From: Louis Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:29024] Jim Blaut on world systems analysis
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 18:56:12 -0400
(From the late Jim Blaut's regrettably out-of-print The National
Question. Sharp readers
F G wrote:
I´m no expert (there´s that word again) in WS analysis, my knowledge
of it stemming entirely from reading some of the papers on the FBC site
and numerous articles in the Journal of World Systems Research. From
what I have read though, some of the above misrepresents the claims
Very interesting argument forwarded by Louis Proyect
At 01/08/02 18:56 -0400, you wrote:
(From the late Jim Blaut's regrettably
out-of-print The National Question. Sharp readers will notice
a strong affinity between Wallerstein's world systems perspective and the
one put forward by Hardt-Negri
Certainly Marx did not write centrally about how the law of value operates
on the largest scale in conditions where there are great discrepancies in
the level of the means of production. But it should not be impossible to do so.
Chris Burford
---
Key to understanding the relationship
Louis Proyect wrote...
A related position is Giovanni Arrighi's peculiar 'geometry' of world
processes under capitalism. Arrighi is an admitted Kantian, and he believes
that the basic forces determining the historical trajectory of the modern
world are ultimately spatial, in an absolutist,
joanna bujes :
Yeah, I read the Wallerstein piece that was posted earlier today and I was
profoundly underwhelmed. It made me think that one cure for neo-marxism
would be some kind of grunt job for at least a year (in lieu of a
sabbatical). Beyond that, Hardt/Negri/Wallerstein/etc interest
