Thinking about modes of production and how important the concept was for the development on non-Western #Marxism, because it allowed for separating historical analysis from purely theoretical. But I'm wondering whether people like Samir #Amin or Walter #Rodney actually read #Althusser or #Balibar.

Balibar (in Lire le Capital and Cinq Etudes) develops a flexible, historically contingent notion of modes of production on a theoretical level, but Amin (and, after him, Eric Wolf or Jairus Banaji) make it concrete, developing it along non-European case studies in order to show it isn't exclusive.

Amin lived in Paris for a time and taught in Vincennes in 1969, so I would be astonished if he hadn’t connected to these discussions, but he doesn’t cite them anywhere as far as I can see.

(incidentally, this debate seems to belie one of the major critcisms of the dependency school, namely that it overemphasises circulation above production. They don't, they try to reconsider the historical dynamic between the two, necessarily because production looks different in the global South)