600fc REVIEWS 79 development of capitalism at all, but of some curse called under development. His sentimental tirade against capitalism takes him to a repetition of the typical error of romanticism: the conclusion that since capitalism is torn by contradictions, it is not a higher form of social organisation9 A romanticist, with his reactionary point of view, denies, precisely that which the scientific theory of Marx and Lenin found in capitalism: its inherent striving for development, its irresistible urge onwards, its inability to halt or to reproduce the economic processes in their former, rigid dimensions.10 A romanticist reads into the tremendous impoverishment and suffering of the people the conclusion that what has happened is not a stage forward in the historical development of that socio-economic formation, but actually a stage backward. Gunder Frank cannot, of course, understand that even in the colonised countries, the home market does not shrink, but is actually created (although with very great constraints on its growth) by the development of capitalism. He cannot, of course, accept the position that the development of capitalism under such conditions (although characterised by unprecedented plunder, loot, exploitation and criminality) actually creates a market for capital, to the extent wage labour is created, domestic production gives way to production for sale, and the handicraftsman is superceded by the factory. In his preoccupation with chains and ladders (which link world capitalism from top to bottom, from beginning to end) Gunder Frank forgets the simple truth that capital is primarily a relation between social classes involved in production. Gunder Frank's theory sees capitalism outside of production, as something which happened when the world became divided into two unequal halves. Maixist-Leninist theory presents a brilliant attack on capitalism, but only after emphasising that capitalism was a great advance over preceding stages of historical development—from the foundations of which one can proceed to a higher level. He questions the reality of these foundations, heaps 'ultra left' scorn over the historical process of development and scolds its direction. Thus, we read : "The necessity arises out of the structure and development of the world and national capitalist system which increasingly deepens the underdevelopment of Chile, sinks the majority of its people into ever greater poverty, and at the same time renders its bourgeoisie less and less capable of reversing the centuries-long development of underdevelopment. The process transcends Chile and is worldwide" (p 144, emphasis added). There is a well-known political position to which all this leads. Gunder Frank, denouncing all 'reformist' (including traditional Marxist5) solutions, proclaims himself for 'socialist revolution' here and now. Trotsky also declared himself, at one stage, for a 'genuine proletarian revolution', that must occur straightaway, or not at all. One does not know precisely which faction, school or political party within the 'Fourth International5 Gunder Frank favours. One does know on whose side Trotsky ended up. —N RAM