Search

This text is the second and final part of the article published in the previous issue (No. 42) of Almanaque Histórico Lati-noamericano on an attempt of intellectual history on the sim-ultaneous origin between dependency theory and world-systems analysis. Both parts should be read together. The aim of this sequel is precisely to deepen the argument as to why the world-systems perspective is not a mere American -or “gringo”- derivative of dependency theory. If the first part fo-cused on the “formal” aspects in terms of the theoretical properties and focal units used by the dependency theorists in their respective theoretical/historical analyses when ana-lyzed through the methodological lenses of Hopkins and Wal-lerstein, this second part will delve into the divergent “sub-stantive” aspects between the two perspectives. The latter concerns, first, the move from the comparative study of na-tional societies to the study of global totalities along with the epistemological, methodological and empirical problems this entails. Secondly, as a metatheoretical question, to criticize to what extent dependency theory really overflows or surpasses “methodological nationalism” or whether it would only con-sist of a study of the (failed) nationalization of societies in the peripheries of the world-system together with the political significance that this entails. The text concludes with a brief review of both parts and considers an early critique of the analytical text of Hopkins and Wallerstein which marked the further development of the latter's analysis of “multinational studies” in the direction of the world-system perspective.

This article is an exercise in intellectual history whose objec-tive is mainly to reveal the almost simultaneous origin be-tween dependency theory in Latin America and world-systems analysis in the United States since the second half of the 1960s. Here we offer in great detail and textual evidence the reasons why the world-system perspective (before having been baptized as such) is not a mere US-American (or “grin-go”) copy of dependency theory. This will be addressed, first of all, with an analysis of the “formal” aspects in the main dependency works—Dependencia y desarrollo en América Latina (1969), by Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Enzo Fa-letto; Dialéctica de la dependencia (1973), by Ruy Mauro Ma-rini; and El capitalismo dependiente latinoamericano (1974), by Vania Bambirra—through the theoretical, methodological and epistemological lenses of the essay “The Comparative Study of National Societies” published by Terence K. Hop-kins and Immanuel Wallerstein in 1967 regarding the VI World Congress of Sociology in 1966 in Evian (France). Sec-ondly, we will delve into the “substantive” aspects—that is, the methodological as well as epistemological discrepancies—between both approaches. Although they are not completely antagonistic, we want to make it clear, on the basis of their methodological and epistemological foundations, not fully discussed until now, that the lines of research in dependency theory and in world-systems analysis have divergent implica-tions.