RE: Andre Gunar Frank & Marx

Pennefather's critique of Frank is at least as old as Brenner's of 
Wallerstein.  I highly recommend reviewing Wallerstein's "Marx and 
Underdevelopment" in Unthinking Social Science, which provides sufficient 
evidence that among Marx's views, he held a world-systems perspective 
insofar as he rejected the idea that nation-states are independently 
developing units.

Not that all that is worthy must measure up to Marx.  I don't think so. 
 But rather that a great deal of Marxism has overlooked this key element of 
his thought which has led to "much spilled ink and blood."

On the other hand, I agree that the analysis of the historically specific 
forms of the core-periphery relation is what is missing in IW's seminal 
work, which, nonetheless, in my view is among the, or possibly "the", more 
profound contribution(s) since Marx.  But a direction I also find 
theoretically fascinating is that outlined in the Introduction of Tomich's 
in Slavery in the Circuit of Sugar.  Check it out.

Elson E. Boles
Assistant Professor, (Historical) Sociology
University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma
(405) 574-1243
facbolese@usao.edu

On Saturday, October 30, 1999 1:48 PM, George Pennefather 
[SMTP:poseidon@tinet.ie] wrote:
>  << File: ATT00003.txt; charset = Windows-1252 >>  << File: 
ATT00004.html; charset = Windows-1252 >>