Giovanni Arrighi

Resumo: Os ciclos de estabilidade, crises e guerras, que permeiam os processos de transição de poder e hegemonia, são um tema recorrente nos debates de Relações Internacionais desde a Segunda Guerra Mundial, ganhando novo fôlego a partir da crise da hegemonia estadunidense nos anos 1970 e sendo retomado no contexto contemporâneo de acirramento da disputa entre EUA, Rússia e China. Desta forma, o presente artigo realiza uma análise dos avanços teóricos do debate sobre o papel das potências hegemônicas para a estabilidade do sistema internacional. Inicialmente, o conceito de hegemonia foi revisado e, em seguida, foram expostas as contribuições das Teorias de Transição de Poder, da Estabilidade Hegemônica, dos Ciclos de Longa Duração e da Crise Estrutural. O objetivo central é identificar as principais ferramentas teórico-metodológicas que podem ser empregadas para a análise dos processos de ascensão e queda de potências hegemônicas, percorrendo diferentes abordagens, visando contribuir para a sistematização do debate teórico. Partimos da hipótese de que as teorias estudadas possuem mais pontos de convergência do que de divergência entre si e, portanto, podem ser aplicadas de forma complementar para a análise das mudanças estruturais na hierarquia de poder internacional. Do ponto de vista metodológico, foram revisadas as principais obras de cada abordagem teórica, considerando as seguintes variáveis: (i) a definição de uma potência hegemônica ou dominante, (ii) como se organiza a estrutura de poder internacional e (iii) como se dá a transição hegemônica ou transição de poder. Palavras-chave: Hegemonia; Transição de Poder; Estabilidade Hegemônica; Ciclos de Longa Duração; Crise Estrutural.
Abstract The cycles of stability, crises and wars, which permeate the processes of transition of power and hegemony, are a recurring theme in international relations debates since the Second World War, gaining new momentum from the crisis of American hegemony in the 1970s and being resumed in the contemporary context of intensification of the dispute between USA, Russia and China. Thus, this article analyzes the theoretical advances in the debate on the role of hegemonic powers for the stability of the international system. Initially, the concept of hegemony was revised and, then, the contributions of the Theories of Power Transition, Hegemonic Stability, Long Term Cycles and Structural Crisis were exposed. The central objective is to identify the main theoretical and methodological tools that can be used to analyze the processes of rise and fall of hegemonic powers, covering different approaches, aiming to contribute to the systematization of the theoretical debate. We start from the hypothesis that the studied theories have more convergence than divergence points between themselves and, therefore, they can be applied in a complementary way to the analysis of structural changes in the international power hierarchy. From the methodological point of view, the main works of each theoretical approach were reviewed, considering the following variables: (i) the definition of a hegemonic or dominant power, (ii) how the international power structure is organized and (iii) how the hegemonic or power transition occurs. Keywords: Hegemony; Power Transition; Hegemonic Stability; Long Cycles; Structural Crisis.

E bevezetőben és jelen lapszám következő tanulmányaiban egy olyan perspektívát ajánlunk a jelenlegi magyarországi rezsimről szóló vitákhoz, ami a Magyarországon belüli viszonyokat a globális kapitalizmus folyamataihoz való kapcsolódás szempontjából vizsgálja. A 2010 utáni magyarországi rezsimet a második világháború utáni globális gazdasági ciklus válságának 2008 utáni fázisában kialakuló, helyi hegemóniaként elemezzük, amely a külső integráció követelményeinek kielégítését átmenetileg sikeresen egyezteti össze egy új helyi oligarchia feltőkésítésével. Mivel e rezsim a külső és a belső tőkefelhalmozás feltételeit csak a munkaerőre háruló egyre erőteljesebb nyomás árán tudja garantálni, ki kell alakítania és uralnia kell az ehhez szükséges társadalmi feltételeket. E bevezető tanulmányban a rezsim alapját adó külső és belső tőkefelhalmozás szerkezetét, valamint az ezt szolgáló intézkedéseket együtt elemezzük azokkal a társadalmi feszültségekkel és társadalomszerkezeti változásokkal, amelyeket a tőkefelhalmozás e folyamatai idéznek elő. A rezsim politikáiban négy irányvonalat azonosítunk, amelyek a tőkefelhalmozás feltételeinek biztosítását és a felhalmozási folyamatok által keltett feszültségek kezelését szolgálják: (1) a makrostabilitást, azaz a külső integráció stabilitását szolgáló intézkedéseket, (2) a nemzeti oligarchia feltőkésítését szolgáló intézkedéseket, (3) a középosztály megerősítését és integrációját szolgáló intézkedéseket, valamint (4) a rezsim által nem kedvezményezett, alávetett osztályok uralását szolgáló politikákat. A rezsim működésének ellentmondásaiként egyrészt a külső feltételektől való függést, másrészt pedig a munkaerő újratermelésének egyre mélyülő válságát emeljük ki.

El objetivo del capítulo es analizar en perspectiva histórica y desde la mirada de Giovanni Arrighi, la articulación del caos y orden en el sistema mundo moderno, en el proceso de configuración de las hegemonías mundiales, en particular la forma en la que estos cambios se desarrollan en la región latinoamericana. Ante ello, la hipótesis que guía este capítulo es que el actual “caos sistémico” podría abrir las posibilidades para América Latina de trascender las estructuras regionales presentes a través de nuevas formas de cooperación multilateral más justas.

پوستون در این مقاله به بحث پیرامون سه اثر مهم از رابرت برنر، جیووانی آریگی و دیوید هاروی می‌پردازد که در آن‌ها این سه مؤلف تلاش می‌کنند تا دگرگونی‌های جهانی طی دهه‌های اخیر را درون چارچوب یک نظریه انتقادی در باب سرمایه‌داری تبیین کنند. وی نشان می‌دهد که رویکردهای متفاوتِ فرمول‌بندی‌شده توسط برنر، آریگی و هاروی، علی‌رغم همه‌ی نقاط قوت‌شان، در تبیین تمام و کمال هسته‌ی تاریخی سرمایه به‌طریقی که معطوف به امکان الغای تاریخی آن باشد ناکام می‌مانند.
بنا به نظر پوستون، در غیاب تحلیلی پیرامون سرمایه که محدود به شیوه توزیع نباشد بلکه بتواند محرک‌های رهایی‌بخشِ تجلی‌یافته توسط مارکسیسم سنتی از یک‌سو و پست‌مدرنیسم از سوی دیگر را مدنظر قرار دهد، مفاهیم ما از رهایی همچنان بین یک کلیت همگون‌ساز (که خواه از طریق بازار یا از طریق دولت عمل می‌کند) و جزئی‌نگری در نوسان خواهد بود؛ نوسانی که بازتاب خودِ شکل‌های دوگانه‌ی کالا و سرمایه است.

Noi sosteniamo da sempre che il capitalismo nasce "statale", cioè non privato, con i liberi comuni, con le repubbliche marinare e con le signorie italiane. Il liberismo non esiste neppure nell'opera principale di colui che è considerato (a torto) il padre delle teorie sul libero mercato, Adam Smith. Perciò il corso del capitalismo, specie dopo la fascistizzazione irreversibile della società, va verso un bisogno crescente di Stato. Non contro la proprietà privata ma per salvaguardarla contro i suoi stessi eccessi. Non per mitigare gli effetti del Capitale ma per esaltarli. Quindi, non per una riedizione dello Stato napoleonico nel XXI secolo ma per integrare il controllo fascista con l'ideologia dell'ultima rivoluzione – liberté, égalité, fraternité – nella forma americana. Dopo, c'è solo lo Stato mondiale. Le sue strutture sarebbero già pronte. La successione a questo punto sarebbe ininfluente. Cina o altro paese, sarebbero costretti ad adottarle. Masse immense di uomini sarebbero sottoposte allo stesso controllo centrale. Un potenziale inimmaginabile. Un ultra-imperialismo, diceva Lenin, non è astrattamente impossibile, ma che esso possa realizzarsi è un altro discorso: le contraddizioni sarebbero tali da farlo saltare per strada. Per la semplice ragione, aggiungiamo noi parafrasando Marx, che sarebbe già il superamento del capitalismo nell'ambito del capitalismo stesso.

Capitalismo e imperialismo van de la mano, y a su lado, para su oportuno desarrollo, inevitablemente, también crisis y guerras. Está en su naturaleza. Como lo está la lucha por la hegemonía en el centro del sistema.
Ahora, cuando el declive de la hegemonía estadounidense es evidente, surge la posibilidad de un cambio de imprevisibles consecuencias.

Tomamos o já clássico debate feito por Giovanni Arrighi em seu Adam Smith em Pequim para analisar à luz da atual relação sino-estadunidense a hipótese do "surgimento-ascensão" harmônico da China, e o papel da luta de classes na encruzilhada dos processos de decadência hegemônica na época imperialista de crises, guerras e revoluções. Giovanni Arrighi, economista político italiano e professor de Sociologia da Universidade Johns Hopkins nos Estados Unidos, teve papel relevante em pensar as resultantes geopolíticas das crises de acumulação capitalistas do último quarto do século XX, com contribuições importantes sobre a compreensão do papel da China na modulação do século XXI. Em Adam Smith em Pequim [1], livro que incorpora alguns artigos publicados na revista britânica New Left Review (denominados "Hegemony Unraveled"), publicado em 2007, Arrighi abrange algumas das modificações que em sua leitura explicam a radical diferença do papel da

سرمایه‌داری به بازار نیاز دارد ولی درعین‌حال با بی‌ثبات‌کردن بازار شکوفا می‌شود. جووانی اریگی به تغییر بزرگی اشاره می‌کند كه از اوایل دهه 1980 تحت عنوان نولیبرالیسم صورت گرفت و پیامدهای آن در بسیاری از كشورها و مناطق فاجعه‌آمیز بود. ایالات متحده كشوری بود كه در كوتاه‌مدت بیشترین سود را از نولیبرالیسم برد. بااین‌حال، او به افول ایالات متحده اشاره می‌كند كه چطور همه توفیقات آن مبتنی بود بر وابستگی هرچه‌بیشتر ایالات متحده به منابع مالی‌ای که از خارج می‌آمد و اگرچه منفعت این عدم توازن ابتدا به جیب ایالات متحده می‌رفت، بدهی‌هایی روی هم تلنبار می‌کرد كه بیش از پیش ناپایدار بود. مصاحبه حاضر چند ماه قبل از سقوط مالی بازارهای جهانی در 18 مه 2008 انجام شد ولی اظهارات پیشگویانه اریگی در مواجهه با بحران‌های امروز به کار می‌آید. آنچه در ادامه می‌آید ترجمه متن گفت‌وگوی کوان هریس با جووانی اریگی است که در سال 2012 در مجله «انجمن جامعه‌شناسی آمریكا» منتشر شده است.

This article challenges “regionalist” approaches to spatial transformation and capitalist development. Drawing on the comparative analysis of two mid-size towns in the North and South of Italy, the article brings into light the “critical junctions” articulating local and global processes, showing how people and places are connected to larger fields of power, differently situated in the geography of capital accumulation, and how connectedness and situatedness are intimately coherent with the unevenness and disjuncture of global capitalism. By bringing into comparison a “successful” story of flexible accumulation and a case of “peripheralization” alongside the decline of state-driven industrialization, our goal is to highlight how unevenness and deservingness are mutually produced, as well as how their entanglement is enmeshed in the formation of spatialized cosmologies of difference. Our analysis deconstructs the essentializing notions of the North as “hospitable” and South as “hostile” to capital, by showing, first, the different scales at which unevenness is produced and, second, the interplay of erudite economic models and popular common sense in capital’s unfolding moral geographies. Finally, the comparison points to unevenness and deservingness as the products of geographically larger and historically deeper relations and connections and shows how the state is the fundamental agent translating them into both spatial and cultural differentiation.

In his essay, ‘It is imperative to reconstruct the Internationale of workers and peoples’, Samir Amin (2018) suggested that in order to ‘deconstruct the extreme centralization of wealth and the power that is associated with the system’, we should seriously study ‘the experience of the worker Internationales […], even if they belong to the past. This should be done, not in order to “choose” a model among them, but to invent the most suitable form for contemporary conditions’. In this paper, I will follow Amin's suggestion and provide a brief examination of the past experiences of first Internationales in the nineteenth century, and conditions that produced them, with an eye to the present moment. By comparing the political climate of the early twenty-first century to analogous comparable periods in world history, I will argue that today we need two distinct forms of global political organizations. First one should serve as a horizontal ‘movement of movements’ that reflects the spontaneous and creative energy of mass movements from below; the second one should serve as a hierarchically organized international party which points out, brings to front and represents the global and long-term interests of the movements against their local/short-term interests.

A perspectiva crítica deste curso sobre a “globalização” baseia-se nas contribuições da Economia Política Global (Pijl, 2009), da História Global (Conrad, 2016) e da Sociologia Macro Histórica (Collins, 1999).
Tomando como fio condutor da análise a obra de Giovanni Arrighi (1994, 1999, 2007), o objetivo é oferecer aos estudantes visões, histórias e pontos de vista alternativos ao da academia mainstream, sobre a crise da ordem internacional liberal e do projeto da globalização neoliberal, a hegemonia mundial estadunidense, assim como sobre os “milagres” econômicos do Leste asiático, a ascensão da China e o desenvolvimento e crise do capitalismo concebido como um sistema histórico.
Neste sentido, nosso olhar será deslocado parcialmente desde o “mundo euro-atlântico” ao “mundo euroasiático” salientando suas profundas conexões ao longo da história moderna e contemporânea. Desta forma, procuraremos nos aproximar do entendimento da chamada “globalização” de maneira não eurocêntrica (Hobson, 2004), mas também tecendo, no sentido de Fernand Braudel (1979), uma perspectiva de longa duração genuinamente global.

Land expropriation and peasant resistance in China have been widely noted, but the many cases in which peasants consent to give up land have drawn less attention. This paper conceptualizes and examines an alternative development practice: accumulation without dispossession (AWD), a concept first developed by Gillian Hart and Giovanni Arrighi. AWD may arise if accumulation takes place without (completely) depriving rural producers of the right to assets and benefits. The paper examines multiple forms of AWD and makes two main arguments. First, land expropriation does not necessarily lead to dispossession if peasants are compensated with valuable flats, commercial venues, and/or secure jobs. Due to its positive effects on social equality and livelihood security, AWD may offer an alternative vision in the era of neoliberal dispossession. Second, the outcome of land expropriation in China has varied substantially across space and time. In general, there has been a shift away from AWD in the 1980s following the neoliberal reform in the 1990s, but in the recent decade, there has been some movement back towards AWD due to peasant protests, though only to a limited degree. Nevertheless , the majority of peasants losing land have not received compensation sufficient to sustain a secure livelihood.

This article analyses how periods of geopolitical conflict and violence have affected the development of capitalism and class formation in Turkey. We argue that all major episodes of conflict, violence and war-from forced displacement and ethnic cleansing of the non-Muslims in the late 19th and the early 20th century, to Kurdish secessionist warfare in the 1990s and the Syrian Civil War-have become major historical turning points in the development of historical capitalism in Turkey. These "hostile conjunctures" transformed capitalism through their direct and indirect effects on dispossession, class formation, and capital accumulation. Although each of these conflicts produced a violent dispossession process, none of them resembled the rural dispossession process in England. To make sense of Turkey's experience, we turn our attention to what we call the "Castilian/Spanish road," and what Lenin called the "Junker/Prussian road" and the "farmers/American road." Our analysis shows that these differential paths of dispossession, class formation, and capital accumulation have produced highly variegated rather than uniform outcomes. We conclude that we are living in a new "hostile conjuncture," which is pregnant to a major structural crisis and is generating the preconditions of another historical transformation in the way capitalism operates.

In South Africa, the scale of rural-urban resettlement after apartheid continues to overwhelm the capacity of the government to house city dwellers in need of shelter. But the legitimacy of the postapartheid government rests on its ability to secure the rights of citizens who enjoy constitutional guarantees, including the right to housing. Because the government cannot simply repress this unhoused surplus population, it seeks instead to delegitimize some portion of it. It does so by developing a number of moralizing discourses, the subject of this paper, which distinguish between patient, deserving citizens, and unruly queue jumpers perceived to threaten the democratic project itself. Housing officials misrecognize squatters as a cause, rather than a consequence, of the state's failure to deliver, policing new land occupations with a draconian severity. They justify such repression in the name of protecting the democratic order, which is assumed to require waiting instead of improvisation.

Scholars of agrarian change have long debated the nature of capitalist transition in the countryside, including whether the deepened interlinking of local, national, and transna-tional economic activities make past trajectories of agrarian transformation unlikely to reoccur in the present. This essay makes the case that Giovanni Arrighi's work has much to add to our understanding of the agrarian question in global historical perspective. We focus in particular on Arrighi's research on trajectories of change in the Calabrian region of southern Italy, and his essay "Capitalist Development in Hostile Environments." In this piece, Arrighi and co-author Fortunata Piselli develop two key insights. The first is that the pathways to capitalism are diverse, non-linear, and historically contingent such that within one country-or, in the case of Italy, a single subnational region-multiple tra-jectories can be found. The second is that the outcomes of capitalist transition vary based on a country's position in the international hierarchy of wealth, meaning that agrarian transformation is compatible with both economic development and underdevelopment. We describe the three methodological principles that enabled Arrighi to develop his analysis of capitalist transition and explain how the papers collected in this special issue reflect and extend the Arrighian approach to agrarian political economy.