Dependency and World System Theory: A Critique and New Directions
Dependency and World System Theory: A Critique and New Directions
BA0190031
The framework of the world system explains that there are different stages in the levels of
national development within the global economy and it is related to the economic role and
geographic position of the state and it is important to understand that the generalisation of the
world economy means that the actions of any state will not always be for its immediate concrete
interests but may be because of what has been dictated to the actor. The central theme of the
World system theory revolves around how the core regions exploit peripheral regions through
various mechanisms of unequal exchange.
This idea is however similar to that of the ideas of a structuralist but when closely looked
we will find that this idea is based on the unequal exchange in a labour theory of value. This
theory forms the basis on how the surplus value extracted from the working class of the
periphery is transferred to core regions and how these help in maintaining the monopoly in the
form of capitalism. But this however goes against the ideology of the modern Capitalist
ideology. As according to Emmanuel, the capital is mobile and the labour is immobile in the
world market, this shows how the profits are easily equalized in the world economy where as it is
not the same when we take in to the account of how the wages remain different depending on the
nature of the country. To stop this from happening what the peripheral capitalism can initiate is a
question as it can’t be as simple as that a sudden raising of the level of wages. Therefore, the
logical way to prevent the capital from escaping the peripheral states is to divert it towards the
national capitalists and to impose taxes upon them or we the state can diversify the production to
disperse the capita within the state.
When we evaluate this with accordance to the world system we, conceptualize the issues
of the Third World in terms of dependency or as part of a world system is to lose sight of the
most decisive processes of class formation and social relations. The Variation between the class
and the state within the core countries are the determinants to figure out their relative position in
the world capitalist system. In a Capitalist setup the determinants are different when compared to
a peripheral state as the forces that come into play in these setups are varied.
While considering all this we can understand that the political economy of world system
recommends the aggregate economic and technological levels of societal development as all
societies in one way or other participate in the world capital system but at different levels of
interaction which depends in the level of productive force it has reached at that time. This can be
seen in the levels of interactions between India and Dominican Republic. While establishing this
we also need to confirm to the fact that the world market does have a profound effect in shaping
the developments within a social formation as the level of productive capability of a nation being
a transitional is inversely proportional to the vulnerability it possesses to the market. Therefore,
the contest between the internal class development and world market is important to determine
the overall development.
Also, the author introduces into the field the new directions that had been introduced to
this idea. Like focusing on the social relations of production as it allows for a way to limit
exploitation, improving the class relationship at both the levels of interactions that is both
internally and at the world level, also now the idea of class differentiation in the periphery are
not contained by a national boundary as it has now cut across the national boundaries.