Book Reviews / 237

— this, despite clear and unambiguous statements to the contrary by both of us.
Here again, Sanderson seems determined to make a messy and complex world fall
into neat and ideologically satisfying patterns. lam not persuaded, however that this
is what sociology really needs as it stands on the threshold of the twenty-first
century.

Theories of Development Capitalism, Colonialism, and Dependency.

By Jorge Larrain. Basil Blackwell, 1990. 220 pp. Cloth $49.95; paper $18.95.
Reviewer: YoRKw. BRADauw, Indiana University
With a few notable exceptions, sociologists have not devoted sufficient attention to
theories of economic and social development. Few scholars have successfully traced
the evolution of development theories and linked them to particular historical
periods. By contrast, Jorge Larrain provides a comprehensive, careful, and detailed
historical examination of Marxist development perspectives. The book examines the
intellectual development of these views, looking at classical political economy and
Marxism, colonialism and imperialism, classical dependency, world-system theory,
dependent development, and historical materialism. Although the book covers a
substantial period of time, it does an admirable job of maintaining a consistent
theme and of demonstrating the sequential development of Marxist thought.
The book has three main strengths. First, it contains a rich assortment of quotes,
extracts, and references from numerous scholars who helped to shape development
theory. Importantly, in addition to focusing on well-known figures like Marx, Amin,
Frank, and others, it also devotes considerable attention to less visible scholars who
have made substantial contributions to development thought. For example, although
A.G. Frank has always received much credit for formulating the classical dependen-
cy perspective, he really only popularized Paul Baran's pioneering work from an
earlier period. Baran (who "remained marginal to the academic world for quite a
while") introduced some notable changes in theories of imperialism, giving them a
much less Europocentric and ethnocentric slant.
Second, this book places theoretical developments within a historical context.
Early capitalism, the colonial era, the world wars, the emergence of the United
Nations, and other events clearly have shaped theoretical developments. Larrain
makes a constant effort to match concrete historical events to specific theoretical
developments, providing a nice substantive grounding for the book. The book could
even be expanded to include additional concrete events and data to bolster
theoretical arguments.
Third, although generally sympathetic to Marxist perspectives, the book
underscores the conflicts and inconsistencies within this body of thought. This is in
contrast to today's trend, which tends to lump all dependency and world-system
theories into one generally happy camp, all inspired by an affection for Marxist
views. Larrain discusses bitter factional arguments within these camps, noting a
particularly vociferous attack on dependency theory by some Marxists: "Perhaps the
strongest critique of dependency theory has been advanced by a group of authors
influenced by Marxism, in some cases of an Althusserian persuasion. I refer to
Warren, Bernstein, Phillips, Taylor, Mandle, Booth, Banaji, Kitching, and Leys."
Moreover, Larrain does not hesitate to point out the "dark side" of well-known
"champions" of the oppressed. For example, Marx and Engels made a number of
derogatory, ethnocentric, if not outright racist statements about a number of

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/71/1/237/2232841

by MPI fuer Voelkerrecht user
on 08 June 2018
 238 / Social Forces 71:1, September 1992

nationalities. Many Marxist views — from numerous scholars — have demonstrated

a surprising elitist view of the world while simultaneously discussing the evils of
global inequality.
Although generally strong, the book could be improved in a way that would
broaden its readership. Specifically, it might have expanded its discussion of recent
non-Marxist theoretical developments, especially as it relates to dependency-oriented
arguments. In chapter 3, for example, Larrain skillfully summarizes modernization
theories and shows how they influenced Marxist arguments. He could also have
done this for more recent theories of development that have challenged many
aspects of Marxism (e.g., the urban bias perspective). Moreover, the book could have
made reference to regions other than just Latin America. The primary focus of the
book is clearly on Latin America (which is fine), but a final chapter could have
placed this region in comparative perspective. This is an important point because the
book is a general treatment of capitalism, colonialism, and dependency, suggesting
that it should also apply to a large group of nations outside of Latin America.
On balance, I strongly recommend this book. It is a good resource for scholars
at all levels, especially for graduate students who are learning about theories of
development. The book underscores the complexities of Marxist development
theories, which have evolved over many years and have been shaped by economie,
political, and military events throughout the world system. This book may also be
discomforting to some development sociologists in the U.S. It stresses (1) the
importance of learning the history of particular regions of the world, (2) the
difficulties of quantifying Marxist arguments, and (3) the lack of theoretical depth
among social scientists. This book will inform, prompt debate, and serve as an
outstanding resource to development scholars and students of Marxism.

The Myth of the Madding Crowd.

By Clark McPhail. Aldine de Gruyter, 1991. 265 pp. Cloth $44.95; paper $21.95

Reviewer: NORRLS R JOHNSON, University of Cincinnati

This work can be read as a review of collective behavior theories from LeBon to the
present or as the launching of McPhail's own effort to reforge thinking in the field.
McPhail's premise and the source of his title is that early discussions of collective
behavior, beginning with the work of LeBon and including sociologists Park and
Blumer, created the myth of the "madding crowd." He sees that myth as per-
petuated in the work of a number of social psychologists (he discusses Floyd Allport
and Miller and Dollard in detail), and as finally challenged by Turner and Killian's
theory. The bulk of the book — the first four of six chapters — is an account of the
evolution of collective behavior theory through an explication of the works of those
scholars and of other recent contributors to the field (Carl Couch, Richard Berk,
Charles Tilly, and John Lofland) whom McPhail credits as having moved beyond the
myth. The final two chapters comprise McPhail's reformulation.
The myth to which McPhail refers is that individuals are transformed in a
crowd, losing their individuality and capability of rational response. He carefully
and effectively dethrones that position as well as Allport's individualistic version of
the myth, which asserts that the madness-in-common in crowds is a product of
shared individual dispositions simply intensified by the presence of others similarly
disposed.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/71/1/237/2232841

by MPI fuer Voelkerrecht user
on 08 June 2018