From the national-bourgeois to the associated dependency interpretation of latin America

Nos anos 1960 e 1970 a América Latina foi palco de golpes militares modernizadores e da transição de seus intelectuais do nacionalismo para a dependência associada. Nos anos 1950 dois grupos de intelectuais públicos, organizados entre a Cepal, em Santiago, Chile, e o ISEB, no Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, abriram caminho para o pensamento das sociedades e economias latino-americanas (inclusive do Brasil) a partir de uma visão nacionalista. A Cepal criticava principalmente a lei das vantagens comparativas e suas essenciais implicações imperialistas; o ISEB se focava na definição política de uma estratégia nacional-desenvolvimentista. A idéia de uma burguesia nacional era a resposta para esta interpretação da América Latina. A Revolução Cubana, a crise econômica dos anos 1960 e os golpes militares nos países do Cone Sul, entretanto, criaram espaço para a crítica a essas idéias com uma nova interpretação: a da dependência. Ao rejeitar totalmente a possibilidade de uma burguesia nacional, duas versões da interpretação da dependência (a interpretação “associada” e a “superexploração”) também rejeitaram a possibilidade de uma estratégia nacional-desenvolvimentista. Apenas uma terceira interpretação, a “nacional-dependente” continuava a afirmar a necessidade e a possibilidade de uma burguesia nacional e de uma estratégia nacional. Entretanto, foi a interpretação da dependência associada que foi dominante na América Latina nos anos 1970 e 1980.

Brazil & Lusphone Africa: a study of history, international relations, & international trade

This report was inspired by a personal motivation to acquire more in depth knowledge about Brazil and Lusophone (Portuguese speaking) African nations and how they interact with each other in relation to their common colonial histories, cultures, and on matters of international relations, international development, and international trade. The countries selected for purpose and focus of this report are Brazil, Angola, and Mozambique; reference will also be made with respect to other Lusophone African countries such as Cabo Verde, Guinea-Bissau, and São Tomé e Príncipe. Some of the research methodologies used to gather information about Brazil, Angola, Mozambique, and other Lusophone African nations in relation to their respective histories, international relations, international trade relations, and roles in the global economy as emerging market nations.

The revenge of the market on the rentiers why neo-liberal reports of the end of history turned out to be premature

Starting from the perspective of heterodox Keynesian-Minskyian-Kindlebergian financial economics, this paper begins by highlighting a number of mechanisms that contributed to the current financial crisis. These include excess liquidity, income polarisation, conflicts between financial and productive capital, lack of intelligent regulation, asymmetric information, principal-agent dilemmas and bounded rationalities. However, the paper then proceeds to argue that perhaps more than ever the ‘macroeconomics’ that led to this crisis only makes analytical sense if examined within the framework of the political settlements and distributional outcomes in which it had operated. Taking the perspective of critical social theories the paper concludes that, ultimately, the current financial crisis is the outcome of something much more systemic, namely an attempt to use neo-liberalism (or, in US terms, neo-conservatism) as a new technology of power to help transform capitalism into a rentiers’ delight. And in particular, into a system without much ‘compulsion’ on big business; i.e., one that imposes only minimal pressures on big agents to engage in competitive struggles in the real economy (while inflicting exactly the opposite fate on workers and small firms). A key component in the effectiveness of this new technology of power was its ability to transform the state into a major facilitator of the ever-increasing rent-seeking practices of oligopolistic capital. The architects of this experiment include some capitalist groups (in particular rentiers from the financial sector as well as capitalists from the ‘mature’ and most polluting industries of the preceding techno-economic paradigm), some political groups, as well as intellectual networks with their allies – including most economists and the ‘new’ left. Although rentiers did succeed in their attempt to get rid of practically all fetters on their greed, in the end the crisis materialised when ‘markets’ took their inevitable revenge on the rentiers by calling their (blatant) bluff.