico brindado por Immanuel Wallerstein para caracterizar a la crisis ambiental como una manifestación particular de una crisis mayor, la de la economía mundo capitalista.

This paper presents the World-System Theory, which is also called the Centre – Periphery Model, and its application and usefulness in archaeology. This article focuses only on the World-System theory; the World-System Analysis will be discussed elsewhere. In the current article I consider the background to the Theory, its emergence at the beginning of the 1970sand its influence on archaeological works, particularly on the scholarly activity of Kristian Kristiansen and Andrew Sherrat. As an example, I present some statements concerning the Bronze Age as an era that saw very sophisticated, multiple exchange relations connecting remote regions of Europe. I also present the criticism towards the World-System Theory and its application in archaeology by Anthony Harding. Artykuł ten ma na celu przedstawienie społeczności archeologicznej dorobku i osiągnięć jednej z najciekawszych postaci nauk społecznych przełomu XX i XXI w. – Immanuela Wallersteina. Proponowana publikacja będzie podzielona na dwie części, które będą ukazywać się w kolejnych numerach Folii Praehistorici Posnanienses.