What do you think?
Rate this book
The Modern World-System #3
The Modern World-System III: The Second Era of Great Expansion of the Capitalist World-Economy, 1730s-1840s
Immanuel Wallerstein’s highly influential, multi-volume opus, The Modern World-System, is one of this century’s greatest works of social science. An innovative, panoramic reinterpretation of global history, it traces the emergence and development of the modern world from the sixteenth to the twentieth century.
390 pages, Paperback
First published November 28, 1988
9 people are currently reading
770 people want to read
About the author
Immanuel Wallerstein
209 books341 followersImmanuel Maurice Wallerstein was a scholar of politics, sociologist, historical social scientist, and world-systems analyst. His bimonthly commentaries on world affairs were syndicated.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
September 17, 2015
Once again, Wallerstein looks at great detail into a topic as complex as world systems analysis. This time, he focuses on a big question: What was the French Revolution and what did it do?
His analysis is largely historical, and from, as always, an impressive number of sources. When reading this book though, while the first chapter is devoted to further developing and answering the question, I think this book is a little weaker than its previous two. In part, because Wallerstein answers his question in the first chapter: The French Revolution did not spark capitalism, but was a continuation of it -- and essentially did not provide a break in the logic of the world system, only a further point of it... so consequently the rest of the book examines how this time period developed and then exceeded the Napoleonic wars without much interruption. For sure, the French Revolution was a major event. It did give pause to all the actors who then perhaps, changed policy or strategy in order to account for it. But the world was already run by economic consideration, so really, business as usual.
Wallerstein instead locates the French Revolution as the last spasm of the French in their fight against the developing British Hegemony. As always, Wallerstein looks at economic basis and reads how policy responds to attempt to capitalize on this material basis, and whether or not these policies had its intended effect.
What I found really interesting was how freedom and ideology were instead utilized as a narrative to rally an unhappy people -- especially in the Americas in part with the British colonies (most of which did not join the American Revolution) and also with the Spanish colonies, whose racial complexity (300 years of interbreeding gave rise to a mixed race that was part of the economic and social fabric) told a completely different story, giving rise to a different response. In part, the liberation of the Americas as political and economic units reflected the level of their economic development and inherent quasi-independence as individual actors in the world economy. Independence then, comes politically because it the opportunity presents itself as Europe goes through the Napoleonic war to reshuffle her political structure to "catch up" with its economic reality. What I would have liked Wallerstein to write more on, was how the rise of nationalism in Europe, something which happened with the French reshuffling, could be accounted for when people identify with their body-politic as an economic realization. Do people become nationalistic because they realize they need to be politically responsible for their economic wealth? I think this is the answer he would give. Reading between the lines it seems so, but if he had said it directly, then that would have been nice.
On the other hand, political instability follows a shifting of economic basis, as with the case of West Africa, China, India, Russia and the Ottoman Empire. Now Russia went voluntarily, with that intention, it seems, so that's a little different but with each other, their inclusions into the world economy were first marked by a destablization of their economic power base, a reshuffling of economic power into a new rising class, and then the dissolution of their major political unity as this new rising class pursued their own agendas rather than keeping social stability. India was particularly interesting as the British eventually tried to keep the country together in order to ensure profitable trade... this did not prove fruitful for them, as the cost was too great, except in keeping India under their control as a route to China which was more profitable.
Within all this, I see the rise of the bourgeois class, with their identity and social ambitions... their taste for exotic foods, goods, and status helped enslave entire foreign populations, and restructured the entire world to learn to acquire the same taste for luxury items... Wallerstein doesn't look to this as a driving force, at least he doesn't really mention this in this book. Instead, he concentrates on the economic exploit and the changing political landscape as an attempt to solidify lines of trade, political dominance and military exercise in the name of the former two. If anything, over the last three books of his, he has been convincing me that economics -- access to resources -- remains the primary motive for individuals and populations. That our political well being and agendas are not due to ideology (it can be for individuals) but it is due in greater part, for our desire to secure wealth for ourselves (or with the masses, at least enough to maintain an accustomed lifestyle).
Seen in this way, the French Revolution like many other revolutions, as Wallerstein points out, was mainly the very poor rising up, caught in the ideology and stirrings of a merchant class that is unhappy with how the ruling class has managed their interests... and then the merchant class taking command of the rising masses (only because they want to direct its growth to secure their own stability, rather than seeing their own place in society like-wise overturned) and then a finally, the installation of conservative governance, or at least a government somewhat conservative, to maintain at least enough of the power structure so as to secure some economic status quo so that resource and ownership are not taken away from the wealth that be. It is in this way that many Latin-America countries have their "revolutions" (that those that benefit most from the existing order would see a revolution that continues to benefit their order), revolutions where the existing economic infrastructure remains the same.
I hang back from giving him 5 stars mainly because I would have liked to see some examination of ideology in this view... something touched upon but not fully developed... if anything a strong view of ideology from an economic position would be to claim that all ideology is propaganda, meant to direct the masses either to overthrowing the ruling class or maintaining some economic basis for those who already have economic power... a weak view of ideology is that it does reflect some new ideas about the role of people, to legitimatize the freedoms that people can gain through mass political action. While this is not Wallersteins thesis in this book, his introduction to his world systems analysis promises a deeper view of world capitalist systems in order to also account for ideology... something which is largely takes a backseat in this book to the actual moves of economic realities... that is to say, save for questioning the role of the French Revolution in the rise of capitalism.
His analysis is largely historical, and from, as always, an impressive number of sources. When reading this book though, while the first chapter is devoted to further developing and answering the question, I think this book is a little weaker than its previous two. In part, because Wallerstein answers his question in the first chapter: The French Revolution did not spark capitalism, but was a continuation of it -- and essentially did not provide a break in the logic of the world system, only a further point of it... so consequently the rest of the book examines how this time period developed and then exceeded the Napoleonic wars without much interruption. For sure, the French Revolution was a major event. It did give pause to all the actors who then perhaps, changed policy or strategy in order to account for it. But the world was already run by economic consideration, so really, business as usual.
Wallerstein instead locates the French Revolution as the last spasm of the French in their fight against the developing British Hegemony. As always, Wallerstein looks at economic basis and reads how policy responds to attempt to capitalize on this material basis, and whether or not these policies had its intended effect.
What I found really interesting was how freedom and ideology were instead utilized as a narrative to rally an unhappy people -- especially in the Americas in part with the British colonies (most of which did not join the American Revolution) and also with the Spanish colonies, whose racial complexity (300 years of interbreeding gave rise to a mixed race that was part of the economic and social fabric) told a completely different story, giving rise to a different response. In part, the liberation of the Americas as political and economic units reflected the level of their economic development and inherent quasi-independence as individual actors in the world economy. Independence then, comes politically because it the opportunity presents itself as Europe goes through the Napoleonic war to reshuffle her political structure to "catch up" with its economic reality. What I would have liked Wallerstein to write more on, was how the rise of nationalism in Europe, something which happened with the French reshuffling, could be accounted for when people identify with their body-politic as an economic realization. Do people become nationalistic because they realize they need to be politically responsible for their economic wealth? I think this is the answer he would give. Reading between the lines it seems so, but if he had said it directly, then that would have been nice.
On the other hand, political instability follows a shifting of economic basis, as with the case of West Africa, China, India, Russia and the Ottoman Empire. Now Russia went voluntarily, with that intention, it seems, so that's a little different but with each other, their inclusions into the world economy were first marked by a destablization of their economic power base, a reshuffling of economic power into a new rising class, and then the dissolution of their major political unity as this new rising class pursued their own agendas rather than keeping social stability. India was particularly interesting as the British eventually tried to keep the country together in order to ensure profitable trade... this did not prove fruitful for them, as the cost was too great, except in keeping India under their control as a route to China which was more profitable.
Within all this, I see the rise of the bourgeois class, with their identity and social ambitions... their taste for exotic foods, goods, and status helped enslave entire foreign populations, and restructured the entire world to learn to acquire the same taste for luxury items... Wallerstein doesn't look to this as a driving force, at least he doesn't really mention this in this book. Instead, he concentrates on the economic exploit and the changing political landscape as an attempt to solidify lines of trade, political dominance and military exercise in the name of the former two. If anything, over the last three books of his, he has been convincing me that economics -- access to resources -- remains the primary motive for individuals and populations. That our political well being and agendas are not due to ideology (it can be for individuals) but it is due in greater part, for our desire to secure wealth for ourselves (or with the masses, at least enough to maintain an accustomed lifestyle).
Seen in this way, the French Revolution like many other revolutions, as Wallerstein points out, was mainly the very poor rising up, caught in the ideology and stirrings of a merchant class that is unhappy with how the ruling class has managed their interests... and then the merchant class taking command of the rising masses (only because they want to direct its growth to secure their own stability, rather than seeing their own place in society like-wise overturned) and then a finally, the installation of conservative governance, or at least a government somewhat conservative, to maintain at least enough of the power structure so as to secure some economic status quo so that resource and ownership are not taken away from the wealth that be. It is in this way that many Latin-America countries have their "revolutions" (that those that benefit most from the existing order would see a revolution that continues to benefit their order), revolutions where the existing economic infrastructure remains the same.
I hang back from giving him 5 stars mainly because I would have liked to see some examination of ideology in this view... something touched upon but not fully developed... if anything a strong view of ideology from an economic position would be to claim that all ideology is propaganda, meant to direct the masses either to overthrowing the ruling class or maintaining some economic basis for those who already have economic power... a weak view of ideology is that it does reflect some new ideas about the role of people, to legitimatize the freedoms that people can gain through mass political action. While this is not Wallersteins thesis in this book, his introduction to his world systems analysis promises a deeper view of world capitalist systems in order to also account for ideology... something which is largely takes a backseat in this book to the actual moves of economic realities... that is to say, save for questioning the role of the French Revolution in the rise of capitalism.
October 9, 2022
The book seeks to discuss three important revolutions in the period - the Industrial, French and American Revolution - seeking to analyse how each was not a qualitative break, but a continued intensification of capitalism's spread intensively and extensively. The Industrial Revolution, the first chapter makes clear, was simply a phase of the upwards phase of capitalism - dependent on state-involvement allowing the UK to push forward, different market orientation between France and UK, with the former focused on European market and latter on colonial market and lastly that it was a phase of declining state revenue, which the UK was able to resolve through invading India, but France was unable to - allowing its decline in hegemony.
This led to the French Revolution, which is characterised as in part a last-ditch attempt to ward-off the loss in hegemony to the UK, as well as the first anti-systemic movement due to the involvement of the peasantry in its opposition to the bourgeoisie.
Lastly, the American Revolution was a response to the victory of UK over France in 1765 forcing the UK to reign in settlers, creating an irreconcilable conflict between UK and USA, however its success - a settler decolonisation -, was in many ways a victory due to USA maintaing a trade partner of UK without any of the tax expenditure; an issue all of America faced, as there was also settler decolonisation in Latin America due to declining state revenue and the state's inability to maintain control over the colonies, worsened by Spain's involvement in the war against UK.
This led to the French Revolution, which is characterised as in part a last-ditch attempt to ward-off the loss in hegemony to the UK, as well as the first anti-systemic movement due to the involvement of the peasantry in its opposition to the bourgeoisie.
Lastly, the American Revolution was a response to the victory of UK over France in 1765 forcing the UK to reign in settlers, creating an irreconcilable conflict between UK and USA, however its success - a settler decolonisation -, was in many ways a victory due to USA maintaing a trade partner of UK without any of the tax expenditure; an issue all of America faced, as there was also settler decolonisation in Latin America due to declining state revenue and the state's inability to maintain control over the colonies, worsened by Spain's involvement in the war against UK.
February 20, 2019
Третий том Валлерстайна впечатлил уже не так, как первые два. Манера подачи информации по сути не изменилась, хотя третий том написан после достаточно большего перерыва. Изменился анализируемый в томе промежуток времени. Если раньше это были "долгие" XVI и XVII века, то в этом томе по большому счету речь шла о пятидесятилетнем промежутке между Семилетней войной и Ватерлоо.
Любопытно как Валлерстайн показывает как Семилетняя война и поражение Франции в этой войне повлияли на события всего этого пятидесятилетия. А вот рассуждения о том, что Промышленная революция в Британии и Великая французская революция были не такими уж и революциями показались слегка надуманными. Глава о включении России, Османской империи и т.д. в мир-экономику, напомнила сюжет из прочитанного в прошлом году Каменного пояса, когда Демидовы из крупного импортера чугуна в Англию, превратились в прилежных учеников, пытающихся вывезти английские технологии. В последней главе любопытно было прочесть о процессе формирования США, о том почему Канада не присоединилась к 13 штатам и о влиянии событий в Северной Америке и Европе на национальное движение в Латинской Америке.
К четвертому тому вернусь, но через достаточно большой промежуток.
Любопытно как Валлерстайн показывает как Семилетняя война и поражение Франции в этой войне повлияли на события всего этого пятидесятилетия. А вот рассуждения о том, что Промышленная революция в Британии и Великая французская революция были не такими уж и революциями показались слегка надуманными. Глава о включении России, Османской империи и т.д. в мир-экономику, напомнила сюжет из прочитанного в прошлом году Каменного пояса, когда Демидовы из крупного импортера чугуна в Англию, превратились в прилежных учеников, пытающихся вывезти английские технологии. В последней главе любопытно было прочесть о процессе формирования США, о том почему Канада не присоединилась к 13 штатам и о влиянии событий в Северной Америке и Европе на национальное движение в Латинской Америке.
К четвертому тому вернусь, но через достаточно большой промежуток.
March 28, 2022
As we continue to approach modernity, Wallerstein begins to engage with questions of real interest to us today. He takes a contrarian view on most mainstream accounts and the evidence bears him to be more right than wrong.
Industry and Bourgeoisie: What were the Industrial and French Revolutions?
Struggle in the Core: a new perspective on Anglo-French conflicts: The Seven Years War and Napoleonic Wars
The Incorporation of Vast New Zones into the World-Economy: India, Russia, West Africa, and the Ottoman Empire
The Settler Decolonization of the Americas: American and Latin American Independence
Industry and Bourgeoisie: What were the Industrial and French Revolutions?
Struggle in the Core: a new perspective on Anglo-French conflicts: The Seven Years War and Napoleonic Wars
The Incorporation of Vast New Zones into the World-Economy: India, Russia, West Africa, and the Ottoman Empire
The Settler Decolonization of the Americas: American and Latin American Independence
February 1, 2024
More granular and less conceptual than the first two volumes, but that’s because Wallerstein has gotten most of the theoretical scaffolding in place by now (though not all of it, as this is the first time that we get a fleshed-out, semi-systematized idea of what incorporation into various zones of the world-economy entails). This allows for more close historical analysis of the putative “revolutions” he puts under the microscope: French, Industrial, American, Latin American, Haitian (only real one). Remains clearly written and scholastically ambitious, both of which I’ve come to expect from Wallerstein and the leading world-systems guys more generally. One volume to go.
Read
January 8, 2010Ditto
Want to read
January 4, 2011Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews