A Brief Histories of Globalization(s)

Objectives of the Lecturer To introduce four primary points of departure for study of globalisation and to assess the problems and advantages associated with adopting each of these dates

Structure of Lecture Section One Outline Frank and Gills arguments that the world system (globalisation) is 5000 years old Assess the problems inherent in such an approach and suggest a different way of understand the pre-history of globalisation

Section Two Assess the arguments of Wallerstein and Chase Dunn which date rise of European World Economy to around 1500 Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of this approach

Section Three Briefly consider the orthodox Marxist and liberal arguments which date the rise of the World Capitalist Economy (thus globalisation) to C16th and C17th England.

Section Four Engage with the argument that globalisation ought to understood as a relatively new phenomena which dated to the 1970s (1973 in particular)

A note on terminology Braudel’s economie-monde. World Economy= Is a large geographic zone within which there is significant exchange of essential goods as well as flows of capital and labour

Section One Frank and Gills “We believe that the existence and development of the same world system in which we live stretches back five thousand years or more” Wilkinson goes for 3500 years A World System: Extensive and Persistent trade connections, sharing economic, political and perhaps also culture cycles

Started 5000 years WE based around Egypt, Mesopotamia, the Arabian Peninsula, the Levant, Anatolia, Iran, the Indus Valley, Transcaucasiua and large parts of Central Asia

Expanded to include much of Afro-Eurasia by Bronze Age Trade, migration, cultural and technological diffusion, geo-political interaction Convergence in long-term economic cycle China rose to prominence as super- accumulator

Key features of the historic economy according to Frank and Gill: Market based trade Endless accumulation 500 and 50 year economic cycles. Kondratieff

Europe bought into way in World Economy in 1500s and effected qualitative but not quantitative changes. Basic continuity although centre shifted

Strengths and Weaknesses of Frank approach Strengths: Challenges Euro centrism and makes the invisible visible Weaknesses: Ignores fundamental changes and stretches the concept of world system and globalisation to its absolute limits Problem with Empirical evidence

Arguments about Europe are simply wrong European GDP per capita grew 0.13% between 1000 and 1500 while Asia growth was 0.05% per annum. Population of Western Europe increased in 1000 to , while China increased from to How did Europe conquer the America's?

Dismisses Change to lightly Endless accumulation? Take figures from Maddison Asia growth rate AD 0% annum, AD 0.2% annum W Europe % annum

So, these Eurocentric and (anti-) historical categories of ‘feudalism’, ‘capitalism’ (are worthless) Better as we have argued, to abandon the chimera of a unique capitalist mode of production, not to mention its supposed West European origins…. All these ‘world-economies’ in the ‘west’ and ‘east’ were only parts of a single age-old world system, within which this change took place, like all else, only temporarily

Perhaps we ought to accept the sprit of Frank’s arguments without the detail. There have been previous ‘phases’/ waves of globalisation but rise of Europe is still the point at which modern globalisation begins

Section Two Wallerstein and the rise of European World economy in the C15th Economically and not politically based, existence of multiple political centres is key Endless accumulation Emergence of Global Geo-Culture by end of the C18th

Gradual global expansion complete in C18th Imperialism shifts in emphasis from ‘plunder’ to unequal exchange The character of individual states largely derived from position within global economic structure (see Chase-Dunn argument on Soviet Union)

The Key Implications of Wallerstein’s argument: Current events must be placed within long- term cycles of integration and disintegration and v long secular trend towards increasing integration Political and Economic Integration quite separate

Strengths of Wallersteins’ argument There is empirical evidence to support his arguments. For example, world recession in late 1700s Acceration of accumulation and trade in the 16 th and 17 th Centuries

Criticisms Criticisms: Definition of capitalism is a bit vague Qualitative Issue as to when integration is great enough to constitute globalisation and a system. Assertion of the dominance of the world system What is new about European Imperialism?

Section 3. Capitalism was born in Rural England in C16th and C17th Capitalism=Wage labour and the Factory System Britain and the New Imperialism Capitalism exported by UK (Woods: The Pristine Culture of Capitalism) through imperialism and geopolitical competition Idea of an Integrated Global Capitalism Economy really only makes sense in C19th

Strengths and Weaknesses Strengths: Clarity of Definition Clear evidence concerning the impact of capitalism development in England on competitor states, on how states policy shaped global competition/ systemic factors Clear evidence of a degree of synchronicity in the business cycle

Weaknesses: Wallerstein would argue inability to explain the significance of events in early modern Europe Underestimates continuity. Again we left question of what constitutes the world and how deep transformation was in colonies

Section Four 1973 Crisis of Post-war national capitalism Manufacturing net profit G7 26.2%, %, Output 5.5% declined to 2.1% Globalisation is response to crisis in three key ways

Global financial integration is driven by poor conditions for accumulation in the real economy and the need to promote fictitious accumulation. Firms reorganising production in order to restore profitability. The devaluation of capital in crisis makes reorganisation easier Political project to open up new spaces of accumulation for global capital

Events in China and Russia happy accident Processes of proletariatisation and enmeshing of all humanity into web of global market is finally being completed! Although still questions about the universialisation of the “factory system” Global capitalism is born!

Conclusions Different approaches have there merits and problems Not necessarily incompatible Need to be sensitive to 1973 and 5000 years perspectives A historical reading of processes of globalisation calls into question much conventional social science based around sovereignty and the nation state

If we adopt long duree approach this does not necessarily support sceptics view Perhaps we need to think in terms of globalisations not globalization.