World-Systems Theory, Dependency Theory and Global Inequality 

Then & Now this is a great video and it's made a million times better by the fact that you cited you sources (seeing as many RU-vidrs don't). I'm using it to help write a paper for my international relations theory class. This video makes it much more compelling and easier to understand than reading a dry scholarly source. It gives me a great place to start my own research. But i'll have to repeat some of the other comments made. The narration needs to be louder.

Only one source provided comes from the true theorists of these fields, that is why several mistakes were made. I will only focus on this: Dependency Theory and World-System Analysis (it is not a theory as Wallerstein himself asserted) are not opposed to each other. World-System Analysis fits in the Dependency Theory currents. And Dependency Theory is not a well defined and consolidated theory, but a varied set of theories, some of them even opposed to each other, some with marxist origins, some with liberal origins.

Omitted average national IQ which I (and many others) have run regressions on in my class which has an R squared value of 0.35+ and even higher when you control for communist and oil states. When your theory can not even address the root of economics, the humans themselves, you cannot explain different outcomes. This is why the left fears demographic realism and national realism in general.

@@spencer5028 "National IQ"...? Oh, come on.

Wow.... actual citations. The rarest of occurrences on RU-vid.

lol this came to my mind too

The guy who's buying up farm land and wants to patent vaccines.

Rigght

Bill Gates is involved in marlgalipoly, this is the worst form of business protectionism!

Lol. Yea. Misses Wallerstein's whole point too. The US is an extractive NATION.

I was about to write some of my disagreements of the video, but you already said all that has to be said. That's right, this topic is way too complex for a 15 min video, plus, there are some fundamental missunderstandings of the theories and a lot of shortcuts and reductionisms. Even inside the ECLAC were a lot of disagreements between the ideas of what does structuralism and neodevelopmentalism really means. As Ruy Mauro Marini said in his “Dialectic of Dependency”, the underdevelopment is a specific form of capitalist development, one in the periphery. It's a new form of capitalism, a "sui generis" capitalism. That's why saying that it's the exclusion from the structures of the capitalist model the primarly cause of inequality, is a very weird conclusion, that clearly means some misundestanding of the theory. This new form of capitalism that we see in the underdevelopment nations is not an exlusion of the model, is a new part of the structure, one on the periphery, but still a part of the structure. By the way, Maurini could be taken as a kind of structuralist. Another example of the complexity of the issue. Also, I wouldn't take very seriously Why Nations Fail. The autors take the neoinstitutionalism theories in an incorrect way and assumed that the institutions are some kind of organizations. A really, really weird interpretation. Anyway, I agree, this channel takes very seriously the issues and theories which he expose. Is just that, in this video, there were a lot of things that just went wrong.

"but why were they poor?". That question proves you don't understand the most important thing: almost EVERYONE was very poor until very recently. Before industrialization, even europeans barely had enough food to eat, due to lack of technology and trade.

@@BUSeixas11 Not sure that proves what you say it does - these theories arose in the context of decolonisation and dependency directly accounted for the active underdevelopment of the poorer parts of the world during colonialism. In fact Britain actively de-industrialised India. The poorer parts could not (some still cannot) industrialise due to the imbalance in world trade where they sell off resources and primary commodities to obtain industrial goods - this maintains them as primary producers. World systems then accounted for the changing dynamic where exploitation of labour was transnational rather than directly between nation-states. The global pressures have seen changes as many move to semi-peripheral status and yet the poor stay poor, just more distributed.

@@mick7557 Just to add to this, here's some details on how Britain de-industrialized India in particular: www.sgbgatelier.com/world/2019/11/21/5-ways-imperial-britain-crippled-indian-handlooms Essentially, the British fixed prices to make weaving profits impossible, put tariffs of up to 85% on textiles going to Britain (compared to 5% going the other way), and weavers caught selling to non-British were flogged and had their thumbs cut off to prevent them working. India had manufactured 25% of the world textiles in 1600, but only 2% at independence from Britain in 1947.

@@LowestofheDead Thanks

@@greengandalf9116 As Noam Chomsky likes to point out, the Bolsheviks stopped being socialist only months after taking control of the country. The communist party became hegemonic and would go on to rule the Soviet Union under a command economy. Maoism is an adulteration of Marxism and implemented much like Bolshevik communism was implemented. I'd argue that socialism, preferably of the Marx variety, should be heavily considered moving forward. Contrary to popular belief, it actually hasn't even been tried on a large scale, much less failed on a large scale. The theory is there, the popularity (at least outside the US) is there, all that needs to happen is to implement it within a large western nation through (preferably) reform.

@@greenpea4239 And then you'll get what Parenti calls Capitalist Encirclement. Chile tried this route. Any country that tries an alternative gets shut down.

@@greengandalf9116 No, if you'd actually look at the history of socialism, and it's theory and practice beyond skin deep, you'd see that it worked well. Numerous times. Before getting toppled by coups, sabotaged by economic sanctions and blockades, thrown into chaos by literal invasions and bombings, encircled and forced to capitulate, or destroyed by literal fascists. Who controls the information? Where did you hear that Communism doesn't work? Because if you look at the polls for ex communist countries, the numbers tell a different tale. They show that the majority of people resent the collapse of their communist system and want a return to communism in some form. And those numbers have stayed pretty consistent over the years, and in fact, are rising. And mind you, these countries, like Green Pea pointed out, aren't/weren't even good representations of the Socialist system. Bolsheviks dismantled almost all Socialist institutions out of capitulation to the Capitalist powers in order to stave off invasion. If the approval ratings for cheap, off brand Socialism is that high. Imagine what real Socialism could do if ever it were able to get off the ground without being brutally suppressed and buried, and hand waved away by smug plutocrats whose major interest is to keep people like you believing that the Capitalist system is the end all be all so that you don't get any dangerous ideas and disrupt the status quo. Nothing is black and white. Capitalism has failed more times than Communism ever could, and unlike Communism most of the time, when Capitalism fails, it's systemic. Nearly every single "developing country" is a failed Capitalist country. Most of the world is Capitalist. Most of the world is also poor. What most people fail to realize, or simply refuse to realize is that all of this wealth doesn't just get "generated." No, it has to come from somewhere, and it doesn't take a genius to find out where it all comes from. Communism is far more complex and nuanced than what your middle school cold war propaganda infested history class taught you, who would have thought?

@@iDad7276 1) Chomsky isn't a Marxist, he is an Anarcho Syndicalist. 2) Anarchism, and Marxism are against the elite minority, not for it. Capitalism, however is systematically biased toward pursing the interests of the elite. 3) Corruption and control of governments and corporations are intertwined, you are correct. However this corruption stems from the profit motive. This directly contributes to said corruption. Example, the Rockerfellers, IMF, Halliburton, and all the various defense contractors wouldn't lobby for war, and do business with both sides of the war, if there wasn't profit to be had in it. They wouldn't lobby to fuck all these countries over, occupy them, and set up shop if there were no profits to be had. The Banana war in Guatemala wouldn't have happened. Coca Cola death squads in Colombia wouldn't have been a thing. And Imperialism and Neo-Colonialism wouldn't be a fucking problem. But clearly all of this stuff happens for a reason, and that reason is profit and the goal of infinite growth. One thing that i find to be a common characteristic between different reactionary pro capitalist people such as yourself, is the very poor understanding when it comes to the system in which you live, Capitalism. And the absolute lack of any understanding whatsoever when it comes to any of it's proposed alternatives. You have no idea. *Clearly.*

@@greengandalf9116 Highly regulated free market systems in societies that provide good quality public healthcare, public education, that guarantee a standard of living through generous social welfare and mandated employment practices (strictly enforced normal work hours/ parental leave and holiday leave) whilst having tight regulation on the exploitation of natural resources appear to do even better than laissez-faire economies. The countries I've visited that appear to have the best lifestyles also appear to have cultures that value mutual respect and mutual responsibility taking.

@Anarchist Zero Differences in outcomes between human populations are mostly genetic and before designer babies become common place you can't do much about it. But sure, stir up racial hatred, if that's your goal.

@@useodyseeorbitchute9450 interesting how you use genetics to explain generational poverty (which relies on racial logic) but call them a racist for pointing out the racism that occurs in the world.

Exactly

@@noblebrown6077 "which relies on racial logic" If you believe that's "race thing" then you sort of become perplexed why generational poverty exist as well also within predominant ethnic group. "call them a racist" I did not use this slur as I find it over used until the moment it lost any clear meaning. I simply pointed out what's the end result of what's he is doing

​@@noblebrown6077 Fun fact: I used very general word "populations" (as this phenomena can be observed in many situations like ex. assortative mating or brain drain), and you started to suggest it's a race thing.

has/could any other economical arrangement? lol

Thank goodness it wasn't just me.

yeah, I couldn't focus on anything being said because of the loud, repetitive music.

Yes.

Diego Latruwe communisms main issue is the belief that a central source can identify all the needs in the world but markets do this better by several orders of magnitude.

I think it's worth noting that "communism" has had many meanings and that leftists generally understand it to be a theoretical end goal to work towards--a stateless, classless society. What people in the US call "communism" tends to refer to the various projects that attempted to work towards communism via a socialist state. These projects have all been experimental and different, with their own successes and failures.

David Song For one, not all communists advocate for a centrally-planned state capitalist economy.

David Song For two, the efficiency of an economy is not measured by how well it identifies people's needs, but by how well it *meets* people's needs.

like, you're a liberal and that ideological bias really really shows very thickly, but i mean, there's no such thing as unideological. Still, this is as good a treatment of these ideas I've seen on youtube.

Thanks! This is a pretty old video ;)

@@ThenNow ya will check others

@@TSBoncomptewhy do you say he's a liberal based on this one video. i have just found it, and it seems pretty unbiased to me. clean analysis.

Yep. People think that iPhones getting cheaper or being available in ever more countries somehow counts as a real improvement in living standards. They don't. More rights and less labour are the hallmarks of rising living standards, not more gimmicky consumer goods.

That's right. I'm not against a private market, but unless it's subjugated to the First Value of human well-being, we're going to continue have these same problems. We have enough resources on the planet right now to meet everyone's basic needs, but the US govt, my govt, has no intention of allowing this to happen. They're the bad guys. They're a regime as much as any other regime. Sooner or later they're going to have to be neutralized if the planet is going to move forward.

That's why they keep a tight grip on the 3rd world. They understand that if these countries nationalize all their business the west would loose massive profits.

@@TH3FU113ZT Absolutely!

@@TH3FU113ZT At times I think keeping corrupts in the government avoids us from getting bombed.

@@chickensoup9869 what?

Brenten Ireland Ireland Very obviously untrue the only place you can kind of say this is a China but capitalism never solves the problems of slums and poverty it only moves them around.

Technically speaking if you look at metrics used for HDI is fully correct (higher GDP, higher life expectancy, more years of schooling).

@@andrii5175 What countries did not develop "at the cost of the people"?

@@andrii5175 1. Did you not read my question well? 2. Are you telling me USSR is guilty for not having colonies or robbing other countries through war? 3. Where did you take the number 30 million from? Did you include the civil war and famine casualties there or smth?

@@andrii5175 That number is outdated - all people that previously claimed that figure admited they were lying, now they say up to 7 million, but no thorough investigation was done yet, so this 7 mil number is probably much smaller. You should also know that population was constantly growing except WW2 time, and while US was already superpower by russian revolution, USSR had civil war, femins, bloodiest war in history and by the end of it still became 2nd superpower. That shows that it was most successfull country in 20th century.

@@andrii5175 It is 154 quadrillion people killed under Stalin, not 30 million. You gotta account for inflation. IF you look at the USSR population data from Stalin era, you'll clearly see a negative population, where the soviet bureaucrats were selling and buying dead souls like Chichikov. But I agree with the other points.

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-a16cHsV2uq4.html

what other options/alternatives then? in today's world, it's not possible for a country to avoid the capitalist economic system. Many communist countries nowadays have adopted the capitalism and it has brought them advancement, technology and innovation, although poverty still the main obstacle for the developing countries to grow. The narrator has pointed out in the video that the fall of the USSR signifies that Communism as an "economic system" doesn't work. Communism in its ideology may sound appealing to most people but in practice, it's the exact opposite of that, I'm pretty sure you're familiar with George Orwell's Animal Farm if you never heard it then read it. Slavery and discrimination always exist within society, they're the pillars for society stabilization. The labours are being exploited it's because they want to be exploited, there's no one forcing them to choose that path.

Yes and he later even stopped supporting republican spain because of the presence of hardcore communists after all Orwell believed in democratic socialism .

He is presenting points of view and theories.

Environmental degradation is something that's well reducing due to multiple factors such as increased productivity , a more aware public due to increased wealth ,more governmental resources due to increased wealth , in fact we're seeing increasing competition in the market among companies developing renewable and cleaner technologies one has to look no further then Tesla , whose entry has made companies such as BMW and others to increasingly invest more into electric cars and spurred a competition in the electric cars market which has led to increasing innovation , , all indicating that environmental degradation can be reduced and eventually solved. The thing is a market when used properly can promote renewable technology through competition , competition historically has led to technological innovations so I don't see any reason why it won't now.

Plus the fact that authoritarian socialism, similar to the soviet model isn’t the only kind way to practice socialism.

marxists are such boring babies. lol.

The state must also go down with capitalism following the revolution!

world-system theory is already marxist.

cool

gloss over genocide and disgusting atrocities, yup capitlism is the BEST ! i think this youtuber is a oil funded homeboy

Based.

yes

failed "solutions".

try turn up your volume?

Hahah I think he means the audio. Like the music was louder than the audio so no matter how loud you turn it up, it's difficult to hear the audio. That was my problem anyway.

Sorry, I was using the word audio when I meant narration.

wdym?

@@francescocerasuolo4064 Dana Williams recently published a paper on WST from an anarchist POV.

@@CosmoShidan i wouldn't know why this would be so much important(?) i am much more interested in other branches of information/theory - regarding the radical left. nonetheless, if i have time, i'll try to check it out. thanks for the reply.