ACCESO Y ADMISIÓN AL GRADO UNIVERSITARIO

Clearly Cardoso rates investment and the production of capital goods in a dependent country as the most significant factors likely to lead to an enduring process of development and, eventually, to the elimination of dependence (Cardoso and Faletto, 1979: xx-xxi, 5, 175). He adds, of course, that the identification of the appropriate social forces, and the possession of a political will are important in the struggle against dependence. But, while ideologically he does not support the internal classes that are dom inant in Latin

America, his (measured) approval of 'dependent development' (which has occurred under the rule of these classes) shows that he regards reforms within the system as being useful.

1.2.3. Theotonio dos Santos

Dos Santos (1973: 60-71) criticizes the conventional development framework, and points out the shortcoming of ECLA, in terms similar to those of Frank and Cardoso. But he spells out the relationship between dependence and the theory of imperialism

more than they do.

Dos Santos argues that dependence is an approach which integrates the capitalist expansion of the developed countries and the consequences of that expansion into a single historical account. It is for this reason that he sees dependence theorisation as a subset of the general framework of the theory of imperialism, serving to specify the expansion in dependent countries, which the theory of imperialism in its classical formulation could not have done (dos Santos, 1973: 73-74). The expansion, itself a function of the accumulation process which breeds inequality among people, results in a 'combined inequality' among countries (dos Santos, 1973: 77). The major feature of this inequality is that dependent countries are 'assigned' the production and export of primary commodities (export-based capitalism) while lacking capital and technology, and being socio- politically dominated (dos Santos, 1973: 76). According to dos Santos, these are the general considerations that the concept of dependence embodies.

The notions of 'the capitalist expansion of the developed countries' and 'the inequality among countries' are central in the

construction of a formal definition of dependence, which according to dos Santos is:

"A conditioning situation in which the economies of one group of countries are conditioned by the development and expansion of others. A relationship of interdependence between such economies and the world trading system becomes a dependent relationship when some countries can expand through self-impulsion while others, being in a dependent position, can only expand as a reflection of the dominant countries, which may have positive or negative effects on their immediate development. In either case, the basic situation of dependence causes these countries to be both backward and exploited", (dos Santos, 1973: 76. Emphasis original.)

What does the definition imply regarding the characterization of dependence as an external factor in Third World development processes? Dos Santos considers an answer to this question an important part of his clarification of dependence. Like Quijano (1974: 398), dos Santos maintains and stresses that dependence should not be understood as an external factor. At present there are local components which play roles as important, sometimes greater than, those played by externally-based factors in constituting dependence (dos Santos, 1973: 72).

For comparative purposes it is important to note that dos Santos is as explicit as Frank and Cardoso are, that the dependence situation is responsible for problems of development in Latin America (and the rest of the Third World) by establishing the 'limits and forms' of that development (dos Santos, 1973: 76, 78). Nevertheless, like Cardoso, he is keen to stress what Frank does

not, namely the possibility of development within dependence. In his scheme this possibility is theorised as follows:

"Firstly, concrete development situations arise as much from the specific characteristics of the conditioned situation which re- define and specify the general conditioning situation, as from the general conditioning factors of dependence themselves. Secondly, the very situation of dependence can be and is susceptible to change as the hegemonic and the dependent structures themselves change", (dos Santos, 1973: 78).

But it appears that dos Santos sees the possibility of development under dependence conditions only in the short term. There is a strong impression left by his writings that he is pessimistic about the long-term sustenance of such developm ent within the dependence structure. It is this implied pessimism that has led others (Godfrey, 1980: 2) to place him closer to Frank than to Cardoso. Also, like Frank (1969: 372-373), dos Santos stresses that there is a coincidence of interests between local and international dom inators which not only accounts for the socio-political sustenance of dependence, but also implies that a struggle against the 'dominated (local) dominators' is the one most likely to create conditions for 'self-impulsion' and the long term development of Third World countries (dos Santos, 1973: 79). But he is against breaking off the international economic relations, since he believes that solutions to the problem lie within, not outside, the system.

1.2.4 Samir Amin:

Many reviewers of the works of Samir Amin have pointed to his eclecticism which, they believe, has produced numerous positive

contributions as well as numerous errors (Gerstein, 1977; Bernstein, 1979; Dore and Weeks, 1979; Barone, 1982). According to these reviewers, Amin's most important contribution is in displaying a theoretical awareness of certain problems which are ignored by the underdevelopment theorists (Bernstein, 1979: 100), and in refining dependence theorisation by tying it more explicitly to the process of capital accumulation (Barone, 1982: 10). Amin's work is certainly massive, and for our purposes it is an appropriate starting point to review his work with these claims as a general guide.

As indicated by Barone (1982) an evaluation of Amin's contribution to the dependence approach is usually also an examination of his conceptualization of capital accumulation. In general it can be said that dependence theorisation has always sought to refute conventional development thinking as well as reformulate certain aspects of historical materialism, in particular the conceptualization of the accumulation process and the development of capitalism. But while in its infancy the approach emphasized the inadequacy of conventional development thinking (Frank, 1967; 1969), later it turned more to the implications for historical materialism. Even Frank (1978a; 1978b) began to pay more attention to this. Since Amin's is the epitome of the later trend, his explanation of dependence carries more of this specialized debate, and so the dependence aspects which we are considering here must include a considerable portion of it.