This essay argues that the historical–structural framework of analysis is still useful to describe the transformations generated by globalization in the underdeveloped countries, provided that it is employed with the subtlety needed to avoid reductionism. Globalization, in the same way as dependency, is nothing more than an unfolding of the capitalist system in today's historical conditions. The structural starting point conditions—but does not determine—the shape taken by economic and political processes. Political strategies for integrating into the global economy have a certain margin of autonomy. Still, the range of feasible strategies depends on factors that differ from country to country, such as the local capacity of income accumulation, the presence of foreign direct investment, the mix between nationally controlled production and production controlled by multinationals, the participation of the public sector in production, the capacity of the leadership, the prevailing ideologies, and so forth. In other words, there are alternative paths.