چکیده:
World-system theory originally entered the field of study from outside the realm of International Relations (social studies/sociology) and is considered one of the opposing and critical theories to the mainstream. Unlike mainstream theories that suffice with describing, explaining, and interpreting what is considered the 'existing reality' and do not reconsider their scientific-rationalistic foundations, this theory takes a critical stance both towards the 'reality' of international relations and towards the discipline of international relations and its cognitive foundations. This article seeks to demonstrate the capabilities and limitations of world-system theory as a radical critical perspective by examining its meta-theoretical and content-based interpretations. The first part of the article deals with its understanding of the nature and content of international relations; the second part examines its view of the possibilities of transformation in the existing system. The article concludes with a summary and evaluation.
خلاصه ماشینی:
At the ontological level, the unit of study for Wallerstein is the social system as a “totality,” meaning self-sufficient units that are not dependent on external factors and can be in three (or four) forms: mini-states or tribal economies based on reciprocity and monoculture, multicultural global empires with a political system, and multicultural global economies lacking a political system (Wallerstein 1976:229), and finally, a global socialist government as an alternative possibility.
The Origin of the Interstate System For Wallerstein, there is a reciprocal connection between the global division of labor and the international state system, and “the political economy of the world-system” originates from here (Goldfrank 2000:172).
These national cultural identities, along with a strong state apparatus, are both a mechanism to support inequalities within the world-system and an ideological justification for maintaining these inequalities (Wallerstein 1976:230) They have been formed and developed simultaneously, and neither can continue to exist without the other.
While the discussion about the interstate system has been more or less on the periphery of the general discussion of the capitalist economic system, it can be said that among all theories of international relations, this theory (in Wallerstein's account) has been able to specifically provide an explanation for the existence of the international system based on its functional role in the global economy, and this is its main distinction and superiority from the point of view of international relations.
(
, 
, 
)
