We are a blog

My photo

Hi, my name is Biju P R. I am a writer, teacher and academic blogger. Anything that comes through society and technology interest me. My blog posts here define what am I doing here. Please just check it out.

Share this Blog

Saturday, April 20, 2013

Critically analyse the assertion that developing countries are responsible for their own under development? Essay Two

The word or underdevelopment disturbs everyone who lives in the developing areas of the world. It may mean different things to different people but most people are sure on fact that under-development refers a colonised economy or inadequate industrial development or it now may draw closer to mean that foreign is somehow good. Underdevelopment is the state of an organization for instances a country that has not attained its maturity overtime. Meanwhile, It is often used to refer to economic underdevelopment and the  symptoms of which include growth of slums, lack of access to job opportunities, poverty, health care, poor infrastructure, paucity of drinkable water, absence of elementary education, food shortage, diseases, housing and displacement issues on the question of development.
The world consists of a group of rich nations and a large number of poor nations. It is usually held that economic development takes place in a series of capitalist stages and that today's underdeveloped countries are still in a stage of history through which the now developed countries passed long ago.The separation of the world into rich and poor nations and the splitting up within poor nations between a minority of rich people and a majority of poor people living at a minimum subsistence level has been apparent to careful observers for a long time in the area of development research. The apparently stumpy standard of living of the mass of the population in developing countries is labeled out as the key issue in development in developing areas of the world.
Ever since the close of World War II, all over the world we have been experiencing a worldwide effort for the improvement of living conditions in the so-called developing countries and to rebuild the devastated economies. In the commencement, there was little enquiry as to the causes of underdevelopment of newly born countries; eventually the newly independent countries as well as international bodies like United Nations and industrialized countries tried to promote development by applying measures like the research collaboration in developing areas, the expansion of education and building up schooling system, the development of infrastructure for material growth and most of them followed the example of western model of development. Meanwhile, it became noticeable that this was more or less a treatment of symptoms instead of addressing causes and by the pass of time the gap between rich and poor nations gradually widened and the under-development debate has begun to surface in the meetings of the developed and less developed countries of this world.
There are many features of under-development. Population growth is believed to be the first criterion of underdevelopment but really one cannot correctly assess whether a high or low ratio of population to land area is an indicator of underdevelopment and it’s very much controversial. For instances, there are many underdeveloped countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America where the ratio of population to land is very low. At the same time, countries like India, Indonesia Pakistan having high ratio of population to land also exhibit signs of underdevelopment overtime. In addition, ratio of industrial output to total output is low in developing countries. The degree of industrialisation is taken as the criterion for under-development. In countries where agriculture is well developed, the disposable agricultural surplus income will be generally used to subsidize uneconomic urban industries by some means. Ragnar Nurkse affirmed that underdeveloped countries are those which compared with the advanced countries are under-equipped with capital in relation to their population and natural resources[i] and poor rate of capital to per head is an indicator. The most frequently established criterion of underdevelopment is the low per capita income of underdeveloped countries as compared with the advanced countries in many measures.
Harvey Leibenstein has classified the characteristics of underdevelopment under four major heads, namely Economic, Demographic, Cultural and Political and Technological and Miscellaneous. In short the commonly considered  features of underdevelopment are:1.Preponderence of Agriculture,2.Population pressure and Unemployment,3.Poor income and Poor savings,4.Under-utilisation of resources,5.Capital deficiency,6.Low level of technology,7.Foreign trade orientation,8.Poor Economic Organization 9.Lack of suitable Socio-Economic Setup, and 10.A Dualistic Economy.
At the same time there were many theoretical propositions as to explain why underdevelopment in developing countries. The fundamental question is to encounter why under-development in developing countries? Is the developing countries themselves are responsible for their under-development? This question has been beautifully addressed by a plenty shclolars with empirical evidence to suggest that under-development has many reasons and most notable it is observed from most propositions is that developing countries are not responsible for their under-development.  There are a great number of explanations for underdevelopment and concepts of development in Modrnisation theory, dependency theory, and Marxist theory to explain the problem. 
Modernization theory
According to modernisation theories, the internal factors in the countries, for instances traditional agrarian structure, illiteracy, the low division of labour, the traditional attitude of the population, the lack of communication and infrastructure, prevailing traditionalism etc., are guilty for underdevelopment in developing areas. Differences in structure and historical origin are considered of little importance under this theory; international dependencies are not taken into account at the same time.
As a result, a change of these endogenous factors is the strategy for development to effect changes. The industrialized countries are to be considered the model for economy and society and this replica will be reached sooner or later by developing areas. There is a continuum between the least and the most developed country and each country has its position on this line by history. The difference as compared to the industrialized countries is the degree of backwardness which has to be made up for by now. Suitable measures are the modernization of the capital aid, production apparatus, transfer of know-how, financial aid so that the developing countries can reach the stage of industrialized countries as soon as possible and become similar to them. Development is seen as an increase of production and efficiency and measured primarily by comparing the per capita income and this model is purely economical. However this model is vehemently criticized for it fails to explain the fundamental reasons for under-development in developing areas.
Marxist Theories of Under-development
The Classical Marxism was obviously shaped by Marx (1818 – 1883) and Marx thought that when the rich and advanced country trades its goods above their value even though it is cheaper than the competing countries it can be said to be capitalist imperialism at the outset. For Marx capitalist imperialism was that it would generate proliferation of autonomous capitalism. Marx saw distant areas of the world as undeveloped until they were developed by capitalism and this is a point on which Marx would agree with neo-evolutionary and modernisation theorists at the best. On the whole Marx and Engels didn’t write much about development but more about capitalism and lots about dominant and subordinate classes. The interest of Marx was about how capitalism developed in the first world and other countries were only used in comparative studies although the roots of Marxist development theories lie in classical Marxism for the most part.
In fact, Rosa Luxemburg was the leading Marxist to lay emphasis on the developing countries in The Accumulation of Capital (1913) and opined that under-development is the result of accumulation of capital. To Luxemburg the productive capacity of West outperform the consumer’s ability to buy and so the pre-capitalist developing countries provided raw materials and new markets for capital as such in under-developing economies. To sum up therefore, Luxemburg envisages a world capitalist system using the developing areas for that matter and exploitation through accumulation.
Also Lenin detailed imperialism, and informed by Luxemburg, Bukharin and as a whole has furthered the under-development notions and he defined imperialism as the “monopoly stage of capitalism”. The key idea of Lenin’s conceptualization was finance capital that is capital controlled by banks and employed by industrialists. Therefore the centralization of local, national and world economics altogether contributed to imperialist expansion and under-development.
The neo-Marxists came after classical Marxists and views something different. The variation and difference between classical Marxism and neo-Marxism is that neo-Marxists see imperialism as responsible for underdevelopment as such. For the most part all underdevelopment theories are Leninist for them. There are three branches of neo-Marxism- dependency, underdevelopment, and world-system theory based on a Marxist perspectives.
Dependency theory
Another very useful theory is dependence theories, to them the cause of underdevelopment is the dependence of developing countries on industrialized countries while internal factors of developing countries are measured extraneous or seen as symptoms and consequences of dependence at large. In fact the development of industrialized countries and the underdevelopment of developing countries are parts of one historical process that is an out come of a peculiar historical process. Developing countries are dependent countries in fact they were made so. The economic and political interests of industrialized countries determine their development or underdevelopment in different parts of the world. The goals are superimposed and covered up. Underdevelopment is not backwardness but intentional downward development and it is obviously an unintentional consequences.
As to the causes of dependence leading to under-development nay differ from theory to theory, economic factors always dominating in most discussions. External trade theories concentrate on economic relations between countries of rich and poor. Imperialism theories stress the politico economic interest of developed nation lead to under-development of developing areas during colonization while dependencia theories concentrate on the deformation of internal structures by dependence which perpetuates the situation more badly.
Dependence theories concentrate on explanations of the origin of underdevelopment and pay little attention to strategies for overcoming this situation overtime in their explanation. Inherent development here means liberation, end of structural dependence, and independence and obviously more emancipation from material and spiritual limitations.
Imperialism Theory
The imperialism theory explains the domination of underdeveloped areas by industrialized and western nationalities as the outcome of dissimilar economic and technological levels and unequal power potential ensuing from a different economic growth as of now. The upshot and outcome of the development of industrial capitalistic societies is a strain for expansion which may lead to military or political acquisition that is colonies or to maintaining economic dependence of developing and poor countries. More over different theories have their own explanation of the reason for the anxiety for expansion but it is always seen as the result of the inability to cope internally with the consequences of permanent technological innovation and their effects on the society at the best.
Reasons for the underdevelopment in the developing countries?
To understand what is accountable for under-development of developing countries, Frantz Fanon concludes the article Concerning Violence with an associate phrase to the poor nations that they ought to not forget the very fact that the colonizers are accountable and  ethically responsible to pay off them for factually plundering them throughout the years of establishment in nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Nevertheless once we look as if at the full method of establishment during a western-favored perspective, the image is totally different and varying. If we glance into the explanations of at the outset; we are going to notice that the Europeans in search of markets due to large production throughout the commercial revolution, Europe occupied developing countries of the world to sell their product. Thus it's obvious that technological revolution and technological advancement befell Europe for colonization of under-developed areas. 
What was happening within the countries in developing areas throughout same period? simply examine the similarities of the developing countries; it's clear that these nations measure that in the time of establishment of colonialism they didn’t have a well structured education system which they'd adhered to the standard social and non secular practices in line and affinity with  the truthfulness of the varied social, non secular and cultural beliefs altogether.
In addition; on the opposite these countries had a less individualistic culture than the colonizer’s countries had. It’s not higher to seem from a perspective and for them these countries so were non-civilized. The actual fact that technological development had its roots in Europe tells that they did one thing special that these countries didn’t do. Once Europeans came to loot these countries they didn’t have the arms or ammunitions to defend them. These nations during the time were lazy, shortsighted, unintelligible to European perspective and scholars; as a result of they couldn’t defend themselves and during this time. Obviously these are all wrong and ethnocentric European misconceptions.
If the globe hasn’t been settled, the nations states that exists nowadays, the quick rate of economic process and also the technological and industrial bloom that the world expertise today wouldn't are doable. Well the intentions of the colonizers and also the acts of the colonizers may not be virtuously excusable nor will we tend to deny the very fact that the imperialist countries don't seem to be still despoil of the underdeveloped nations.
However, one issue that ought to be unbroken in mind is that the indisputable fact that although developed countries might need a large comparative advantage through the method of establishment, absolutely the advantage of being settled can not be simply unnoted.
The causes of underdevelopment in developing countries include many factors, Imperialism and colonialism from superior nations whom directly or indirectly may be within the helms of affairs of those developing countries.  The miserliness in developing countries that collect taxes from the folks take care of their own interest at the expense of the average man. Careless attitudes of the population of the developing countries that to figure and solve their issues rather hoping on governments exclusively for facilities. Traditionalism and belief of the developing countries in resolution are enhancing issues. People feel adamant to alter and believe that no matter happens to them is results of destiny or the need of some spiritual being.
In short it is contented that developing countries are not responsible for their underdevelopment. There are many components that invariably affect underdevelopment.  All the theories of under-development, for instances Marxist, dependency, Imperialist and Modernization theories are well explaining this.

No comments:

Post a Comment