Idea of development

Discourse on the Development and Underdevelopment Akinola Olanrewaju Victor University of Ibadan akinolanvic@gmail.com 08063820352

Abstract Recent discourse on development shows elements of cracks, if not crumbling. This is seen in the ideas of delusion, disappointment, failures and crimes which happens to tell a common story: it did not work. Our point is that the hopes and desires which made the idea of development fly, are now exhausted and development has grown obsolete’.1There tend therefore to be a growing gap between the developed and underdeveloped countries, a bifurcation which has existed in international relations and diplomacy for a long time. This gap has led to consistent capital influx from the developed countries to those in the underdeveloped countries, with the goal of helping them overcome their problems and to reduce the gap.

Introduction The debate concerning underdevelopment and development within the African continent and other third world countries is not a new phenomenon within developmental discourse, as it can be traced back to antiquity.2 However, discourse on development is made up of a web of key concepts and as such it is impossible to talk about development without referring to concepts such as poverty, production, the notion of the state, or equality. These concepts, first rose to prominence during modern Western history and only then have they been projected on the rest of the world’.3 The aim of this chapter therefore, is to conceptualize the ideas of development and underdevelopment in within the template of the African continent. Furthermore, the chapter examines the diverse definitions of the concept of development and underdevelopment, with particular attention being paid to the historical background of Africa's developmental 1

problem. At the thrust of the argument of the chapter, is the need to reflect on the diverse causes of African underdevelopment crisis, thus considering self-reliance as a means of economic and socio-political emancipation to African development.

Idea of Development Development according to Longmans Dictionary of Contemporary English is the gradual growth of something so that it becomes bigger or more advanced. 4 This definition defines a developed country or nation as a rich industrial country, nation and so on, with a lot of business activity. By contrast, a developing country, nation, or society is a poor country that is trying to increase its industry and improve trade. When a country is found to be developing then it is assumed that it is making progress.

Countries with low levels of material and technological well-being are usually described as developing. They are also countries in which most people have a low economic standard of living. The concept of underdevelopment is that a country that is not developed is underdeveloped. However, a developing country is one that is making some progress at development. Consequently, development is about progress but while the former is negative development, the latter is positive.

The term ‘third world’ refers to the concept of political non-alignment with either the capitalist or communist bloc. It was a concept that gained ground during the Cold War to define countries that were not in line with either capitalism or communism. This became a broad definition provided to categorize the nations of the earth into three groups based on social, political and economic divisions. In other words, the term ‘third world’ arose as a political idea rather than as a term that describes a developed nation. Coincidentally, the ‘third worlds’ are also considered underdeveloped because of the low level of technological development, low gross national product (GNP), lack of industrialization and per capita income-which is the most common view of what constitutes development. It is assumed that in all that a developing nation does, it must catch up with the industrialized West. 5

2

There are various views and types of development. We have development in the areas of the economic, social, political, spiritual, educational, and scientific and so on. In short, development cuts across all areas of life. There are many development theorists, hence, we shall engage in a brief conceptual clarification of some of their ideas on development in order to relate it to the African situation.

On one hand, development can be technology based which believed to generate it trend in self-realization. In this regard growth theorists such as Pearson, state that development is partly a process whereby a country can achieve reasonable self-sustaining growth, which facilitates and enhances industrial and technical progress in the interest of the people. 6 By this definition, a nation’s progress is measured using technological advancement. It also assumes that technological development leads automatically to the progress of the people.

The advancement of technology or industrialization does not automatically lead to societal self-advancement especially if the drivers of such advancement are capitalists and profit oriented to the core. This ability cannot be received from others in a ready-made form. It has to be encouraged, nurtured and strengthened in oneself. ‘The person must develop himself’'.7 It is self-liberation. Hence, self-reliance.

On the other hand, development can also be linked with artifacts. Rostow for example, says that development is determined by the rate at which a country accumulates social, cultural, industrial, technical and other artifacts. The implication is that countries that do not have these artifacts are not developed.8 Rostow’s view, though more detailed, can be considered an extension of Pearson’s. However, in like manner, it also does not consider how the accumulation of the various artifacts leads to the development of the people.

It is also commonly assumed that development is about the economy of a nation.

According to Arthur Lewis, development revolves around world-market or profit instead of man. So the level of economic indices such as per capita income, gross domestic product and so on, determines the level of development. Thus, a country with high per capita income is more developed and vice versa.9 3

The above views of development are rather material. They do not take into consideration other aspects of development such as the humanistic, moral and spiritual. It is assumed that development leads to progress when scientific and technological progress is achieved.

From their analysis, this aspect of development measures a nation’s progress by its technological and industrialized advancement. The measure of a country’s development then is in such things as: types of building highways, forms of transportation, communication and telecommunication, sources of energy, computer awareness and so on.

The more we conform to these Western ideals, terms and standards of living, the more the society is assumed to be developed. This is a narrow view of development and it is not all encompassing.

When development programs are preoccupied with economic development, there is great danger of losing the concept of development that fosters real humanity, humanness, fellow feeling and concern for others. Due to this, there will be a tendency to forget the other aspects of development in our national development plans. There will be no national policy that emphasizes human values. In other words, the neglect of human resources and the morally good can thwart efforts to bring about development even in the economic or political sense.

A broader view involves not only technology, economic, or artifacts but a kind of growth between society and individuals. Walter Rodney argues that development in a human society is a many-sided process. At the level of the individual, it implies increased skill and capacity, greater freedom, creativity, self-discipline, responsibility and material wellbeing. Though he states that some of these factors of development are virtually moral categories and are difficult to evaluate depending, as they do, on the age in which one lives, one’s class origins and one’ s personal code of what is right and what is wrong. He however considers that the achievement of any of the personal development is very much tied in with the state of the whole society. Be that as it may, society can help to make or mar one’s progress and level of development. As such, we need a concept of development that is allencompassing, all-involving and takes care of all areas of life.10 4

Some other scholars like Olusegun Oladipo place their emphasis on human development, in his analysis, claims that development is nothing but human development and it can be described as a process whose primary goals are human well-being, both in its material and moral dimensions. He argues that the development process is not an abstraction, the integrity of which can be measured simply in quantitative terms, such as the rate of growth in GDP per capita. It is not even the process of social change whose primary goal is to 'catch up’ with the more developed societies-a process pervasively, but mistakenly, called the process of modernization. Rather, it is a process of social transformation, which involves the replacement of those factors that inhibit the capacity of the individual for selfdirection and the promotion of social cooperation with those which promote these ideals.

It is in short the essence of the quality of life of the people.

According to Oladipo, development is a social concept standing for the process through which human beings strive to improve the conditions of their lives. To this end he identifies two broad dimensions of development as the tangible or technical and the intangible or moral aspect. The tangible aspect is concerned with material progress and it involves the control and exploitation of the physical environment through the application of the results of science and technology.11 The primary goal of this process is human well-being, which involves among other things: the eradication of certain human-demeaning social phenomena such as poverty, illiteracy and low life expectancy and the creation and maintenance of what can be called ‘livelihood opportunities’. The intangible or moral aspect of development has to do with improvement of the qualities of human relations between people. It involves the promotion of positive social values, such as freedom, justice, tolerance, compassion and cooperation, as well as the reduction of social inequity, which globally is a major source of conflicts.

Oladipo analyzed further that the tangible aspect appears most visible but the intangible aspect is crucial. This is because it is that which enhances the capacity of the individual to actually shape his or her own life without being insensitive to the common good. In other 5

words, any development goals and initiatives that do not take into consideration the capacity to shape the individual and the concerns of the common good is not an allencompassing form of development.12 In line with the above, Amartya Sen argues that; development is a process of expanding the real freedom that people enjoy. It focuses on human freedom rather than other views of development such as growth of national product, or with rise in personal incomes, industrialization, technological advance, or social modernization. Although he does not deny the importance and relevance of growth of GNP or of individual income to expanding the freedoms enjoyed by the members of the society, he avers that freedom depends also on other determinants, such as social and economic arrangements (for example, facilities for education and health care) as well as political and civil rights (for example, the liberty to participate in public discussion and scrutiny).13

In this view, Human Development, as an approach, is concerned with what is the basic development idea: namely, advancing the richness of human life, rather than the richness of the economy in which human beings live, which is only a part of it.

Similarly, the Human Development Report (HDR) asserts that: “People are the real wealth of a nation,� and maintains that the objective of development should be to create an enabling environment for people to enjoy long, healthy and creative lives may appear self-evident today. But that has not always been the case. A central objective of the HDR for the past twenty years has been to emphasize that development is primarily and fundamentally about people.14

The basic purpose of development is thus to expand people's choices, though in principle, these choices can be infinite and can change over time. However, people often value achievements that do not show up at all, or not immediately, in income or growth figures.

Greater access to knowledge, better nutrition and health services, more secure livelihoods, security against crime and physical violence, satisfying leisure hours, political and cultural freedoms and a sense of participation in community activities are also cherished. The objective of development is thus to create an enabling environment for people to enjoy long, healthy and creative lives.

6

Considering the Human Development Project, it is very rich and all-encompassing. It cuts across other themes and issues that are considered central to it. They include: social progress in terms of greater access to knowledge, better nutrition and health services and the importance of economic growth as a means to reducing inequality and improving levels of human development.

It also addresses efficiency in terms of resource use and

availability, whereby human development is pro-growth and productivity as long as such growth directly benefits the poor, women and other marginalized groups.

Equity in terms of economic growth and other human development parameters is also one of its concerns. Participation and freedom-particularly empowerment, democratic governance, gender equality, civil and political rights and cultural liberty (particularly for marginalized groups defined by urban-rural, sex, age, religion, ethnicity, physical/mental parameters, etc.) are further considerations. In addition, sustainability for future generations in ecological, economic and social terms; human security in daily life against such chronic threats as hunger; and abrupt disruptions including joblessness, famine, conflict, etc. are major concerns of this project.

But how can a nation achieve all these without a well-organized political structure and good leadership? Who is responsible for the organization of the society and how will it be achieved? In a corrupt society where selfish motives and moves characterize the leaders, how then do we achieve these human development goals or any other developmental goals for that matter? Everything boils down to leadership and leadership qualities. There is no doubt that these are the key missing factors in African development.

Class stratification and corruption are one of the key problems affecting development in Africa. Toye emphasizes the inability of most organizations in Africa to achieve their desired objectives, stating that this often stems from corruption among leaders on the political and administrative levels. Corruption today he says “Stands like a ruin in the societal and political landscape of most African countries. Leadership entails being a builder of special values, a definer of societal mission, a setter of societal goals and a 7

facilitator for goal attainment”. No meaningful development can take place when the country and its citizens are corrupt.15 Toye, in his detailed analysis of the nature and effects of corruption in Africa, succinctly asserts that, “Corruption not only undermines authority but it displays selfish moves that are counterproductive to development”.

The argument thus is towards good leadership and moral development in order to achieve development in Africa. Africans and their leaders currently place emphasis on foreign aid and assistance (capitalism). If there are no committed, patriotic leaders to plan in a particular progressive direction, even when the aid comes they may not be utilized to achieve desirable goals of growth and development of individuals and the society at large.

The Moral Factor in Development It will be grossly inadequate to say that the moral factor is the problem responsible for underdevelopment in contemporary Africa. The factors that militate against development are many. There are economic, ideological and political factors such as political instability and intrigue, lack of continuity and lack of clear and coherent ideological policies; economic factors such as level of industrialization, problem of balance of payments and international economic problems; demographical factors such as ‘brain-drain’, which is presently affecting our universities, whereby the current highly skilled migrant program and visa lotteries all drain away experts and people at the top of their chosen professions and careers; socio-religious and cultural obstacles such as tribal wars, cultural inferiority, irrational adherence to custom and tradition and disunity among states etc. Here we single out the moral factor in development. Although it is certainly an aspect of development, it must be contended that it is an all-encompassing form of development.

Morality is unique in a number of ways. It is morality that can help government to make policies capable of bringing development to the society. It is also on moral grounds that we can criticize bad governments and bad policies. It is morality that can prevent government from enacting arbitrary and socially iniquitous or inhumane laws that can deprive citizens of their fundamental human rights. It is also morality that can define duties and 8

responsibilities of the government and citizens. But for morality we would have engaged in irrational social acts. Immanuel Kant says that an effort to be immoral is an effort to be irrational.16 Morality promotes love, truth, harmony and social peace, which will breed security and stability in our states. When individuals are stable, a collection of individual stability will lead to a general stability in our countries. Creating a community of moral individuals will enhance the quality of life of the individual himself and consequently of the wider society.17 An adequate engagement with this moral factor would necessitate dealing with the total person and seeking to make the best of him as a physical, psychological, social, spiritual and rational being. So, with the development of the moral aspect one will not only be useful to him or herself but to the community and the human race at large.

Idea of Underdevelopment The concept of underdevelopment appears to be clear enough too many but its precise meaning remains contentious between dependency and modernization theorists.

The distinction appears clearer when we seek to understand the causes and not the features of the phenomenon. The fact that the world is divided between the rich and the poor; the developed and the underdeveloped, is not contentious at all. It is a social reality. The other point is that the gap between the underdeveloped world and the developed is not static or narrowing but continually widening. Three quarters of the world’s population in Africa, Latin America and Asia ‘live’ in a condition of poverty and penury. To many of them, the future still looks bleak. The question therefore is: what is Underdevelopment? Is it natural?

What is the cause? Is it possible to overcome underdevelopment?18 Whether by bourgeois or Marxist standards, underdevelopment defines a relative condition in which a society lacks autonomous capacity to control and mobilize socioeconomic formation for a sustainable economic growth and development necessary to effect physical, mental, material and technological fulfillment without dependence on external stimuli. The Third World states fit well into this model. In a very simple way, 9

underdevelopment means a condition of economic and technological backwardness which, together, constrains the evolution of stable and enduring political system and dynamic external relation.19 Underdevelopment is not natural. It is not divine. To believe otherwise, is to accept that the creator of the universe, God, is partial. This is not so. Well understood, underdevelopment is a human factor. It is man-made. In fact, it is a product of history. It defines relatively not the total absence of development features, but the gap between one state of development and the other. This understanding is vital. We have the underdeveloped countries because there are developed countries for comparison. The history of underdevelopment dates back to the contact between Europe and the rest of the world, in which case there is no history in any attempt to separate or de-link the phenomenon of imperialism and colonialism from the emerging socio-economic formation of the new nations at the end of colonialism in many parts of the world. To think as modernization theorists are inclined to do, that neither imperialism nor colonialism dislocated and disoriented pre-capitalist economies is just to be unfair to history. It is unimaginable how the many decades of European political and economic domination of Africa, Latin America and Asia would have no adverse economic and technological effects.

The irony of this inclination becomes clearer against the practice of capital accumulation in the metropolis and the periphery. In Western Europe, the state promoted the virtues of freedom of economic enterprise. Local initiatives and creativity were encouraged and protected by the laws of the state. This saw the development of European bourgeoisie. To the contrary, in the periphery, the colonial state was hostile, interventionist and disoriented the development of freedom of economic enterprise. There was no encouragement to local industrial and technological development.20 Local bourgeoisie were oppressed and suppressed. Unskilled labour and cheap natural economic resources were exploited by sheer brutal force to the greater affluence of the metropoles. Certainly, the indifference of the colonial states to local economic development in the periphery was responsible for the

10

gap in the stage of development between the new nations and the Western developed capitalist states.

Underdevelopment therefore refers to a socio-economic structure which is subjugated and dominated by another social formation. It is usually characterized by a disarticulation mode of production, absence or low levels of proletarianization, over marginalization of the peasantry, low levels of productivity, high rates of unemployment and under-employment, chronic foreign debt and balance of trade problems, dependence on raw materials, exports and industrial product imports, low levels of living, absolute poverty, inadequate food and poor nutrition, low income, dictatorial and corrupt leaders etc.

However, one of the most significant outcomes of the ten decades of British rule and imperialist subjugation of Nigeria for instance was that it led to the incorporation of Nigeria’s socio-economic systems to subject the indigenous population to the needs and objectives of imperialism. Britain was able to institute an unequal division of labour and institutional structures and factors for reproducing this unequal division of labour. The nature of this division of labour between Britain and Nigeria was such that Nigeria assumed the role of supplies of cheap labour and raw material products to Europe and importers of industrial products from the European Centre.

Under these circumstances, the traditional society was distorted to the point of being unrecognizable; it lost its autonomy, and its main function was to produce for the world market under conditions which because they impoverished. It deprived the members of any prospects of radical modernization. This traditional society was not, therefore, in transition to “modernity”; as a dependent society it was complete, peripheral, and hence at a dead end.21

In addition to the imposition and institutionalization of the British capitalist mode of production, the subjugation of African social formation also prevented the “normal evolution” of an autonomous state and national bourgeoisie capable of “taking control” and subjecting all external relations (particularly expropriation of economic surplus) to the needs and logic of internal primitive accumulation and investments and subsequently 11

autonomous development.22 What actually emerged in Nigeria was a dependent state, which is lacking any “relative autonomy” function according to the need and requirements of British capitalism that subjected it.

This is perhaps, the fundamental root of Africa’s underdevelopment. Because the state was subordinated in its embryonic stage, and made an appendage of the British capitalist state, the African state was unable to create “concrete conditions” necessary for the development of autonomous capitalism. In other words, the subjugation and integration of the African state in a dependent and unequal relation prevented the state from making possible conditions necessary for the evolution and formation of autonomous capitalism in the same manner the British or German or French state created conditions that gave impetus to the development of European capitalism.

The different role played by the British, state and the African state in promoting capitalist development may be better understood when examined in relation to the development stages (and not stages of growth as suggested by Rostow) which occurred both in Europe and in Africa. The development stages are essential to an understanding of the variations which occurred in the level of the development of national productive forces. According to Samir Amin (1974) and Walter Rodney (1972), the development of capitalism in the centre (Western Europe) differs from the development stages which occurred in the periphery of the world system, such as Nigeria: first, the development of capitalism in Western Europe, which British capitalism formed the core “stemmed from an internal process of breaking-up the pre-capitalist mode of production”. In this case the feudalism mode of production.23 According to Samir Amin, Social relations and national state that were conducive to the “agricultural revolution which proceeds- and makes –possible the subsequent industrial revolution.

The emergence of the agricultural revolution led to the expansion of production in agricultural and food products and the subsequent proletarianization of the peasantry. It is 12

this process of proletarianization of the population that aided the rapid development of commercial agriculture. By so doing, agriculture was able to increase the production of marketed food products necessary for the reproduction of emerging industrial proletariat.

Secondly, the new capitalist relations that emerge from the subsequent industrial revolution that began to unfold provided the stimuli for the development of a new “class alliance between the land owners and the emerging industrialist and the growth of a powerful national state” necessary for the defence of the interest of the new class.

Thirdly, the development of the new class alliance and of the powerful nation-state allowed the new class to subject all external relations (either in the form of long distance trade, slave trade, or direct colonization) to the need and requirements of internal accumulation.

This subjugation of all external relations to the European social formations led to the emergence of a “group auto centered and interdependent (although equally advanced) central formations (e.g. Britain), and of the peripheral formations. (e.g. Nigeria) subjected to the logic of accumulation in the centres that dominate them”.

The Philosophical Background of Africa's Development Problems Without even reaching the point of considering the African drive to development, theories accounting for the underdevelopment of Africa are soon riddled with philosophical questions. Whether the African lag is attributed to colonialism and neocolonialism or to properly African inadequacies or to both, analyses always grapple with philosophical matters. Take the thesis that colonialism kept Africa away from modernity. In addition to the economic pillage of Africa and the establishment of inadequate social institutions, the statement means that the ideology of colonialism has deeply disturbed and negatively affected the perception that Africans have of themselves. This is usually called the dehumanizing practice of colonialism whose palpable outcome plunged, it is said, Africa into a deep and lasting crisis of identity.

Indeed, according to the racist ideology of colonialism, Africans are so alien to modern and rational life that they cannot be expected to make any progress without a close and 13

corrective European tutelage. The category of primitiveness divests African thinking of any inner impulse to liberate itself from irrationality, myths, and obsolete habits. 24 Only under the supervision and guidance of the West can it be dragged into some kind of rationality.

This model of development, otherwise known as Westernization, had a particularly corrosive impact on Africa because, unlike other colonized peoples, Africans could not counter the disparaging discourse with the mitigating effect of a glorious past. Africa being the land of "those who invented neither gunpowder nor compass," to quote AimĂŠ CĂŠsaire,25 nor gave birth to Universalist religion, still less to expanding empires, the colonial discourse was bound to be devastating. No other race in the world was so reminded of its alleged inferiority, and no other race was so disarmed to combat the allegation.

Quite naturally, the accusation of pre-rationality and primitiveness imparted a philosophical texture to the whole idea of African modernization. In particular, the question of knowing whether or not Africans are rational by nature triggered philosophical investigations into African cultures. On the presumption that the ability to think philosophically reveals a rationalistic disposition, the presence or lack of philosophy in Africa became the yardstick of the rationality of Africans. This mating of rational thinking with philosophy invested from the start African philosophy with the task of disproving the charge of pre-rationality against Africa. This refutation had a direct bearing on development, as rationality is a prerequisite for scientific and technological abilities on which development depends.26 Among African philosophers, many became convinced that the best way to counter the imputation of pre-rationality was to support the concept of pluralism. The need for extended humanity, the very one able to offer a place for those who did not invent anything, became all the more pressing the more the records of African failure to catch up with the West were accumulating. The confrontation between the African legacy and the requirements of the modern world acquired the spiritual dimension of alterity, otherness.

14

This, in turn, placed the issue of difference, the connection between race and the human essence, at the center of African philosophical reflections. The need to define African humanness in a world dominated by Eurocentric models imparted to African philosophy an acute sense of subjectivity in search of a new definition. Descartes can say that he is not his body, that his subjectivity is thought, transcendence, aloofness from bodily determinations. He is the captain in his ship. Not so Africans who see to what extent their body sticks to them, how it’s being held in contempt affects their thinking and prevent them from identifying themselves with a non-corporeal subjectivity. As emphasized by Lucius Outlaw, the deep issue of African philosophy; ‌is a struggle over the meaning of `man' and `civilized human', and all that goes with this in the context of the political economy of the capitalized and Europeanized Western world. In the light of the European incursion of Africa, the emergence of `African philosophy' poses deconstructive (and reconstructive) challenges.27

Whether Africans ascribe the inability to join the modern world to the inappropriateness of their legacy or to the ruin of their original identity, in both cases they are compelled to construe the West as an unavoidable challenge inducing them to reexamine their legacy and culture. As stated by Serequeberhan; the indisputable historical and violent effected by colonialism and the continued `misunderstanding' of our situation perpetuated by neocolonialism calls forth and provokes thought in post-colonial Africa. 28

The addition of the dereliction of post-colonial Africa to the disparaging discourse of colonialism deepens even more the crisis of identity and obliges philosophical thinking to be nothing more than a haunting quest for identity. Should Africans feel that a major reason for inadequacy is the loss of identity, we see them engaged in the task of restoring precolonial links. Should they decide that the pre-colonial heritage obstructs advancement, they feel compelled to adopt a critical attitude with the view of strengthening Universalist leanings to the detriment of particularism.

15

The issue of modernity versus tradition thus emerges as the basic concern of African philosophy. Be it noted that the conflict between tradition and modernity is the core question that demarcates the various schools of development. Thus, while the school known as modernization theory explains underdevelopment by the persistence of traditional thinking and institutions, the trend known as dependency school rejects the culpability of tradition, arguing that the satellization of African societies by the powerful Western metropolises is the real cause of underdevelopment. Another school, called the mode of production approach, attempts a synthesis by suggesting that underdevelopment occurs when traditional methods and structures batten on advanced systems to perpetuate themselves.29 In all these positions, the friction between tradition and modernity remains the core problem.

Nothing could better illustrate the overlap between development issues and philosophical questions than the fact that the conflict between tradition and modernity generates similar divisions in African philosophy. Speaking of the displeasure of professional philosophers with ethnophilosophy, Oyeka Owomoyela remarks that "development is the powerful end that orients all their arguments." For those who argue that the present powerlessness of Africa is due to its straying from its legacy, some kind of revival of the past is seen as a remedy.30 Termed as ethnophilosophers, their position has instigated a vigorous critique of the modernists or professional philosophers. The latter equate this infatuation with the past with a reactionary attitude designed to maintain Africa in its backward beliefs and practices. Pointing out the real issue at stake, Kwasi Wiredu writes: This process of modernization entails changes not only in the physical environment but also in the mental outlook of our peoples, manifested both in their explicit beliefs and in their customs and their ordinary daily habits and pursuits. Since the fundamental rationale behind any changes in a world outlook is principally a philosophical matter, it is plain that the philosophical evaluation of our traditional thought is of very considerable relevance to the process of modernization in our continent.31

Thus, African philosophical effort is geared towards the rehabilitation of the past or its displacement by Western equipment, the objective of development and the choice of 16

strategy are decided. Clearly, the conflict between tradition and modernity in the particular context of Africa’s need to assess its legacy strongly highlights the philosophical texture of the terms of African development.

Besides, the encounter of African philosophy with the problems of development is not particular to Africa. Whatever is their destination, theories of development are sooner or later confronted with the basic problem of philosophy, namely the question of the primacy of mind or matter. Concerning the ultimate nature of being, philosophical schools, we know, be they monistic or dualistic, agree with the necessity of reducing the ultimate reality either to matter or spirit. Whereas materialism holds that all phenomena, including spiritual ones, are the determination and expression of material processes, spiritualism gives primacy to spirit by arguing that material phenomena are themselves derivations. So when theories explain development either by economic or environmental causes or by spiritualist and cultural considerations, they inevitably come under materialism or spiritualism. For instance, as Marxism ascribes social evolution to economic determinism, it represents the most accomplished materialist theory of development. In return, the position of Max Weber typifies a spiritualist approach, as for him religious anxiety explains, in the last instance, European capitalism.32 Grant that the drive to development implicates a determining spiritual or material cause, and the way is clear to understanding the African retardation by the absence of the said cause. Thus, the attribution of underdevelopment to economic dependency is consistent with a materialist approach, while the appeal to cultural reasons tends to conform to a spiritualist assumption. It is this philosophy of development, most of the time implicit in the mind of social scientists, which erupts in the debate dividing African philosophers. The question of knowing whether the lasting impact of colonialism and neocolonialism in Africa is to be found in socio-economic or spiritual disabilities is, as we shall soon see in detail, an important aspect of the African philosophical debate.

17

Because the nature of the problem determines options, strategies of development too are subordinate to the issue of primacy. Take theories of development advocating far-reaching Westernization. Their materialist premises are but obvious, as they believe that the establishment of the appropriate material conditions through reforms borrowed from the West is enough to give birth to the corresponding spirit. 33 Those scholars who insist on African identity and the need to institute an African path to development are rather spiritualist, the setting up of objective conditions being for them useless without the readiness of the engine, to wit the mind. Strategies of development are therefore tributary to philosophical positions, obvious as it is that they cannot avoid facing the question of knowing which, of the spiritual or the material, is likely to trigger the process of growth.

Most remarkably, the question of primacy has assumed a dramatic countenance in the African case. As a result, the encounter between Africa and the West took a philosophical turn from the start. Reproducing the philosophical debate between materialism and idealism in a dramatized form, the West revealed itself to Africa in the striking figure of unmatchable material superiority intent on subduing a traditional spirituality. The situation simulates the European context during the Renaissance and Reformation. Europe was then immersed in an exciting philosophical investigation flowing from the need to counter the materialist premises of the new and triumphant scientific method.34 Descartes, Leibnitz, Kant, the British empiricists, all wrestled with the manner of grounding science in a refurbished spirituality so as to unify European thinking and neutralize the materialist challenge of the scientific method.

The African case is no different: a traditional spirituality is challenged by a material power that the scientific method helped to build. Even if direct colonial subordination retarded the philosophical awakening of Africa, it did not suppress it altogether. Philosophical interest in Africa, especially in post-colonial Africa, is therefore in keeping with the general pattern of philosophical inquiry. Whenever a materialist challenge provokes a spiritual anxiety, the philosophical consciousness awakens. In effect, summoned by Western

18

challenge to argue and redefine itself, the traditional thinking could not but assume a philosophical form harboring a defensive reaction.

Consequently, the deep involvement of philosophy in development issues is that technological ability is an essential ingredient of development which anticipates the solution of philosophical problems, at least the framework of their rationalization. Indeed, the profound meaning of the question of primacy is to open the possibility of changing spiritual anxiety into a drive to conquer matter. The fact that through technology humans can exert their control over nature is then an elegant way of asserting the primacy of mind.

Some such admittance of the spiritualist origin of Western technology assigns to African philosophy the important mission of kindling African longing for technology by implanting it in a spiritual quest.

19

Endnotes 1

Sachs, W., The Development Dictionary.(New York: Zed Books Limited, 1992), p. 3 Adebo, A., The State and Underdevelopment in Nigeria: A Theoretical Perspective in “State and Society in Nigeria” (an Unedited Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference of the Nigerian Political Science Association, 1984) 2

3

Sachs, W., The Development Dictionary.(New York: Zed Books Limited, 1992), p. 3

4

Longman’s Dictionary of Contemporary English, 1995, p. 374.

5

Onyemelukwe, C.C., Economic Underdevelopment. (London: Longman Group, 1974), p. 98.

Pearson, L.B., The Crisis of Development.London: (Pall Mall Press, 1970), p. 5.

6

Nyerere, Julius. “Ujamaa: Essays on Socialism”. (Dar es Salaam: Oxford University Press 1968), p. 122.

8 W. W. Rostow, The Stages of Economic Growth (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971), p. 26-27.

7

9

Lewis, W.A., The Theory of Economic Growth. (London: George Allen and Unwin 1963), p. 14.

10

Walter R., How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. (Love and Malcomson Redhill, 1972), p.16.

11

Olusegun, O., Philosophy and Social Reconstruction in Africa. (Ibadan: Hope Publications 2009), p. 96.

12 Olusegun, O., Philosophy and Social Reconstruction in Africa. (Ibadan: Hope Publications 2009), p. 97.

13 Sen, A., Development as Freedom. (New York: Alfred A. Knoff, 2000), p. 4.

14 15 16 17

http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/14/hdr2013_en_complete.pdf Toye, J., Dilemmas of Development, (Oxford: Blackwell, 1987), p. 28 Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason (New York: Everyman's Library, 1969), p. 18.

Ibid., p. 28.

18

Akpuru-Aja, A., Fundamentals of Modern Political Economy and International Economic Relations. (Owerri: Data Globe Nigeria, 1998), p. 49.

19

Offiong, D., Imperialism and Dependency. Enugu: Fourth Dimension Publishers, 1980), p. 15.

20

Onyemelukwe, C.C., Economic Underdevelopment. (London: Longman Group, 1974), p. 28.

Amin, S., Underdevelopment and Dependency in Black Africa-Origins and Contemporary Forms, in Dennis Cohen and John Daniel: Political Economy of Africa. (London: Longman, 1981), p. 118.

22 Amin, S., Nation and Class, Historically and in Current Crisis. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1980), p. 90.

23 Amin S., Accumulation on a world Scale: A Critique of the Theory of Development. New York: Monthly Review, 1974), p. 58 21

20

24

V. Y. Mudimbe, The Invention of Africa (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988), p. 132.

Aimé Césaire, Return to My Native Land (Harmonsdworth: Penguin Books, 1969), p. 72.

26 Ibid., p. 34.

27 Messay K., “Development and African Philosophical Debate in Outlaw”, L (ed) Sage Philosophy: (Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa Vol 1 No. 2, 1999), p. 237.

25

Tsenay Serequeberhan, “The Hermeneutics of African Philosophy”, (New York: Routledge, 1994), p. 16.

29 Messay Kebede, Meaning and Development (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1994), pp. 117-18.

30 Oyeka Owomoyela, "Africa and the Imperative of Philosophy: A Skeptical Consideration," African Philosophy: The Essential Readings, ed. Tsenay Serequeberhan (New York: Paragon House, 1991), p. 162.

31 Kwasi Wiredu, Philosophy and an African Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), p. 10 32 Karl Marx and Frederich Engels, The German Ideology, ed. R. Pascal (New York: International Publishers, 1969), p. 197.

33 Messay Kebede, Development and the African Philosophical Debate (Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa Vol 1 No. 2, 1999), pp. 15 34 Ibid., p. 19.

28

21