- Record: found
- Abstract: found
- Article: found
Imperialism and capitalist transformation: critique of a Kenyan debate
Abstract
The question of whether or not a dependency model is applicable to Kenya has been subject to considerable recent debate. Beckman offers a critique of the overall terms in which the debate has been cast. He argues that the critics of underdevelopment theory have failed to transcend its problematic and its misdirected identification of contradictions. They have in consequence placed unjustified emphasis on the state as a instrument of ‘factional’ interests. Defenders of the dependency position have for their part been unable to place their analysis within the framework of the logic of capital accumulation, imperialism and class formation. But for Beckman, it is only in terms of the general requirements of capital accumulation that the relation of the state to underlying class forces can be adequately understood.
Content
Author and article information
Bibliographic Note
Underdevelopment in Kenya, the Political‐Economy of Neocolonialism, ( Heinemann, London , 1975 )
‘Capital Accumulation, Class Formation and Dependency’ , Socialist Register 1978 .
‘Industry and Capitalism in Kenya — Contributions to a Debate') paper presented to the Conference on the African Bourgeoisie , Dakar , December 1980
Multinational Corporations in the Political Economy of Kenya, ( Macmillan , 1980 );
Kaplinsky , ‘Capitalist Accumulation in the Periphery — the Kenyan Case’, Review of African Political Economy, No. 17 , 1980 .
R. Brenner , ‘The Origins of Capitalist Development — a Critique of Neo‐Smithian Marxism’, New Left Review, No. 104 , 1977 ;
A. Phillips , ‘The Concept of “Development”,’ Review of African Political Economy, No. 8 , 1977 ;
N. Swainson , The Development of Corporate Capitalism in Kenya, ( Heinemann, London , 1980 ).