Differences between the periods hegemonic British and North American: English focus in the imperialism; U.S.A. bets in the descolonizao. English policy of free exchange; U.S.A. makes pressure for opening of markets in only hand. The financial control if dislocates from the governments for particular groups; while the company English had partial participation of the government, in the American period the preponderant paper is of the companies multinationals. For Hopkins this process all has a continuity: the phases dutch, English and North American would indicate the birth, consolidation and development of the capitalism. The author if leans over then on the universe of possibilities of the next sistmica crisis, and considers some points for consideration: The concept of world-wide government; organizations as ONU and FMI assuming each time more before exclusive attributions of the hegemonic nation.
the crisis of the territorial nations as effective instruments of government. Jackson says of almost-states, mentioning itself it the terceiromundistas nations that copy French republican model without success and disjunctions become: military structures with modern army, appearance occidental person, politics, arbitrary use of the state power against the citizens and inefficient bureaucratization. This picture if has aggravated with the desmantelamento of the communist world. The author considers despite the intense transnationalization of the global companies, far from being a newness, is a reproduction in bigger scale very of experiences made since the Italian cities. In summary: Secular cycles of Braudel: Long century XVI (1450-1640): formative stage of the economy world-wide-capitalist; sistmico cycle of accumulation (CSA) genovs. Long century XVII (1640-1776): Dutch CSA. Long century XIX (1776-1914): bourgeois-liberal stage of the historical capitalism; English CSA. Each ' ' century longo' ' it has a structure supported in three periods: a first period of financial expansion where the new regimen of accumulation if develops inside of the old one, as part integrant of the expansion and contradiction of the last one; as a period of consolidation and development of the new regimen of accumulation and one third period where the financial expansion comes back to provoke contradictions and creates space for the competing and alternative new sprouting of regimes.