Cardoso and Faletto, and Marini, Bambirra through The Comparative Study of National Societies: Substantive Aspects

Abstract

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.

Keywords

• dependency theory; world-systems analysis; epistemological
• theoretical
• and methodological divergences; substantive as-pects.