Re: Civility

Louis,

In what way is world-system theory any more disconnected from practice
than other Marxist projects, say, for example, the one you are involved
in? 

Despite problems, world-system theory does a better job of tackling the
theoretical problems of the third world than most other Marxist
orientations I have experienced. World-system, in part, and in a way other
strands of Marxism did not, developed out of grounded historiographies in
the periphery, frequently by intellectuals in the periphery. 

Moreover, world-system has put at the center of its analysis the
recognition of the totality of the bourgeois historical system in a way
often implied in Marx's work yet erased by Marxist ideologues concerned
with legitimating a narrow nationalist interpretation of Marx (even if in
rhetoric they deny this).

The degree to which world-system theory is relevant for our struggle for
socialism has to do with how well it captures historical reality and how
willing we are to put it into practice. Here, like any other knowledge
system, it has its pluses and minuses. But your point about practice is
irrelevant, since world-system theory does not make the claim that it
should not be used in practice. Indeed, to take one example, Wallerstein's
theoretical claims are intrinsically oriented towards the building of a
socialist world-system.

Finally, world-system theory is in keeping with the tradition of Marx.
Unlike most other ideological orientations of Marxism, world-system theory
is EVOLVING. Rather than being hooked into the theories and accounts of
late-19th century/early 20th century ideologues, world-system theory has
(albeit reluctantly at times) changed to represent a changing world.

World-system theory is a serious intellectual endeavor. I have seen no
challenge to world-system theory in your post, Louis, although I imagine
that list-members welcome such a challenge. I would only ask that such a
challenge be a serious and rational one, not one based on slogans and
flaming.

Respectfully,
Andy