Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T12:40:59.528Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Beyond asymmetry: critical notes on myself as a young man and on some other old friends

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Albert O. Hirschman
Affiliation:
Albert O. Hirschman is Professor of Social Science at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N. J. The author is indebted for comments to Joseph Ben-David, Abraham F. Lowenthal and to the editor of this issue.
Get access

Extract

One of the intellectual precursors of contemporary dependency theory is Albert O. Hirschman's National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade (1945) which examined the political potential inherent in the foreign trade sector. By focusing on the asymmetries in economic relations among countries, and on the possible manipulation of these asymmetries, Hirschman described the structural bases of power and influence in the international system. Like modern dependency theory, so does National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade suffer from a conceptual shortcoming: neither one takes up the issue of the countervailing, dialectical forces generated by these asymmetrical structural relations. A preponderance of objective capabilities may be countered by an asymmetry of opposing desires, as when the “weaker” nation desires its freedom from domination more than the “stronger” nation is bent on dominating it. Another dialectical force may be found in the imbalance between the attentions of any two countries with the stronger country's global involvement diluting its attention while the weaker country is able to concentrate its diplomatic skill on only one or a few salient partners. Thus, calculations based solely on economic power, i.e., on the ability to inflict punishment through economic means, are bound to be inadequate guides to the understanding of evolving relations.

Type
Part I
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 In the latter respect, an explicit use of my conceptual framework is in Marer, Paul, “The Political Economy of Soviet Relations with Eastern Europe,” in Rosen, S.J. and Kurth, J.R., eds., Testing Theories of Economic Imperialism (Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1974), pp. 231–60.Google Scholar

2 See in particular Bloomfield, Richard, “Understanding United States Policy Toward Latin America: The Need for New Approaches,” in Lowenthal, A.F. and May, E.R., eds., The United States and Latin America: The Politics of Policy-Making (Harvard University Press, forthcoming).Google Scholar

3 See my advocacy of a “passion for the possible” (a phrase due to Kierkegaard) in the introduction to A Bias for Hope: Essays on Development and Latin America (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1971), pp. 2637.Google Scholar