Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The semiperiphery in Africa and Latin America: Subimperialism and semiindustrialism

  • Articles
  • Published:
The Review of Black Political Economy

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. See, for instance, Richard R. Fagen, “Studying Latin American Politics: Some Implications of aDependencia Approach”,Latin America Research Review 12(2), 1977, 3–26 and Timothy M. Shaw, “The Political Economy of African International Relations,”Issue 5(4), Winter 1975, 29-38.

    Google Scholar 

  2. See, for example, James Eayers, “From Middle to Foremost Power: Defining a New Place for Canada in the Hierarchy of World Power”International Perspectives May/June 1975, 15-24.

  3. See the works of Andre Gunder Frank, especially hisLatin America: Underdevelopment or Revolution (New York: Monthly Review, 1969) andCapitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America: Historical Studies of Chile and Brazil (New York: Monthly Review, 1967), and Peter C. W. Gutkind and Peter Waterman (eds),African Social Studies: A Radical Reader (London: Heineman, 1977).

  4. See Martin C. Needier,An Introduction to Latin American Politics: The Structure of Conflict (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1977) 28–49 and 67-68 and Bernard Magubane, “The Evolution of the Class Structure in Africa” in Peter C. W. Gutkind and Immanuel Wallerstein (eds),The Political Economy of Contemporary Africa (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1976) 169-197.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Joseph A. Kahl,Modernization, Exploitation and Dependence in Latin America: Germani, Gonzalez Casanova and Cardoso (New Brunswick: Transaction, 1976) 7.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ibid. 16. Also see Susanne Bodenheimer, “Dependency and Imperialism: The Roots of Latin American Underdevelopment”Politics and Society 1(3), May 1971, 327-357, Barbara Stallings,Economic Dependency in Africa and Latin America (Beverly Hills: Sage Professional Papers in Comparative Politics, 1972. Number 01-031), Karl W. Deutsch, “Theories of Imperialism and Neocolonialism” in Steven J. Rosen and James R. Kurth (eds),Testing Theories of Economic Imperialism (Lexington: Heath, 1974) 15-55 and Aidan Foster-Carter, “Neo-Marxist Approaches to Development and Underdevelopment” in Emmanuel de Kadt and Gavin Williams (eds),Sociology and Development (London: Tavistock, 1974) 67-105.

    Google Scholar 

  7. See Philip J. O’Brien, “A Critique of Latin American Theories of Dependency” in Ivar Oxaal et al. (eds),Beyond the Sociology of Development: Economy and Society in Latin America and Africa (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1975) especially 10–16.

    Google Scholar 

  8. See, for instance, Osvaldo Sunkel, “The Pattern of Latin America Dependence” in Victor L. Urquidi and Rosemary Thorp (eds),Latin America in the International Economy (London: Macmillan for International Economic Association, 1973) 3–25.

    Google Scholar 

  9. See Edward Milenky, “Problems, Perspectives and Modes of Analysis: Understanding the Latin American Approach to World Affairs” in Ronald G. Hillman and H. Jon Rosenbaum (eds.),Latin America: The Search for a New International Role (Beverly Hills: Sage-Halsted, 1975).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cf. Roger W. Fontaine and James D. Theberge (eds),Latin America’s New Internationalism: The End of Hemispheric Isolation (New York: Praeger, 1976) and James D. Theberge and Roger W. FontaineLatin America: Struggles for Progress (Lexington: Heath, 1976. Critical Choices for Americans volume XIV).

    Google Scholar 

  11. For a review of some of the problems ofdependencia and of alternative approaches to it, see Yale H. Ferguson, “Through Glasses Darkly: An Assessment of Various Theoretical Approaches to Interamerican Relations”Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 19 (1), February 1977, 3–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Immanuel Wallerstein, “The Three Stages of African Involvement in the World-Economy” in Gutkind and Wallerstein (eds),The Political Economy of Contemporary Africa 49.

  13. See ibid. 49-50.

  14. Ibid. 48.

  15. See Ali A. MazruiA World Federation of Cultures: An African Perspective (New York: Free Press, 1976) 308 and 319.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ibid. 320.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ibid. 438–442.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ibid. 441. On counterdependence also see Ali A. Mazrui, “The New Interdependence: From Hierarchy to Symmetry” in James W. Howe (ed),The US and World Development: Agenda for Action 1975 (New York: Praeger for Overseas Development Council, 1975) 118-134.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Tamas Szentes “Socioeconomic Effects of Two Patterns of Foreign Capital Investments, With Special Reference to East Africa” in Gutkind & Wallerstein (eds),The Political Economy of Contemporary Africa 286.

  20. Immanuel Wallerstein “Dependence in an Interdependent World: The Limited Possibilities of Transformation Within the Capitalist World Economy”African Studies Review 17(1), April 1974, 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ibid. 9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ibid. 22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wallerstein, “The Three Stages of African Involvement in the World-Economy” 48.

  24. See Timothy M. Shaw and Malcolm J. Grieve, “The Political Economy of Resources: Africa’s Future in the Global Environment”Journal of Modern African Studies 16(1), March 1978, 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  25. See Osvaldo Sunkel, “Transnational Capitalism and National Disintegration in Latin America”Social and Economic Studies 22(1), March 1973, 132–176, and Martin Godfrey and Steven Langdon, “Partners in Underdevelopment? The Transnationalisation Thesis in a Kenyan Context”Journal of Commonwealth and Comparative Politics 14(1), March 1976, 42-63.

    Google Scholar 

  26. On such “middle-class” nations see Johan Gaining, “A Structural Theory of Imperialism”Journal of Peace Research 2, 1971, 104–105. See also Raimo Vayrynen and Louis Herrera, “Sub-Imperialism: From Dependence to Subordination”Instant Research in Peace and Violence 3, 1975, 165-177; and Robin Jenkins,Exploitation: The World Power Structure and the Inequality of Nations (London: MacGibbon & Kee, 1970) 83-85 and 158-161.

    Google Scholar 

  27. P-Kiven Tunteng, “External Influences and Subimperialism in Francophone West Africa” in Gutkind and Wallerstein (eds),The Political Economy of Contemporary Africa 213.

  28. Ibid. 230.

  29. See Richard Joseph, “The Gaullist Legacy: Patterns of French Neo-Colonialism”Review of African Political Economy 6, May–August 1976, 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ibid. 13.

    Google Scholar 

  31. See Esko Antola, “The European Community and Africa: A Neo-Colonial Model of Development”Peace and the Sciences (Vienna: International Institute for Peace, 1976) 20. See also Johan Galtung, “The Lome Convention and Neocapitalism”African Review 6(1), 1976, 40.

    Google Scholar 

  32. See Johan Galtung, “Conflict on a Global Scale: Social Imperialism and Sub-Imperialism—Continuities in the Structural Theory of Imperialism”World Development 4(3), March 1976, 153–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Alvin Z. Rubinstein, “The Soviet Union’s Imperial Game in Africa”Optima 26(3), 1977, 120.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ibid. 124.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Dirk Kunert, “Wars of National Liberation, the Super Powers and the Afro-Asian Ocean Region”South African Institute of International Affairs, Johannesburg, March 1977. Special Study, 46 and 47.

  36. See Edward Milenky, “Latin America’s Multilateral Diplomacy: Integration, Disintegration and Interdependence”International Affairs 53(1), January 1977, 73–96.

    Google Scholar 

  37. See Ray Mauro Marini, “Brazilian Subimperialism”Monthly Review 23(9) February 1972, 14–24.

    Google Scholar 

  38. See, for instance, Jamie Swift and Tim Draimin, “Canadian Subimperialism”This Magazine 9(2), May–June 1975, 32–33, and Timothy M. Shaw, “Kenya and South Africa: Sub-Imperialist States in AfricaOrbis 21(2), Summer 1977, 375-394.

    Google Scholar 

  39. On the tensions between “transnationalism” and “nationalism” within Africa’s “managerial bourgeoisie,” see Richard L. Sklar, “Post-Imperialism: A Class Analysis of Multinational Corporate Expansion”Comparative Politics 9(1), October 1976, 75–92. On the case of Zambia see hisCorporate Power in an African State: The Political Impact of Multi-National Mining Companies in Zambia (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975), and Timothy M. Shaw, “Zambia: Dependence and Underdevelopment”Canadian Journal of African Studies 10(1), 1976, 3-22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. See Philip Ehrensaft, “Polarized Accumulation and the Theory of Economic Dependence: Implications of South African Semi-Industrial Capitalism” in Gutkind and Wallerstein (eds),The Political Economy of Contemporary Africa 58-59.

  41. Ibid. 62.

  42. Ibid. 65.

  43. See Kenneth W. Grundy, “Intermediary Power and Global Dependency: the Case of South Africa”International Studies Quarterly 29(4), December 1976, 553–580, and Timothy M. Shaw, “International Stratification in Africa: Sub-Imperialism in Eastern and Southern Africa”Journal of Southern African Affairs 2(2), April 1977, 145-165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Kenneth Good, “Settler Colonialism: Economic Development and Class Formation”Journal of Modern African Studies 14(4) December 1976, 597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Ehrensaft, “Polarized Accumulation and the Theory of Economic Dependence” 66. On the prospects for selective Third World growth and industrialization, see Bill Warren, “Myths of Underdevelopment: Imperialism and Capitalist Industrialization”New Left Review 81, September–October 1973, 3-44. Warren suggests that if “. . . world capitalism is characterised not only by uneven development, but bychanging hierarchies of uneven development . . . then new power centers are arising throughout the Third World . . .throughout the underdeveloped world the post-war period has witnessed a major upsurge of national capitalisms. The result is that the balance of power has shifted away from the dominance of a few major imperialist countries towards a more even distribution of power. Imperialism declines as capitalism grows.” (41)

  46. Ehrensaft, “Polarized Accumulation and the Theory of Economic Dependence” 66.

  47. Ibid. 80-82. See also Timothy M. Shaw, “The Political Economy of Technology in Southern Africa” in Timothy M. Shaw and Kenneth A. Heard (eds),Cooperation and Conflict in Southern Africa: Papers on a Regional Subsystem (Washington: University Press of America 1976) 365-379, and Ruth Weiss, “The Role of Para-Statals in South Africa’s Politico-Economic System” in John Suckling, Ruth Weiss, Duncan Innes,The Economic Factor (London: Africa Publications Trust for Study Project, 1975) 55-91.

  48. Ehrensaft, “Polarized Accumulation and the Theory of Economic Dependence” 84.

  49. See Lynn K. Mytelka, “The Salience of Gains in Third World Integrative Systems” World Politics 25(2), January 1973, 236–250, and Donald Rothchild and Robert L. Curry, “Beyond the African State: The Political Economy of Regionalism”American Political Science Association, San Francisco, September 1975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Timothy M. Shaw
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

About this article

Cite this article

Shaw, T.M. The semiperiphery in Africa and Latin America: Subimperialism and semiindustrialism. Rev Black Polit Econ 9, 341–358 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02891728

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02891728

Keywords

Search

Navigation