GIOVANNI ARRIGHI'S ANALYSIS OF CAPITALIST TERRITORIALISM

GIOVANNI ARRIGHI'S ANALYSIS OF CAPITALIST TERRITORIALISM
"HEGEMONY UNRAVELLING"
Student Name:
Institutional affiliation:
Lecturer's Name:
Course:
Due Date:
Introduction
For the capitalism theory to deal with the revolutions of history for the past few decades, it can only explain the economic improvements which are only understood intently but also must be in a position to brighten the natural changes of cultural and social life within the capitalist framework. It is only then that critical capitalism theory can claim to be precarious in the modern era, which is traditionally subjective rather than a determinate economic organization theory. With that, the critical capitalism theory should also be capable of expounding qualitative, social objective interrelated changes, and the subjectivity of addressing the cultural changes as well as social appointments. Only then that at least a capitalist theory can be overcome. In this paper, I will look into the analysis of hegemony by Giovanni Arrighi on capitalist territorialism. I will touch on the surface and deep structure.
Analysis of Capitalist Territorialism 
Arrighi is considered to be among the theorists that conceptualize the period from 1973 as among the qualitative variations. He embodies the change in terms of capital financialization terms as its predominant feature. In his arguments against the positions, the enhanced significance of finance capital marks a new stage entirely for the development of capitalists. He maintains that the financialization predominance is an intermittent singularity. It is a phase of capitalists' greater cycles development which started in early contemporary Europe and late medieval.[Taylor, Ian. "Global Governance and Transnationalizing Capitalist Hegemony." 2016. doi:10.4324/9781315414058.]
The study on the twelve-century crisis by Arrighi is mainly set in a much larger context. It involves the analysis of the processes and structure of the capitalist realm system entirely at various development stages. In turn, the latter is deeply informed by the ambitions of Arrighi in attempting to think in harmony what was characterized by Charles Tilly to being the two modern master processes that are interdependent. They involve the creation of the national state system and the establishment of a global capitalist system. With these two to the universal systems, he has an alternative to the previous theories by Karl Polanyi and Ferdinand Braudel. He adopts Braudel's capitalism as the top cover of the three-tiered construction entailing the lowermost layer known as material life by Braudel. The non-economies stratum can be molded through capitalism, a market economy's middle layer, and the anti-market, which is the top layer and the zone for the large predators. The upper level by Braudel is considered as the real locus of capitalism. Based on broadens understanding, Arrighi claims the capitalist development historically was not considered as an innumerable unpremeditated consequence of actions that are taken on by persons and various world economy communities but that the restructuring and expansion of the capitalists global economy have happened under particular communities leadership and government blocs as well as the business agencies. By this, Arrighi tries relating the state system with capitalism on Braudel's uncoupling basis on the daily economic activities from the economic powerful group's upper strata.[Casier, Tom. "Unravelling power and hegemony." Hegemony and World Order, 2020, 48-64. doi:10.4324/9781003037231-3.] ["Hegemony and World Order:." Unravelling Gramsci (n.d.), 111-136. doi:10.2307/j.ctt18dzstb.11.]
Arrighi continues to reinforce his approach by appropriating the critiques of Karl Polanyi on the ideas of the nineteenth century on the economy's self-regulation. Polanyi depended on the transformation of industrial elements into commodities that include money, labor, and land. The three commodities in nature are considered to be completely fictitious, as stated by Polanyi. Systems based on such fictions are found to be completely socially disruptive as they consequently generate a counter-movement for restricting their tasks. This thereby infers that for capitalism to purpose in the long term, the market instruments are required to be politically and socially controlled.["3. The Hegemony ofExchangist Practices." The Body in Late-Capitalist USA, 2020, 75-90. doi:10.1515/9780822381969-005.]
Based on Arrighi's appropriation of Polanyi and Braudel, he outlines the capitalist world system development in relation to four accumulation cycles, among which each of them are subjugated by a state of a capitalist hegemonic. This includes the Genoese cycle, which is from the initial fifteenth century to the well along the seventeenth century, the Dutch sequence going from the former sixteenth century to the later eighteenth century, and the British cycle that run from the well along the eighteenth century to currently. The United States cycle, on the other hand, began getting on in the nineteenth century. All of the above cycles have a reference to the capitalist world-system processes in the late nineteenth century, as stated by Arrighi. He mainly focuses on the structures and strategies of the business and government activities of each of the states since what he claimed involved the successive centrally development of these phases.[Casier, Tom. "Unravelling power and hegemony." Hegemony and World Order, 2020, 48-64. doi:10.4324/9781003037231-3.] [ibid]
Conferring to Arrighi, each cycle is regarded as similar phases from a preliminary of financial spreading out through a material expansion phase trailed by an additional financial expansion. Therefore, financialization plays a significant role in the suppression of one hegemony by the other, as found by Arrighi. As described by Arrighi, each hegemon's upward trajectory is based on trade and production expansion. At a given point in every cycle, an indication of crisis usually occurs as a consequence of capital over-accumulation. An alternative state is therefore required to provide an outlet for the over-accumulated capital. Therefore, within these schematics, growing financialization involves the transfer of resources from the contemporary hegemon to a new growing hegemon. However, this development pattern is considered not to be cyclic as it has directionality. The new cycle is found to be shorter where the new hegemon is larger, powerful, and complex. The success of each hegemon is in the internalization of the costs which its predecessors failed to internalize. For example, Great Britain, Netherlands internalized the costs while the United States added the transaction cost of internalization. Through the establishment of this array, Arrighi claims that the existing financialization phase is an indication of the American hegemony decline, which is the beginning to the end of the fourth sequence.[The Hegemony ofExchangist Practices." The Body in Late-Capitalist USA, 2020, 75-90. doi:10.1515/9780822381969-005.]
Arrighi's development pattern outline is frequently illuminating and also very elegant. However, there also exist various problematic aspects of these accounts, which, in my view, indicate the limits of the patterns. An example includes when he turns to higher present-day developments, and this makes his account of the fall and rise of the United States hegemony to be more eclectic as compared to what would be expected from his description of the capitalist's d...