STUDENT: SILVIA RODRIGUEZ LAURA
ID: 20,993,245
SUBJECT: ANNUAL THESIS SEMINAR
TEACHER: GUSTAVO GUEVARA
PROJECT OF THESIS
Topic: The Crisis of the capitalist system 1975: final unannounced History .
Critical analysis of current neo-Marxist within the dependency school: Vania Bambirra, Theotonio Dos Santos and Ruy Mauro Marini .
the deep crisis in Latin America can not be resolved within capitalism. Or is moving steadily towards revolutionary socialism and opened a path of development and progress for the broad masses of our country, or appeals to fascist barbarism, only able to secure the capital conditions for political survival some time for it to continue its development dependent based on the super of workers, the denationalization of our economy, the exclusion of vast sections of the petty bourgeoisie, the export venture the detriment of domestic mass consumption. Such a "development economic "may only be imposed based on the most barbarous tyranny" (¹)
When thinking about these words of Theotonio dos Santos and watch the process since year 1975 to present, in Latin America, opens a big question about forecast was not. A forecast could not imagine the continuity in time of crisis capitalist system without a final resolution, and could not risk the possibility of the emergence of a new pattern systemic accumulation, which overcome the recession. Nor could contemplate the idea of \u200b\u200bdependent capitalist development in Latin America monopoly within democratic regimes, without falling into the exclusive option of: Socialism or Fascism. Again the question is why and here focuses the objective of this research, which seeks to understand the theoretical evolution of the School of the Unit and in particular the group called "radical" or neo-Marxist, made by that Theotonio dos Santos, Ruy Mauro Marini and Vania Bambirra, who advanced deeper into the study of the contradictions of capitalist development and monopoly dependent, resulting in the blocking the development of productive forces in Latin America and the significance of dependence not as an external imposition but as a relationship formed by condition two external faces and internal . On that basis, posed the impossibility of autonomous capitalist development, because the hegemonic distribution in the world and was established as the internal structure of our countries, was set in a subordinate position. Was
(¹) Theotonio dos Santos, "Imperialism and dependency" (Mexico, Ediciones Era, 1978) p. 471.
structural change needed to overcome dependency, as this would produce a continuous process of stagnation, which paid for the political circumstances, could radicalize both right, as left.
The end of history, is well known and today we see as our countries grow, the inequality, because the system is developed, taking fracturante behavior in society: on one hand a minority with high incomes and consumption patterns consistent with the central and the other with a large majority little or no income to bid for survival. Today we see that U.S. made up its hegemonic role, and even some scientists speak of recolonization. Today we see that the production model for large transnationals, no longer think of subsidiaries that manufacture for the domestic market of the country they are guests, but the decomposition of the production process, which locates in country areas more advanced activities identified and most backward countries, work in series, drawing on his behalf differences in productivity and wages. Once again the capitalist system has morphed, developing a new stage in the internationalization of capital , now has global scale and is called "globalization", overcoming the crisis, thanks to the rebuilding of profit rate, with a new form of regulation called post-Fordist, where production and consumption not intended to reach the mass where manufacturing is specialized to be targeted at market segments with high incomes, without geographic boundaries.
What happened between the International Crisis 1975 and the rise that began in 1994, some keys are likely to find on what happened during those years, where function defeat in the mobilization of the working class in Latin America and installation of de facto regimes, opened the door for greater economic subordination, through the deepening of the mechanism of debt, which led to successive military governments as both are democratic, not only to transfer resources abroad continuously, but to introduce economic reforms demanded international financial institutions, which pointed to the unrestricted opening at the expense of domestic industry and in favor international corporations, as well as the dismantling State, while protecting social security and employer, under the excuse of being deficient and inefficient. Ultimately it was in Latin America, where after the political defeat of popular mobilization, it installs a cultural defeat, as the doctrine of "no alternative" created by neoliberalism, means that the social (health, housing, education) commodified. Those areas that a few decades ago were protected by the State, of the contradictions of capitalism, today measured by the criterion of profitability. In summary we believe that de facto regimes opened the way for greater vulnerability not only from economic openness, but also consolidating the defeat of Labor by Capital, as workers were losing bargaining power first because of political persecution and repression then through labor flexibility, and finally from the addition of automation technologies that reduced the number of jobs and whose ultimate effect was the generate a social discipline. Once the vulnerability deepened by debt, deindustrialization , And labor flexibility, the policy could therefore be dictatorial, as democratic as the economic subordination was implemented and appeared as an independent sphere of politics.
Our work aims to track these key moments that explain the improvement of the International Crisis Capitalist System in 1975 and entry into a new phase, from particular study processes Argentina, Chile and Brazil, seeking to establish more clearly the strengths and weaknesses Analytical neo-Marxist theorists of the dependency.
STATE OF AFFAIRS:
The so-called School of the Unit, comprising a many authors, who
share some basic ideas and see the development / underdevelopment, while two sides of the same process; dependence phenomenon internal / external and underdevelopment connected with the expansion of industrialized countries and not previous stage to evolve.
Overall is a classification proposed by the authors and Hettne Blomstrom, whereby could be grouped into three lines:
- Structuralist: pose of which revolve around the diagnosis of the causes of underdevelopment in Latin America and the proposal of limitations for independent development. In this group we find: Osvaldo Sunkel, Celso Furtado, Henrique Cardoso,
- neomarxists: their research will toward understanding the causes of dependent development and monopoly and the need for structural change to resolve the crisis that this type of system generates. Here we can name: Vania Bambirra, Theotonio dos Santos and Ruy Mauro Marini.
- work Ander Gunder Frank, that if it does not fall within Marxism, has in common with neo-Marxists, especially in analysis of capitalism in Latin America (complementary) and generator development and underdevelopment. The big difference is that the posing of Gunder Frank, trapped in the central country schema / satellite country, unable to advance the concept of dependence and its root conditioning.
In our research, we focus within the radical or neo-Marxist group, whose works can be find some basic guidelines. For Theotonio dos Santos, his research, advanced in the context economic cycles of the capitalist system (whose origin crawled in Kondratieff), the study of multinational deeper understanding monopoly capitalism, supported by the work of Baran and Sweezy. At the same time ran the contradictions of monopoly development, scoring a major the fact that the productive base capitalism becomes increasingly international, while the market and state , starting points for development are limited to national frameworks.
On the other hand, left raised the combined and uneven character of this system., Which generates a surplus transfer to the most dynamic centers, which accentuates the world system cycle and generates the development of a the detriment of others. Their work continues in this line, to reach the concept of dependence, a cornerstone of the neo-Marxist group that is understood as a proper relationship of a particular historical moment in the global economy, which determines the internal structure of a country, which in once redefined in terms of their potential for expansion, which always ultimately involves a blockage in the development of productive forces. In particular, the study of Latin American economies , is approached by Dos Santos, both from the export sector, as from domestic industrial .
His whole frame analytical concludes with the view that development of monopoly capitalism and dependent leads to end a crisis within that same system whose contradictions can be exacerbated or not, depending expansionary or recessionary phase of the global economy. Therefore and this agree Dos Santos, Marini and Bambirra, it is necessary to overcome dependency, independent development of Latin America and the settlement of political and economic subordination.
On Ruy Mauro Marini, one of the central works, is about to unravel the "secret exchange unequal, as the core countries exchanged goodwill on high productivity, by absolute surplus with low productivity and super. Here is one of the most important contributions, which joins the explanation of why the development invented the underdevelopment because Latin American specialization in food and raw materials allowed Europe's industrial specialization and the establishment of its axis accumulation in growth of relative surplus value.
From the political debate is important to highlight the concepts discussed Marini, the characterization fascist coups in Latin America during the '60s. This author tries to establish basic differences with the fascist state of the 40's, while not seeking the support of the masses, or form movement superior containing society as a whole. Basically according to opinion establishing a " counterinsurgency State, understood as the corporate state monopoly of the bourgeoisie and the armed forces , under a process of change of the middle class dominant and monopolistic fractions that are domestic and foreign, who will lead the process and are unable of alliance with other classes of product characteristics assumed new type of accumulation., because it does not include as the "Populist State" to the society as a whole (although less is unevenly). The State of Counterinsurgency, it should be understood not only from changes in the bourgeoisie, but since the rise that had been made in the mass struggle, within a new context class alliances: monopoly bourgeoisie-FFAA / Small bourgeoisie-working class. The latter analysis is rich in both incarnation gives the class struggle and has points of contact with the proposals of William O'Donnell, referring the "hegemonic tie" between the alliance offensive / defensive, that breaks new with military dictatorships and the establishment of a new mode of accumulation.
THEORETICAL
The proposed topic will be addressed, from the conception of historical materialism, to define a History of economic ideas about the Development, Crisis and the emergence of a new pattern of accumulation In the capitalist system, from the 70's. To this end, we start from the work done by the current neo-Marxist, comprising Bambirra, Dos Santos and Marini, who give us a very rich in ; regarding the perception of the depth of the crisis, whose character is defined as systemic and international, while advancing on the analysis of the form taken in societies Latin American subsidiaries.
The study will seek to work from the face theoretical and practical Latin American social reality. For the theoretical analysis and in order to achieve greater understanding of the developmental characteristics of the capitalist system and its crisis, will incorporate the analysis of Paul Sweezy about it, that leaves the question raised on the collapse or chronic depression , but ultimately, always viewed as an impediment to the development of the productive forces of society. Coupled with this, take the "Theory Long Waves", with its different phases, as the political and economic processes to study in Argentina, Chile and Brazil, show an interesting sync with the 1967-1975 phase of the cycle.
also from Marxism, but in particular from the Gramscian thought, take the concept of "Hegemony " that allows us to advance on a few meanings central to our work, as "hegemonic role " while the role of U.S. in the international economy. As well as the "hegemonic Tie" between the various class alliances, where any does impose itself on the other, but only hinder the project otherwise. This approach, which was developed in work Guillermo O'Donnell, I think is interesting, to see where the countries studied, as he did and how it was overcome the situation of a tie, from the break that led to military coups in the countries concerned.
Finally from the field of political analysis, derrick see the definition of Socialism and Fascism from the neo-Marxist group, as the likely alternatives are that they pose, to the radicalization of the crisis of 1975.
0 comments:
Post a Comment