Peripheral States—At home with the Comprador Class

Another source of stability within the world-system is the existence of a dominant, so-called comprador class within the developing world. A number of more radical theorists have claimed that the ruling elites in most, if not all, peripheral, and even some semi-peripheral states, behave in ways which advance the interests of the core within their own societies rather than in ways which might improve the lot of their compatriots. Core states and MNCs actively encourage this state of affairs and will often intervene, directly or indirectly, in order to support client regimes or to overthrow governments who threaten the position of the comprador class. One classic example of such behaviour was the over­throw of the left-wing Allende government in semi-peripheral Chile in 1973.

Critics have suggested that a de facto understanding exists between the core and the elites in the 'Third World' along the following lines. If Western business and political interests are protected then 'Third World' regimes will not be seriously taken to task no matter how oppressive or brutal their behaviour towards their own population. This would certainly explain why Western countries have colluded with so many odious regimes in the developing world. The nature of this understand­ing is succinctly, if rather crudely, summed up in a description proffered by one American president of a particularly loathsome Central American dicta­tor: 'he may be a mean son-of-a-hitch. hut at least he's our son-of-a-bitch' (Booth and Walker 1993: 130).

The existence of a comprador class means that at least some of the tensions that would otherwise be generated by the inequalities of the modern world-system are neutralized, thus ensuring far greater stability in North-South relations than would otherwise be the case.

Geoculture

In his more recent writings Wallerstein has become increasingly preoccupied with 'geoculture'. Geoculture refers to the cultural framework of the 'modern world-system, with culture being viewed in the broadest terms to include values and thought; processes. Wallerstein describes geoculture as that part of the system which is 'hidden from view and therefore more difficult to assess, but the part with­out which the rest would not be nourished.' (1991b: 11) What he suggests is that the particular patterns of thought and behaviour—even language— inscribed in geoculture, are not only essential to ensure that the modern world-system functions effectively, but also provide much of its underlying legitimation. Thus, geoculture, along with states and the interstate system, has been an essential sta­bilizing factor in ensuring the thus-far successful reproduction of the dominant world order.

Wallerstein's depiction of the operation of geo­culture concentrates on two aspects in particular: the first is the role of liberalism as the dominant ideology in the system; the second is the dominant knowledge system' which is termed 'scientism'. We will briefly examine both in turn.

Ideologies are incredibly powerful: people live and die for them. The existence of an ideology which leads people to believe in the prevailing order is ultimately a far more powerful and effective means of upholding that order than simple coer­cion. Wallerstein argues that for the past two hundred years the modern world-system has been sustained by a remarkably successful ideology which has convinced most people that the modern world-system provides the only rational, indeed, the only conceivable, way of organizing world soci­ety. That ideology is liberalism.

Liberalism has been the dominant ideology within the system to such an extent that other apparently" 'competing' ideologies such as conser­vatism and socialism have accepted its central tenets and have become, in effect, variations on a theme—conservative liberalism and socialist liber­alism. For example, Wallerstein points to the broad Similarities between the literalism of American President Woodrow Wilson and the version of Marxism propagated by Lenin. Following the Enlightenment tradition of the eighteenth century, both firmly believed that humanity, acting ratio­nally, could construct a better society based on sec­ular principles. Both believed that this better society could and would embrace the whole of humankind: their ambitions were universal. Finally, both believed that the state provided the key mechanism for bringing about this 'new world order'. This later point is crucial for, as Wallerstein argues, 'Liberalism is the only ideology that permits the long-term reinforcement of the state structures, the strategic underpinning of a functioning capi­talist world-economy.' This is because 'Conservat­ism and socialism [when not harnessed to liberalism] appeal beyond the state to a "society" which finds expression in other institutions' (1991b: 10). Liberal ideology has thus been crucial in buttressing the organization of the modern world-system into competing states.

The second geocultural pillar of the modern world-system has been provided by scientism. This is the term used by Wallerstein to describe the knowledge system that evolved within that system as society became secularized and knowledge was increasingly validated in terms of the instrumental manipulation of the material world. The spectacular success of the natural sciences in discovering what appeared to be universal laws, applicable across time and space, had very significant impli­cations for production processes, and hence capital accumulation. It also led to the scientific model of knowledge being posited as the correct j approach for other disciplines including the social sciences.

The common thread between both these aspects of geoculture are provided by their universalizing impulses. Scientism is concerned with discovering universal laws and applying them for, ultimately, universal benefit. Liberalism attempts to apply universal principles to the organization and conduct of the state. The problem is that this universalist thrust implies within it a notion of equality which is in stark contrast to the massive inequalities inherent in the functioning of the world-system. This poses the dilemma of 'how to maintain/restore hierarchy without renouncing universalism, a necessary component of the geo­culture' (Wallerstein 1996: 97). The answer is pro­vided by racism and sexism, both of which Wallerstein regards as vital elements of geoculture. Their value to the system is that they supply the jus­tifications for the unequal outcomes which occur within the world-system despite the stress on uni­versalism. Whilst universalism implies that all are equal, racism and sexism justify why some are more equal than others.