Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
EScholarship UC Item 6d4039j5

EScholarship UC Item 6d4039j5

Ratings: (0)|Views: 0 |Likes:
Published by serjuto

More info:

Published by: serjuto on Aug 04, 2014
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishingservices to the University of California and delivers a dynamicresearch platform to scholars worldwide.
Peer ReviewedTitle:
Marxist Theories of Development, the New International Division of Labor, and the Third World
Journal Issue:
Berkeley Planning Journal, 9(1)
Parthasarathy, Balaji
Publication Date:
Publication Info:
Berkeley Planning Journal
Local Identifier:
What are the implications for development in the Third World in light of the widespread intellectualretreat from Marxist theory and practice in recent years? This essay offers an answer to thisquestion by focusing on the current debate concerning the rise of a new inter national division of labor (NIDL). The debate over the NIDL has much significance given the growing interpenetrationof various re gional and national economies in an increasingly integrated global economy. Butwhile one can safely argue that integration with the global economy is now essential to economicgrowth, the terms of the debate over that process appear to have shifted to the mechanism andconditions of integration for hitherto isolated economies. This essay will delineate the trajectorytaken by the NIDL debate to date and will suggest how an historical-structural approach in theMarxist tradition, provides opportunities for furthering the discussion.The essay first provides a brief overview of Marxist theories of Third World development, includingthe ideas of Marx, Lenin and key post-World War II dependency theorists. Next, it highlights keypoints of continuity and discontinuity between these older theories and the current debate onthe NIDL. The essay then concludes with a discus sion of both the structural and historicallydetermined economic and political constraints on the incorporation of the Third World into theNIDL before setting out some questions for future research.
Copyright Information:
 All rights reserved unless otherwise indicated. Contact the author or original publisher for anynecessary per missions. eScholarship is not the copyright owner for deposited works. Learn moreat http://www.escholarship.org/help_copyright.html#reuse
Mrxst hors o vopmt th Nw Iro vso o Lbor, d th hrd ord
Balaji Parthasarathy
Wa are e implicaions or developmen in th Tird World in lig o te widespread inellecual rerea rom Marxist eory d pracice in recen years Tis essay oers an nswr o tis qustio by ocusing on e currendebae concerning te rise of a nw itnational division o labor (NIDL)Te debate ovr h ND hs muc signiicance given e growing inerpentraion of vaios gional and naional economis in an increasingly inegrated glo economy. Bu wile one can saely argue a integraion wi th global economy is now essenial to economic growt, th trms of th debae over a process appear o ave sied to th mecnis d condiions o inegraion or iero isolated conoies This ssy will delineae e rajecory an by e NID debae to date and wll sugges ow an isoricalstrucural approac in te Marxis raditio, provides opporuniies or uhering e discussionTe essay irs provides a brie overview o Marxist eoris of Tird World developmenincluding e ideas o Marx, Lenin and y posWorld War II dependency eoriss. Next i igligs ey points o coninuiy and disconinuiy beween ese older eories and th curren debae on e NIDLTe essay en concludes wi a discussion o bot e srucural and isorically deermined economic d poliical consrains on e incorporaion of e Tird World ino th NIDL beore seing ou some quesions or uure rearc.
M Th d h Thd Wld
Since muc o wa is reerred o as te Tird World was und colonial dominaion by the naions o Europe in te mid19 cenuy, Marxs views mus be inrreed roug is views on coonilism (Avineri 1968). Because e saw capitalism as a progressve foc, Marx oug tt colonilism woud benefit the colonis by introducing capitalis relations. Capialis was progrssv bcus it had an endogenous dynamism wic earier socoeconomic systms laced Te very survival o capitalism inged on its continuing ability to revolutionize its means o producion. As economic ctivity po-vided te basis or socil sructu, suc dynamism exnded to th
Berkeley Planning)ournal9 (1994, 109-124
Bky Paig Joa
o em o even "don nd unhngng sees nd eoe wee nevby dwn no  od nd esued om he doy o u e nd od pejude hus Mx dnguhed eween wh he w  he objeve ws  hoy nd oonm   moy unenbe pe. Cm' ooeonom dynmm w expned by he og o  eoduon. h og equed he onnuou exon o upus vue om podun. Eseny he pdun poess nomed nue no mmde o e he ey o uh nomon depended on he ehn mens  he dpo o he  Moe mpon depended on he ens  poduon sne pduon o equed e us  b pwe Indeed o Mx he bo nu w he oue  vue. Mx sw he exon o uu nd he mmeon  wge bo s he b o  on uh on woud eu n he evenu vehow o he bougoe nd he ebshmen o  yem whee ve oey nd he eon o uu by he ubugon o bo woud be ohd. he he ue o oonsm ws neve en o Mx w-n enn 939) woe moe ey on he ubje n he ey 20h eny n dong o enn mde n mpon depue om M n h oonm woud ed deomen n he oone o enn oonm w he ouom o mem he hghe e o m. h ge ws hezed by he omon o monooe nd  onenon o nne  nd o-duon. eekng new nvemen opoune o  nd new oue o w me he onge p non oned he wod no oone. hu oonm bough mh o h non- wod unde he ono o nenon  nd oked he new oone no he nenon dvon o b  e o w my he 90 howev  w no e h e wodwde ed o m hd ed o he oeve nomon o  oee. No hd o ndnden nny moved he ondono he om oon n he ony by mo eonom nd we-e memh o he hd od w no ng we w n h on  ddny heoy oe Fnk 97)  mo m-on okon w on d o Bznd Che o e h n h n nuy n ndn wod eonomy en-ed n n o o hd nooed n eveoed hy n  om o oon  nooon no he wod onomy d  o  ym onom eveomen o he

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->