資本主義的擴張與剝奪：邊陲地區依賴理論的批判性檢視

Course descriptions and objectives: This course will introduce students to recent revisions in the dependency theory/world systems theory as applied to the agency of expanding capitalism in semi-peripheral and peripheral regions, particularly drawing on examples from Central and Eastern Europe. The course will discuss the legitimization of political and economic transformations in peripheral regions within the framework of critical analysis of global capitalism's expansion. It will explain how these transformation resulted in significant dispossession of land, properties, companies, and public infrastructure, predominantly by Western European and American corporations. This phenomenon will be interpreted as part of recurring waves of radical ownership transformations in the world's periphery and semi-periphery, where the dispossession or acquisition of substantial shares in national assets of peripheral countries emerges as a pivotal aspect of modern capitalism, alongside exploiting domestic labor. Following critical theory it will be discussed how since the mid-twentieth century, capital expansion has increasingly manifested as indirect political control, facilitated by intricate instruments enabling acquisitions in previously closed markets, whether due to minimal asset valuations or structural imperatives driving such transactions. Drawing on the case of Central Eastern European countries (Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Czech Republic), this course will illustrate how the cyclic waves of expropriation were perceived as inevitable by the public, largely due to the legitimization of global capital expansion championed by dominant segments of CEE elites defined in the critical literature as the "comprador service sector." It elucidates these processes of naturalization as reflective of the logic of dependent development, which bestows privileged social status upon Eastern European elites, particularly through their mediating role essential to the interface between foreign capital owners and the indigenous population. The course will emphasize a historical peculiarity of Central and Eastern European societies (especially Polish and Hungarian) where the bourgeoisie has been weakly established, and a high degree of foreign ownership of financial assets has dominated. Consequently, as will be demonstrated, a post-feudal intelligentsia stratum – the elite of cultural capital – has historically set the parameters of civic responsibility in this region. In explaining the semi-peripheral conditions of Central and Eastern Europe, the course will demonstrate how political discourses surrounding this region often explicitly or implicitly refer to its dependent status in relation to the Western core countries. The part of the argument assumes that the modern CEE collective identity building has been significantly shaped by the discursive strategies of assessing CEE’s countries actual or imaginary state of the maturity as compared with the self-reported European “values” or “standards”, what has been determined by the dependent position of peripheral Central and Eastern Europe towards the core Western European countries. Additionally, the course will explore the distinction between the classic concept of orientalism as articulated by Said and its application to Central and Eastern Europe. Whereas Said's notion of the Orient delineated a clear separation from Europe and emphasized fundamental differences, the position of East Central Europe remains ambiguous. It occupies a liminal space, both within and outside of Europe. The boundary between Western Europe, considered the "true" Europe, and Eastern Europe is fluid, contested, and subject to numerous interpretations leading to stigmatization, exclusions and exploitation. This course will explain also the legitimization strategies of social control associated with the rise of new digital industries and communication technologies in the 21st century. Specifically, it will lecture how the expansion of digital communication networks and social media platforms has influenced the social construction of moral panics targeting various economically worthless folk devils, thereby fostering a sense of 'entrepreneurial subjectivity' conducive to benefiting from a purportedly 'fair' neoliberal system that champions hardworking, autonomous citizens. The proliferation of claims-making surrounding moral panics is viewed here as cultural control mechanisms that serve to uphold a prevailing neoliberal social order. The course on public shaming in social media will be explained within a methodological framework known as 'netnography,' which investigates how shaming claims are propagated through the cyber-public sphere and online interactions to perpetuate certain citizenship model. Netnography examines how online shaming is susceptible to the claims-making activities of primary and secondary definers and how these claims are disseminated through online moral entrepreneurship associated with the construct of ideological normalization shaped by the parameters of economic efficiency, which are antagonistically confronted by the portrayal of 'shiftless citizens' allegedly disregarding the benefits of the neoliberal model. Within this context, different categories of Polish, Hungarian, Czech, Slovak, Romanian, Bulgarian citizens (often working-class members and farmers) are typically accused of lacking the 'proper civilization competences' necessary for European integration, modernization, open-mindedness, etc. Upon the completion of the course students will be able to: (i) Use a range of approaches about the dependency theory/world-systems theory and have the ability to utilize them in critical analysis of a wide range of challenges related to complex contemporary societies; (ii) Critically assess the complexities of current power relations and analyse how these processes are shaped by uneven and contested strategies of global capital; (iii) Discuss the dimensions of current conceptual approaches to core-periphery relations. The course will be also an important stage in the development of the interdisciplinary skills of students. Contemporary social sciences increasingly require a more inter-disciplinary approach.

1. Homework and Assignments, Exams and Quizzes, Evaluation and Grading Policy: Exams. (40% total) Students will have two exams in this course, one in the 6th week of classes and one during finals. Exam 1 will cover all of the chapter readings, outside readings, and discussions from the first 5 weeks of class and the Final Exam will be cumulative, although the bulk of the exam will cover material from the last 10 weeks of class. More detailed information about the content of the exams will be announced as they approach. Homework (30% total). Students will have several writing assignments in this class. The goal of each assignment is to develop critical thinking skills and to improve abilities to write clearly and concisely. Additional details for each homework and writing assignment will be provided in advance. Discussion / Active Contributions (27% total). Students will have an opportunity to contribute insights and questions to a class discussion. Quizzes (3 %) Grading Assignment “A” 20% of final grade A = > 90% Assignment “B” 20% of final grade B = 80 to < 90% Mid-Term Exam 20% of final grade C = 70 to < 80% Final Exam 40% of final grade D = 60 to < 70% 100% F = < 60% 2. Pedagogy and other supplementary information (websites, TAs, handouts and/or databases): The course includes teaching with slides. Attendance is required. Lecture slides follow problems assigned in readings and textbooks. Students are encouraged to ask questions related to teaching problems and assigned textbooks. Homework submission are due on the class date. Late submissions will be deducted 50% of the grade. The reading lists and slides will be posted. The information of homework, presentations and ongoing problems will be posted. Students will have oral presentations and discussion with TA.

Böröcz József. 2006. “Goodness is elsewhere: The rule of European difference”. Comparative Studies in Society and History 48(1): 110–38. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417506000053. Bukowski Paweł, Filip Novokmet. 2021. “Between communism and capitalism: long-term inequality in Poland, 1892–2015”. Journal of Economic Growth 26: 187–239. Drahokoupil Jan. 2009. Globalization and the state in Central and Eastern Europe: The politics of foreign direct investment. London: Routledge Harvey David. 2003. The new imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press Myant Martin. 2018. “Dependent capitalism and the middle-income trap in Europe and East Central Europe”. International Journal of Management and Economics 54: 291–303 https://10.2478/ijme-2018-0028 Nölke Andreas, Arjan Vliegenthart. 2009. “Enlarging the varieties of capitalism: The emergence of dependent market economies in East Central Europe”. World Politics 61: 670–702.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887109990098 Palma José Gabriel. 2008. Theories of dependency. in: International Handbook of Development Economics. Volume One. A.K. Dutt, J. Ros (red.), 125–135. Cheltenham & Northampton: Edward Elgar Piketty Thomas. 2014. Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Cambridge, MI: Harvard University Press Savage Mike, Nora Waitkus. 2021. “Property, wealth, and social change: Piketty as a social science engineer”. The British Journal of Sociology 72: 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12817 Shields Stuart. 2009. CEE as a new semi-periphery: Transnational social forces and Poland’s transition. in: Globalization and the ‘new’ semi-peripheries. O. Worth, P. Moore (red.), 159–176. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230245167_10 Sutch Richard. 2017. “The one percent across two centuries: A replication of Thomas Piketty’s data on the concentration of wealth in the United States”. Social Science History 41(4): 587–613. https://doi.org/10.1017/ssh.2017.27.