How the West Came to Rule

Mainstream historical accounts of the development of capitalism describe a process which is fundamentally European - a system that was born in the mills and factories of England or under the guillotines of the French Revolution. In this groundbreaking book, a very different story is told. The book offers a unique interdisciplinary and international historical account of the origins of capitalism. It argues that contrary to the dominant wisdom, capitalism’s origins should not be understood as a development confined to the geographically and culturally sealed borders of Europe, but the outcome of a wider array of global processes in which non-European societies played a decisive role. Through an outline of the uneven histories of Mongolian expansion, New World discoveries, Ottoman-Habsburg rivalry, the development of the Asian colonies and bourgeois revolutions, the authors provide an account of how these diverse events and processes came together to produce capitalism

How the West Came to Rule

Mainstream historical accounts of the development of capitalism describe a process which is fundamentally European - a system that was born in the mills and factories of England or under the guillotines of the French Revolution. In this groundbreaking book, a very different story is told. The book offers a unique interdisciplinary and international historical account of the origins of capitalism. It argues that contrary to the dominant wisdom, capitalism’s origins should not be understood as a development confined to the geographically and culturally sealed borders of Europe, but the outcome of a wider array of global processes in which non-European societies played a decisive role. Through an outline of the uneven histories of Mongolian expansion, New World discoveries, Ottoman-Habsburg rivalry, the development of the Asian colonies and bourgeois revolutions, the authors provide an account of how these diverse events and processes came together to produce capitalism

Limits of the Universal: The Promises and Pitfalls of Postcolonial Theory and Its Critique

AbstractThis article seeks to reassess the potential merits and weaknesses of the Subaltern Studies project through the prism of Vivek Chibber’s much-publicised and controversial bookPostcolonial Theory and the Specter of Capital. By critically examining Chibber’s work, the article aims to better pinpoint exactly what is ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ with the Subaltern Studies project, while drawing out some productive points of engagement between Marxism and postcolonial theory more generally. In particular, we argue that an understanding of the origins of capitalist modernity remains a relatively unexplored omission within postcolonial thought that problematises their broader project of ‘provincialising Europe’. Against this backdrop, the article explores the affinities between Leon Trotsky’s notion of uneven and combined development and postcolonialism, demonstrating how the former can provide a theoretical solution to the problem of Eurocentrism that the Subaltern Studies project correctly identifies but inadequately conceptualises.</jats:p

Historical sociology and world history: uneven and combined development over the longue durée

The concept of 'uneven and combined development' was originally coined by Leon Trotsky to theorise Tsarist Russia's distinctive experience of modernity and revolution. But it has re-emerged over the last decade or so as a burgeoning research programme within International Relations (IR) and historical sociology. It has been critically and creatively deployed in two main areas: the provision of a sociological foundation to international theory overcoming the chronic schism between ‘sociological’ and ‘geopolitical’ modes of enquiry; and, relatedly, in superseding prevailing Eurocentric approaches in the social sciences. This volume is the first to provide a sustained reflection on the idea of uneven and combined development as the intellectual basis for a non-Eurocentric social theory of ‘the international’. It does so through a series of empirically rich and theoretically informed analyses of socio-historical change, political transformation, and intersocietal conflict over the longue durée. The volume thereby aims to demonstrate the unique potentials of uneven and combined development in overcoming IR and historical sociology’s shared inability to theorize the interactive and multilinear character of development

Lineages of Capital

Our reply focuses on three key themes raised in the symposium. First, we discuss an enduring issue in Marxist International Relations: ‘the problematic of the international’ and the problems of methodological internalism. We examine how our interlocutors have responded to this problematic and why we consider these responses insufficient. Specifically, we suggest that the source of our disagreement is grounded in two divergent understandings of the problem of internalism itself. We then reassert the value of our chosen response to the problematic – uneven and combined development (UCD). Second, we respond to the criticism that our extension of UCD as a ‘transmodal’ general abstraction is problematic by further explicating the significance and role of general abstractions in Marxist theory – a point yet addressed by our critics. Finally, we return to the fundamental question at the core of the transition debate: what is capitalism and how do we theorise it

How Did the West Usurp the Rest? Origins of the Great Divergence over the Longue Durée

Traditional explanations of the “rise of the West” have located the sources of Western supremacy in structural or long-term developmental factors internal to Europe. By contrast, revisionist accounts have emphasized the conjunctural and contingent aspects of Europe's ascendancy, while highlighting intersocietal conditions that shaped this trajectory to global dominance. While sharing the revisionist focus on the non-Western sources of European development, we challenge their conjunctural explanation, which denies differences between “West” and “East” and within Europe. We do so by deploying the idea of uneven and combined development (UCD), which redresses the shortcomings found on both sides of the debate: the traditional Eurocentric focus on the structural and immanent characteristics of European development and the revisionists’ emphasis on contingency and the homogeneity of Eurasian societies. UCD resolves these problems by integrating structural and contingent factors into a unified explanation: unevenness makes sense of the sociological differences that revisionists miss, while combination captures the aleatory processes of interactive and multilinear development overlooked by Eurocentric approaches. From this perspective, the article examines the sociologically generative interactions between European and Asian societies’ development over the longue durée and traces how the breakdown of feudalism and the rise of capitalism in Europe were fundamentally rooted in and conditioned by extra-European structures and agents. This then sets up our conjunctural analysis of a central yet underappreciated factor explaining Europe rise to global dominance: the disintegration of the Mughal Empire and Britain's colonization of India

Colonial lives of the carceral archipelago: rethinking the neoliberal security state

Mass incarceration, police brutality, and border controls are part and parcel of the everyday experiences of marginalized and racialized communities across the world. Recent scholarship in international relations, sociology, and geography has examined the prevalence of these coercive practices through the prism of “disciplinary,” “penal,” or “authoritarian” neoliberalism. In this collective discussion, we argue that although this literature has brought to the fore neoliberalism's reliance on state violence, it has yet to interrogate how these carceral measures are linked to previous forms of global racial ordering. To rectify this moment of “colonial unknowing,” the collective discussion draws on decolonial approaches, Indigenous studies, and theories of racial capitalism. It demonstrates that “new” and “neoliberal” forms of domestic control must be situated within the global longue durée of racialized and colonial accumulation by dispossession. By mapping contemporary modes of policing, incarceration, migration control, and surveillance onto earlier forms of racial–colonial subjugation, we argue that countering the violence of neoliberalism requires more than nostalgic appeals for a return to Keynesianism. What is needed is abolition—not just of the carceral archipelago, but of the very system of racial capitalism that produces and depends on these global vectors of organized violence and abandonment. L'incarcération de masse, la brutalité policière et les contrôles aux frontières constituent une partie intégrante des expériences quotidiennes des communautés marginalisées et racialisées du monde entier. Des études récentes en relations internationales, en sociologie et en géographie ont examiné la prévalence de ces pratiques coercitives par le prisme du néolibéralisme « disciplinaire », « pénal » ou « autoritaire ». Dans cet article, nous soutenons que bien que cette littérature ait mis en évidence la dépendance du néolibéralisme à la violence étatique, elle ne s'est pas encore interrogée sur le lien entre ces mesures carcérales et les formes précédentes d'ordre racial mondial. Cet article s'appuie sur le féminisme noir, les approches décoloniales, les études indigènes et les théories de capitalisme racial pour rectifier cette « ignorance coloniale » marquante. Il démontre que les formes « nouvelles » et « néolibérales » de contrôle national doivent se situer dans la longue durée globale de l'accumulation racialisée et coloniale par dépossession. Nous associons les modes contemporains de maintien de l'ordre, d'incarcération, de contrôle migratoire et de surveillance à des formes antérieures d'assujettissement racial/colonial pour soutenir que contrer la violence du néolibéralisme exige davantage que des appels nostalgiques au retour du keynésianisme. Ce qu'il faut, c'est une abolition : non seulement de l'archipel carcéral, mais aussi du système de capitalisme racial en lui-même qui produit et dépend de ces vecteurs globaux de violence organisée et d'abandon. El encarcelamiento masivo, la brutalidad policial y los controles fronterizos forman parte de las experiencias cotidianas de las comunidades marginadas y racializadas de todo el mundo. Estudios recientes en RI, Sociología y Geografía han examinado la prevalencia de estas prácticas coercitivas a través del prisma del neoliberalismo “disciplinario,” “penal” o “autoritario.” En este artículo, sostenemos que, si bien esta literatura puso en primer plano la dependencia del neoliberalismo de la violencia estatal, aún tiene que cuestionar la manera en que estas medidas carcelarias se vinculan a formas anteriores de ordenamiento racial global. Para rectificar este momento de “desconocimiento colonial,” el artículo recurre al feminismo negro, a los abordajes descoloniales, a los estudios indígenas y a las teorías del capitalismo racial. Demuestra que las formas “nuevas” y “neoliberales” de control interno se deben situar dentro de la longue durée global de la acumulación por desposesión racializada y colonial. Al trazar un mapa de los modos contemporáneos de vigilancia policial, encarcelamiento, control de la migración y vigilancia sobre las formas anteriores de subyugación racial-colonial, sostenemos que contrarrestar la violencia del neoliberalismo requiere algo más que apelaciones nostálgicas de retorno al keynesianismo. Lo que se necesita es la abolición, no solo del archipiélago carcelario, sino también del propio sistema de capitalismo racial que produce y depende de estos vectores globales de violencia y abandono organizados

Capital, states, and conflict : international political economy and crisis, 1914-1945

This thesis is not available on this repository until the author agrees to make it public. If you are the author of this thesis and would like to make your work openly available, please contact us: [email protected] Library can supply a digital copy for private research purposes; interested parties should submit the request form here: http://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/collections/departments/digital-content-unit/ordering-imagesPlease note that print copies of theses may be available for consultation in the Cambridge University Library's Manuscript reading room. Admission details are at http://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/collections/departments/manuscripts-university-archive