Dear Colleagues,
Franks position is not that there is/has been a "monocentric" world
system; quite the contrary. He argues that there has rarely been
periods in which one "superhegemon" reigned. Rather, we have usually
seen interconnected/interlinked hegemons which subsequently rise and
fall in synchronicity based on a (roughly)500 year cycle.
His approach (and the empirical reality?) is synchronic and polycentric.
Some will argue that on the issue of systemic evolution Frank's position
isn't merely synchronic. To those i ask a simple question: Why is it
that the logic of accumulation is said to have been the dominant dynamic
of the system since the Neolithic revolution?
Best,
Christian Harlow
UC Santa Cruz