Doubtless a right-wing or neo-liberal book but, got good reviews in some
quarters. Any comments from y'all?
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/PACDEP.html
THE DEPENDENCY MOVEMENT
Scholarship and Politics in Development Studies
ROBERT PACKENHAM
(heh, blurb from Peter Berger!"Pyramids of Sacifice" Oh well, Heilbroner or
Robert Lekachman gave his book on capitalism 50 arguments for a good review
but!)
And, after all these years, what about the book by Bob Warren? One of my
neo-maoist ( joking here!) profs at UCSC, Paul Lubeck had us read his,
"Imperialism, Pioneer of Capitalism, " book from Verso.
And abook I'd recommend (though it can get repitive) is
Under Northern eyes : Latin American studies and U.S. hegemony in the
Americas, 1898-1990 / Mark T. Berger.
Author: Berger, Mark T., 1955-
Imprint: Bloomington : Indiana University Press, c1995.
Michael Pugliese
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Henwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 11:20 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:12010] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Eurocentrism once again
> Jim Devine wrote:
>
> >However, he disagrees with the proposition that "not only that the
> >rise of underdevelopment is inherent in the extension of the world
> >division of labour through capitalist expansion, but also that the
> >'development of underdevelopment' is an indispensable condition for
> >capitalist development itself." I don't see why anti-imperialists
> >_have to_ accept this proposition. If European capitalism hadn't had
> >the third-world periphery to exploit, it could have abused nature
> >more, for example. Or it could have taken advantage of its own
> >proletariat, as Marx, Brenner, Wood, _et al_ argue.
>
> There's no question that imperialism was essential to the rise of
> European capitalism. But what about its contribution to First World
> wealth in the present? No doubt greater than zero, but how much? Does
> anyone have any good ideas?
>
> Doug
>
