International Political Economy
Structuralism in
Perspective: Lenin and
Imperialism, Modern World
Systems Theory, Dependency
Theory.
(Ch. 4 contd)
Lenin and Imperialism
-
-
Lenin: founder of the Soviet Union, role in the Russian
Revolution of 1917.
Took Marx’s ideas forward – Russia had gone through the
capitalist stage in history and was ready for a socialist
revolution
Lenin’s ideas are the basis of Dependency and MWS theory
Marx Vs Lenin
Marx: Capitalism contains the seeds of its own destruction –
inherently unstable – three laws – class conflict – revolutionary
crisis – transition to socialism.
Lenin expanded Marx’s theory: Capitalism had escaped its three
laws of motion through overseas imperialism – acquisition of
foreign colonies had enabled the capitalists to dispose off
unconsumed goods and acquire cheap resources.
Marx focus: internal exploitation of capitalism
Lenin Focus: international exploitation of capitalism – how
inequality between classes was similar to inequality in
development among industrialized and developing countries.
Fourth Law: Law of capitalist imperialism
As capitalist economies mature, capital
accumulates, profits fall, capitalist economies
acquire colonies to serve as markets,
investment outlets and sources of cheap raw
material.
Lenin: imperialism is the highest stage of
capitalism –concentration of wealth in
capitalism fuels imperialism
Imperial capitalism spreads through two structures of
IPE: the production and finance structure.
Under capitalism both theses structures are constituted
to create dependency and facilitate exploitation.
Rich capitalist countries are able to delay their financial
crisis by keeping poor nations underdeveloped and
deep in debt, and dependent on the rich nations for
manufactured goods, jobs and financial resources.
Modern World System’s theory
(MWS)
Immanuel Wallerstein - the founder of the
intellectual school of world-systems theory –
- characterizes the world system as a set of
mechanisms which redistributes resources from the
periphery to the core.
Modern World System’s theory (MWS)
Core: developed industrialized nations
Semi- Periphery: NICs
Periphery: LDCs
Core nations dominate the peripheral states through
unequal exchange- extraction of cheap raw materials
etc. The Core interacts with the periphery and the
semiperiphery through the global structure of
capitalism. Core exploits and transforms
Semi periphery acts as an intermediary – diffusing
opposition of the periphery to the core.
The core nations primarily own and control the major means of
production in the world and perform the higher-level production
tasks.
The periphery nations own very little of the world’s means of
production and provide less-skilled labor.
Like a Marx’s class system with a nation,:The core nations receive
the greatest share of surplus production, and periphery nations
receive the least. Furthermore, core nations are usually able to
purchase raw materials and other goods from noncore nations
at low prices, while demanding higher prices for their exports to
noncore nations
Core, Periphery and Semi-periphery Today?
Criticism of MWS?
MWS approach to structuralism sees
exploitation as an inherent element of the
capitalist economic structure both within and
among the core, periphery and
semiperiphery.
Simplistic and deterministic?
Dependency Theory
Main theme: the structure of the global political
economy enslaves the less developed
countries of the “South” by making them
dependent on the capitalist core nations of
the “North”
“Development of underdevelopment” thesis:
Imperialism produced underdevelopment
Then how can the periphery develop if it is
exploited by the industrialized nations in the
global political economy?
- Withdraw from the global political economy?
- Efforts to redistribute power and income
between North and South (eg. Organizations
like UNCTAD)
- Calls for a NIEO