Bağımlılık Teorisi ve Modern Dünya-Sistem Analizi Bugün Hala Geçerli mi?

Öz

Bu makale, küresel kapitalizmin çağdaş dinamiklerini anlamak için bağımlılık teorisi ve modern dünya-sistemleri analizinin uygunluğunu analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu çalışma, bağımlılık ve dünya-sistemleri yaklaşımlarının epistemolojik geçerliliklerini tartışmak yerine, bu yaklaşımları günümüzdeki siyasi ve ekonomik gelişmeleri anlamak için analitik araçlar olarak kullanmayı önermektedir. Bağımlılık ve dünya-sistemleri yaklaşımlarının uygulanabilirliğini ilkel birikim, eşitsiz mübadele ve finansal tabiiyet vakaları üzerinden değerlendirmektedir. Çalışma ilk olarak, çok uluslu şirketler tarafından kontrol edilen maden çıkarma endüstrileri ve doğal kaynakların metalaştırılması ve özelleştirilmesi yoluyla çevre ülkelerdeki ilkel birikimi incelemektedir. İkinci olarak, artı değerin eşitsiz mübadeleler yoluyla çevreden merkeze sürekli aktarımını analiz etmektedir. Bu mübadeleler, merkez ve çevre ülkeler arasındaki ücret ve kaynak fiyatı farklılıklarından kaynaklanmakta, hiyerarşik ticaret ilişkilerini sürdürmekte ve eşitsiz kalkınmaya yol açmaktadır. Çalışmada üçüncü olarak, yapısal olarak kırılgan çevre ülkeleri için sürekli borç tuzaklarına yol açan borç-kredi ilişkilerini içeren ve "finansal tabiiyet" olarak adlandırılan finansallaşma süreci tartışılmaktadır. Küresel para hiyerarşisinin ve sermaye akışlarındaki oynaklığın, gelişmekte olan ve yükselen ekonomilerin kırılganlığını ve çevreselleşmesini daha da kötüleştirdiği gösterilmektedir. Bu üç vakanın analizi, hem bağımlılık teorisi ve dünya sistemleri yaklaşımlarının küresel kapitalizmdeki çağdaş dinamikleri yorumlamak için değerli içgörüler sunduğunu göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bağımlılık Teorisi
• Dünya-Sistemleri Analizi
• Eşitsiz Mübadeleler
• İlkel Birikim
• Finansal Tabiiyet

Are Dependency Theory and Modern World-System Analysis Relevant Today?

Öz

This article aims to analyze the relevance of dependency theory and modern world-systems analysis in understanding the contemporary dynamics of global capitalism. Instead of discussing their epistemological validity, this study suggests tackling the dependency and world-systems approaches as analytical tools to explore recent political and economic developments. It assesses the applicability of these approaches through cases studies of primitive accumulation, unequal exchanges and financial subordination. The study initially examines the primitive accumulation in peripheral countries through extractive industries controlled by multinational corporations and the commodification and privatization of natural resources. Secondly, it analyzes the continuous transfer of surplus value from the periphery to the core through unequal exchanges. These exchanges stem from wage and resource price disparities between core and peripheral countries, perpetuating hierarchical trade relations and fostering uneven development. Thirdly, the study discusses the process of financialization, which entails debt-credit relations leading to perpetual debt traps for structurally fragile peripheral countries – termed “financial subordination.” It is shown that the global currency hierarchy and the volatility of capital flows exacerbate the vulnerability and peripheralization of developing and emerging economies. The analysis of these three cases confirms that the dependency and world-systems approaches offer valuable insights for interpreting contemporary dynamics in global capitalism.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dependency Theory
• World-Systems Analysis
• Primitive Accumulation
• Unequal Exchanges
• Financial Subordination

Kaynakça

1. Adaman, F.; Arsel, M.; Akbulut, B. (2021). Neoliberal Developmentalism, Authoritarian Populism, and Extractivism in the Countryside: The Soma Mining Disaster in Turkey. In Authoritarian Populism and the Rural World, I, Scoones & M. Edelman, eds. Routledge: New York. pp. 154–176.
2. Alami, I., Alves, C., Bonizzi, B., Kaltenbrunner, A., Koddenbrock, K., Kvangraven, I., & Powell, J. (2023). International Financial Subordination: A Critical Research Agenda. Review of International Political Economy, 30(4), 1360-1386.
3. Beck, M. (2016). The Risk Implications of Globalisation: An Exploratory Analysis of 105 Major Industrial Incidents (1971–2010). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13(3), 309.
4. Byres, T. J. (2005). Neoliberalism and Primitive Accumulation in Less Developed Countries. In Neoliberalism: A Critical Reader, A. Saad-Filho & D. Johnston, eds. London: Pluto Press, pp. 83-90.
5. Bureau of Economic Analysis. (2023). Direct Investment by Country and Industry 2022. https://www.bea.gov/news/2023/direct-investment-country-and-industry-2022
6. Chase-Dunn, C. (2007). Dependency and World-Systems Theories. The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology, pp. 1060-1062. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781405165518
7. Devine, H.; Gerard, M.; Suljagic, I. J.; Thakoor, V.; Beer, S. Tax Avoidance in Sub-Saharan Africa’s Mining Sector. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund, 2021. https://www.imf.org/-/media/Files/Publications/DP/2021/English/TASSAMSEA.ashx
8. Duménil, G.; Lévy, D. (2005). The Neoliberal (Counter-) Revolution. In Neoliberalism: A Critical Reader, A. Saad-Filho & D. Johnston, eds. London: Pluto Press, pp. 9-19.

9. Emmanuel, A. (1972). Unequal Exchange: A Study of the Imperialism of Trade. London and New York: The Monthly Review Press.
10. Farny, E. (2016). Dependency theory: A useful tool for analyzing global inequalities today. E-International Relations Journal, https://www.e-ir.info/2016/11/23/dependency-theory-a-useful-tool-for-analyzing-global-inequalities-today/
11. Frank, A. G. (1966). The Development of Underdevelopment. Monthly Review, 18(4), 17-31.
12. Frank, A. G. (1992). Latin American Development Theories Revisited: A Participant Review. Latin American Perspectives, 19(2), 125-139.
13. Frank, A. G. (1998). ReOrient: Global Economy in the Asian Age. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
14. Foley, C. F., Hines Jr, J. R., & Wessel, D. (Eds.). (2021). Global Goliaths: Multinational Corporations in the 21st Century Economy. Brookings Institution Press. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/multinational-corporations-in-the-21st-century/
15. Güngen, A. R. (2021). Borçlandırma Siyaseti: Türkiye'de Finansal İçerilme. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
16. Harvey, D. (2004). The “New” Imperialism: Accumulation by Dispossession. Socialist Register: The New Imperial Challenge, pp. 63-87. https://socialistregister.com/index.php/srv/article/view/5811/2707
17. Hickel, J. (2017). The Divide: A Brief Guide to Global Inequality and its Solutions. London: Random House.
18. Hickel, J.; Sullivan, D.; Zoomkawala, H. (2021). Plunder in the Post-Colonial Era: Quantifying Drain from the Global South through Unequal Exchange, 1960–2018. New Political Economy, 26(6), 1030-1047. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2021.1899153
19. Hickel, J.; Dorninger, C.; Wieland, H.; & Suwandi, I. (2022). Imperialist appropriation in the world economy: Drain from the global South through unequal exchange, 1990–2015. Global Environmental Change, 73, 102467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102467
20. IFAD. (2020). Overview: Rural Poverty in Developing Countries: Issues, Policies and Challenges, https://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/03/Suttie-Paper.pdf
21. ILO. (2011). World Statistic: Occupational Safety and Health. https://www.ilo.org/moscow/areas-of-work/occupational-safety-and-health/WCMS_249278/lang--en/index.htm
22. Kiely, R. (2010). Dependency and world-systems perspectives on development. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.142
23. Köhler, G. (1998). The structure of global money and world tables of unequal exchange. Journal of World-Systems Research, 4(2), 145–168.
24. Kvangraven, I. H. (2021). Beyond the stereotype: Restating the Relevance of the Dependency Research Programme. Development and Change, 52(1), 76-112.
25. Kvangraven, I. H.; Styve, M. D.; Kufakurinani, U.; Santanta, F. (2017). Dialogues on Development Volume 1: Dependency, White Rose University Consertium, https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/131850/1/dependency_theory_e_book_comp.pdf
26. Kuran, İ. (2010). Toplumsal bilimlerde kriz mi?. Toplum ve Bilim, 117, 206-212.
27. Marx, K. (1867). Chapter Twenty-Six: The Secret of Primitive Accumulation, Capital (Volume One), https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch26.htm
28. Nelson, R. M.; Weiss, M. A. (2020). The US Dollar as the World's Dominant Reserve Currency. US Congressional Research Service. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11707
29. Palley, T. I. (2005). From Keynesianism to neoliberalism: Shifting Paradigms in Economics. In Neoliberalism: A Critical Reader, A. Saad-Filho & D. Johnston, eds. London: Pluto Press, pp. 20-29.
30. Perelman, M. (2007). Primitive Accumulation from Feudalism to Neoliberalism. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 18(2), 44-61.
31. Petras, J. (1981). Dependency and World System Theory: A Critique and New Directions. Latin American Perspectives, 8(3-4), 148-155.
32. Prudham, S. (2013). Men and things: Karl Polanyi, Primitive Accumulation, and Their Relevance to a Radical Green Political Economy. Environment and Planning A, 45(7), 1569-1587.
33. Radice, Hugo. (2005). Neoliberal Globalisation: Imperialism without Empires?. In Neoliberalism: A Critical Reader, A. Saad-Filho & D. Johnston, eds. London: Pluto Press, pp. 91-99.
34. Saad-Filho, A. (2005). The Rise and Decline of Latin American Structuralism and Dependency Theory. The Origins of Development Economics: How Schools of Economic Thought Have Addressed Development, eds. J. K. Sundaram, E. S. Reinert, pp. 128-45.
35. Savran, S. (2008). Kod Adı Küreselleşme: 21. Yüzyılda Emperyalizm, İstanbul: Yordam.
36. Silver, B. J.; Arrighi, G. (2003). Polanyi's “Double Movement”: The Belle Époques of British and US Hegemony Compared. Politics & Society, 31(2), 325-355.
37. Singham, N. (2019, June 10). Mining Corporations Loot the Global South, No Consequences. Salon. https://www.salon.com/2019/06/10/mining-corporations-loot-the-global-south-no-consequences_partner/
38. Tausch, A. (2010). Globalisation and Development: The Relevance of Classical “Dependency” Theory for the World Today. International Social Science Journal, 61(202), 467-488.
39. UN Environment. (2019). Global Resource Outlook: Natural Resources for the Future We Want, United Nations Environment Programme Publication. https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/27517/GRO_2019.pdf
40. UN. (2023). Meetings Coverage: Extreme Poverty in Developing Countries Inextricably Linked to Global Food Insecurity Crisis. https://press.un.org/en/2023/gaef3590.doc.htm
41. Wallerstein, I. (1974). The Modern World-System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic.
42. Wallerstein, I. (1976). A World-System Perspective on the Social Sciences. The British Journal of Sociology, 27(3), 343-352.
43. Wallerstein, I. (1980). The Modern World-System II: Mercantilism and the Consolidation of the European World Economy, 1600-1750. New York: Academic.
44. Wood, M. E. (2003). Kapitalizmin Kökeni- Geniş Bir Bakış. Çev. A. Cevdet Aşkın, Ankara: Epos Yayınları.