ECOP4011 presents the analytic foundations of historical materialism through a focus on dialectics and the philosophy of internal relations as intrinsic to understanding political economy and the apparent separation of 'politics' and 'economics'. 

In this unit one book will be used as our foundation text. This is: 

Alexander Anievas and Kerem Nişancioğlu, How the West Came to Rule: The Geopolitical Origins of Capitalism (Pluto Press, 2015). 

Each week you will be required to read at least one chapter from the book plus, at times, one additional reading. Rather than a reading kit, all the source material will be provided digitally, or accessible through the library. 

You are advised to purchase the foundation text but this is not compulsory.

The aim of this unit is to provide students with the opportunity to engage deeply with canonical texts by leading thinkers in their discipline. Additionally, there will be a constellation of further texts to build up competing understandings of the foundations of historical materialism. 

The philosophy of internal relations and the violence of abstraction have become central motifs in the work of Bertell Ollman and Derek Sayer. Rather than positing the external interaction of entities (e.g. 'politics' and 'economics', or 'states' and 'markets', or the 'state' and 'civil society', or 'productive forces' and 'relations of production'), historical materialism understands the world as a complex of internal relations. This is a dialectical ontology that avoids fetishising concepts or abstracting them from their alienated forms of appearance. 

It is the social property relations approach of Ellen Meiksins Wood that strongly exhibits elements of this philosophy of internal relations in her pathbreaking approach to understanding the appearance of the separation of the ‘state’ and the ‘market’ under capitalism. It is these sorts of debates that will be the platform from which to launch into the foundation book as the principal reading. 

It is this internal relations perspective that also appears, for example, in the political economy scholarship of David McNally, the feminist social reproduction theory of Tithi Bhattacharya, the ecofeminism of Ariel Salleh, or the world-ecology approach of Jason W. Moore, to name a few. For Derek Sayer, the key issue is to avoid what he refers to as the violence of abstraction. One can see this philosophy of internal relations perspective across inter alia the political economy analyses of figures such as Antonio Gramsci, Henri Lefebvre, Nicos Poulantzas, E.P. Thompson, or David Harvey. In addition to Karl Marx, some of these figures will also be deliberated during the course of our discussions. Throughout the duration of the unit we will also consider criticisms of the philosophy of internal relations.

REFLECTIVE JOURNAL - 15% 

Submit a total of 2 x 500 word papers for any two seminars in weeks 2 to 12. One of these may be the week of your presentation. 

Seminar papers are due online before class (i.e. by 9am) on the day of the seminar. Your paper should provide a critical response to the week’s seminar focus. Additional research beyond the set readings is not required. Brief written feedback will be provided in the week following submission. A single mark for all three seminar papers will be awarded at the end of semester. 

SHORT-FORM ESSAY QUESTION - 30% 

Submit a 1,000 word essay online by 23:59 on Monday 3 April. Bertell Ollman famously elaborated on Vilfredo Pareto’s claim that in Marx there was a problem because in his writing words were confusingly like bats, “one can see in them both birds and mice”. Your short essay should consider the validity of Pareto’s paradox and explore the limits and possibilities of Marx’s method and the broader philosophy of internal relations that it reveals as the hallmark of historical materialism.

Question:

Referring to Bertell Ollman’s arguments in Alienation on “Pareto’s paradox”, what are the limits and possibilities of the philosophy of internal relations as a dialectical method of analysis?

LONG-FORM ESSAY - 50%  

Submit a 3,000 word essay online by 23:59 on Monday 22 May. There are numerous contributions to competing understandings of 1) the origins of capitalism and 2) uneven and combined development. For example, on the origins of capitalism the arguments of Robert Brenner or Ellen Meiksins Wood in critiquing Immanuel Wallerstein stand out. Similarly, on uneven and combined development the contributions of Justin Rosenberg and Benno Teschke have pivotally drawn from classic social theory on the topic. Your long essay should situate your own critical reading of How the West Came to Rule with these sort of wider debates. 

Question:

Critically assess the strengths and weaknesses of Alexander Anievas’ and Kerem Nişancioğlu’s How the West Came to Rule in relation to competing understandings of the origins of capitalism and uneven and combined development.

PARTICIPATION - 20% 

ECOP 4011 is designed as a seminar-based course. Your weekly participation is essential. Each student will be allocated a specific seminar to present at and lead discussion in during our first class. Your participation mark is equally comprised of both your weekly seminar participation and your seminar presentation/leadership. 

Seminar presentations/leadership includes the following tasks (as a single presenter or in groups of two): 

(a) Providing a short overview of the arguments laid out in the readings, responding to the week’s seminar question/s. This should take 

no more than 10-15 minutes per presenter and will provide the foundation for the following all-class discussion. 

(b) Providing 2-3 clearly designed questions to prompt larger group discussion. 

(c) Managing the group discussion. Seminar leaders are responsible for managing the class discussion, keeping fellow students on topic and, when necessary, asking follow-up questions that push fellow students to think deeper and more critically on the issues of the week. 

 1. Seminar presentation/leadership will be assessed according to: 

1. The clarity and insight of the introductory overview; 

1. Clarity and relevance of the design of key questions; and 

1. Skill in leading and guiding group discussion. 

2. Seminar participation will be assessed according to: 

1. Your presentation of a critical understanding of key ideas and concepts introduced in the literature; 

1. Your capacity to discuss links between theoretical debates and current and/or historical events; and 

1. Respectful treatment and inclusion of other students in discussion.