Re: state and market in the third and fourth world

Yasir, I agree with you up to a point. 

First, the discussion about the comparative benefits of a unipolar, bi-polar or 
multi-polar world-system for the periphery. I do not think any kind of a 
capitalist world-system would be beneficial to the periphery in general. But 
particular peripheral places and peoples might find themselves included in 
certain hegemonic projects. For instance, the competition between the Soviet 
Union and the U.S. did create some room for maneuver for some peripheral 
nations such as India, or Egypt. (In most cases by a nation I mean its elites). 
Inside the U.S., the bi-polar world was partially responsible for creating the 
conditions necessary for a Civil Rights deal. In the horn of Africa the 
bi-polar world-system both opened up some bribing opportunities and closed some 
alternative egalitarian possibilities. I doubt whether we can develop a theory 
for such opportunities. They have to analyzed in all their local specificities. 
But I can wager that a uni-polar world-system is probably the worst form for 
any marginal or peripheral group to extract any concessions from. What Lenin 
called 'inter-imperialist rivalries' is necessary for some revolutionary and 
reformist agendas to be deployed.

The second argument about what you call the dialectic between the Authoritain 
Market and the Authoritarian State is even more interesting. At the surface I 
agree with you that the market is obviously no panacea. But there is a part of 
me that buys what I think is the hidden world-system thesis which holds that 
markets are really not the problem, but the particular manipulation of the 
market is. With Braudel, this thesis holds that markets are really not where 
powerful people make money. It is by limiting the market in 'monopolistic' ways 
that capitalism works. Recall that Braudel distinguishes between three levels: 
everyday life, the competitive market, and capitalist monopoly. The realm of 
capitalism is not the competitive market.

Let me give you a dramatic example: if tomorrow no state can have any say about 
cross-border immigration, that is, no state can pick and choose who can or 
cannot enter its realm, the geographical dispersal of core and peripheral 
regions will effectively collapse. Wages will be more equal across spatial 
regions. That is, if the labor market is really allowed to work across the 
globe then it will create relatively equal wages over time. Of course, this 
will not create equality on every front, but it will seriously undermine the 
unequal apportioning of commodity chains. In fact, I find world-system 
perspectives more compelling because of its ability to avoid both the 
Social-Democratic panacea of the state or the Liberal panacea of the market. 
Markets can be egalitarian sometimes. That is of course why real historical 
markets never conform to the pure models of the academic economists.

I have gone on for too long already. 
Krishnendu Ray

>>> moh yasir alimi <yasiriyung@yahoo.co.uk> 03/09/01 11:19AM >>>
Dear Friends,
It is very enlightening to read your discussion here.
Any way, could you please help me clarify these
issues.

1. It seems to me that the decline of unipolar world
system, and the possibly rise of multipolar world
system doesnot gives advantage to the Thirds and
Fourth world, economically and politically. Even,
either the unipolar, bipolar or multipolar
world-system economy, are often founded at the expense
of the third and fourth world. For instance, In some
of them, their economy and their geography will
collapse.This point of view is probably a
generalization, but that i want to say is that there
are less advantages than the disadvantages. In our
world system now, are there any potentials for the
development of inclusive, pluralist world system
beyond "IMF" and "WORLD BANK".

2. For the Third World peoples, they have double
burdens now. The Authoritarian Government and The
Authoritarian Market. Or some of them experienced an
authoritarian regime in the past, but now they have to
face an authoritarian market. Are there any markets
systems in the world system that could give benefits
for poor and traditional people in the Third and
Fourth World.
Thanks for your consideration.

Best Wishes
Yasir

____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk 
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie