Re: "rise of china" and wst

        World-system theory, like all others, is applicable only to the
past.  Anyone who sees it as more than a vague, fuzzy, and exceedingly
general guide to future events is, like the undersigned, foolhardy.

        Warren


On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Richard N Hutchinson wrote:

> Today in my Contemporary Sociological Theory course I led a discussion of
> world-system theory.  I/we did not do justice to the topic, of course, as
> part of a whirlwind tour of theories.
> 
> But an issue came up that made me wonder about the theory, and that is the
> so-called "rise of China."  Perhaps I'm a bit slow and this is what Gunder
> has been trying to say for the past few years, but I found myself
> wondering if it doesn't challenge the theory at a basic level.
> 
> Here are some possibilities:
> 
> A) Is a peripheral country actually set to become a contender for
> hegemonic power?  If so, doesn't that knock a big hole in the theory?  
> 
> B) Is it actually the case that China, being a peripheral country, is
> not really going to be a contender for hegemon/core power any time
> soon?  (Perhaps, like the old USSR, it's really just moving up to
> semi-peripheral status?)
> 
> C) Perhaps the truth is some combination of the two (as in Kantor's recent
> study) and China can become quite powerful without becoming part of the
> "core" in terms of GDPPC?  What are the implications of that for the
> theory?
> 
> Are there other positions I've missed?  What is the evidence for each?
> 
> Hoping to trigger a productive debate,
> 
> Richard Hutchinson
> Weber State University
> remote Ogden, Utah
> 
> 
>