| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
102430
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
098286
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Routledge, 2010.
|
| Description |
viii, 279p.
|
| Standard Number |
9780415478021, hbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 055175 | 320.532/ANI 055175 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
087855
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
A central concern of much contemporary Marxist scholarship in international relations (IR) is to internally relate global capitalism and the state system without reducing one of these systems to an epiphenomenon of the other. A recent attempt at this is Justin Rosenberg's reformulation of Leon Trotsky's idea of uneven and combined development (U&CD). This article examines the internal relations of 'unevenness' and 'combination' as presented by Trotsky and reworked by Rosenberg. From this anatomization of the concept, we focus on the problematic status of U&CD as a transhistorical general abstraction arising from the exchange between Callinicos and Rosenberg (Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 22:1 2008, 77-112) and suggest our own possible solution. We argue that while the uneven and combined nature of historical development represents a truly transhistorical phenomenon, its distinct causal determinations, articulated and expressed through inter-societal competition, are only fully activated under the specific socio-historical conditions of generalized commodity production. These theoretical points are illuminated through three specific historical examples (the Meiji Restoration, the 'Eastern Question' and the origins of the two World Wars). Finally, we illustrate some of the dangers of analytical overextension found in Rosenberg's own ambiguous use of U&CD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
124621
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article draws on the theory of uneven and combined development (U&CD) to construct a non-Eurocentric and 'internationalist' analysis of the transition to capitalism. In doing so, we seek to respond to and rethink two challenges: exposures of Eurocentric notions of the 'Rise of the West' on the one hand; and recent critiques of Eurocentric assumptions in the theory of U&CD on the other. Beginning with an assessment of Robert Brenner's Anglo-centric theorisation of capitalism's origins, we argue Brenner's efforts are hamstrung by an omission of international determinations and conditions. In turn, we retrace these missing international factors through an analysis of the Mongol invasions of the 13th/14th centuries, Ottoman imperial expansion in the 15th/16th centuries and the contemporaneous discovery and colonisation of the New World. We argue that each case demonstrates the historically specific forms of U&CD that fed into - and ultimately determined - the developmental trajectory of capitalism in north-western Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|