4. Discuss and critically evaluate dependency and cultural imperialism
Dependency The basis of dependency theory emerged in 1950 as a result, of investigations of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). One of the most representative exponents was Raul Prebisch. The main points in Prebisch model to create conditions for development within a country are necessary: 1. Control the monetary exchange rate, placing more emphasis on fiscal policy in monetary policy 2. Promote a more efficient government role in terms of national development 3. Creating a platform for investments, giving priority to national capital 4. Allow entry of foreign capital following priorities already established in national development plans 5. Promote domestic demand more effectively in terms of domestic markets as a basis for consolidating the efforts of industrialization in Latin America in particular and developing nations in general 6. Generate more domestic demand increased wages and salaries of workers 7. Develop a more efficient social insurance system by the government, especially for the poor in order to create conditions so that these sectors may become more competitive 8. Develop strategies consistent with the import substitution model, protecting domestic production by imposing quotas and tariffs on foreign markets. The proposals of Prebisch and ECLAC were the basis of dependency theory in the early 50's, however, more elaborate theoretical model were published in the late fifties and mid sixties. Among the leading proponents of the theory of dependence we have: Andre Gunder Frank, Raul Prebisch, Theotonio Dos Santos, Enrique Cardoso, Edelberto Torres-Rivas, and Samir Amin. The dependency theory combines elements of neo-Marxist Keynesian economics (liberal economic ideas that emerged in the U.S. and Europe in response to the depression of the 20. From Keynes' economic approach, the theory of dependence consists of 4 basic points: 1
a) Develop an effective domestic demand considerable in terms of national markets b) Recognize that the industrial sector is important for achieving higher levels of development national, especially since this sector to generate more value added products compared to the agricultural sector c) Increase the income of workers as a means to generate higher aggregate demand in domestic market conditions d) Promote a governmental role more effective for enhancing the conditions for national development and raising living standards in the country Foster-Carter (1973) finds three main differences between classical orthodox Marxism and neo-Marxism, the second one that provides a basis for dependency theory. First, the classical approach focuses on analyzing the role of extended global monopolies, while the center of neo-Marxism is to provide a view from the peripheral conditions. Second, the classical movement foresaw the need for a bourgeois revolution in the introduction of manufacturing processes, from the neo-Marxist perspective and based on current conditions in Third World countries, it is imperative to "jump" to a social revolution mainly because it is perceived that the national bourgeoisie identifies strongly with elite positions of the metropolis rather than nationalist positions. The classical Marxist approach considered that the industrial proletariat had the strength and was destined to be the vanguard for social revolution, the neo-Marxist approach stressed that the revolutionary class must be made by farmers to carry out a revolutionary conflict. Although the modernization school and dependency schools differ in many areas, they also have some similarities, the main ones are: a) The focus of research is the development of Third World countries b) A methodology that uses a high level of abstraction and focuses on the revolutionary process, using nation-states as the unit of analysis c) The use of theoretical polar structural visions, in one case the structure is tradition versus modernity (modernization), the other in the case center versus the periphery (dependence). According to the dependency school the principal assumptions relating to development in Third World countries are: First, the development of Third World countries need to have a degree of subordination to the center in contrast to the development of core nations whose development was historically and is now independent. Second, they generally considered dependent peripheral countries experience their greatest economic development when its links with the center are
weaker. An example of this is the process of industrialization that took place in Latin America during the 30s and 40s when the nations of the center were focused on solving problems of the Great Depression and the Western powers were involved in World War II. Third hypothesis is that when the core countries recover from their crisis and restore its trade and financial linkages, incorporated back into the system to the peripheral countries, and growth and industrialization in this country tend to see subordinate. Frank noted in particular that when the core countries recovering from war or other crises that have diverted their attention from the periphery, the balance of payments, inflation and political stability of Third World countries have been affected negatively. Fourth aspect concerns the fact that the underdeveloped nations that still operate traditional feudal systems are those that had closer relations with the center, however, Theodino Dos Santos said that the basis of the dependence of developing countries is technological industrial production, rather than monopolies financial ties to the core countries. Other classical authors of dependency theory are: Baran, who has studied conditions in India at the end of the decade of 1950 and Ladsberg, who has studied the processes of industrial production in the core countries in the seventies. The main criticisms of dependency theory have focused on the fact that this school does not provide exhaustive empirical evidence to support its conclusions. In addition, this approach uses a high level of abstraction in its analysis. Another criticism is that the dependency analysis considers bad links in these countries with transnational corporations while in fact these links can be used as a means of technology transfer. In this regard is important to remember that America was a colony and that this country had the capacity to break a vicious cycle of underdevelopment. New studies of the dependency theory include those of Cardoso (1979) and Falleto (1980). These authors take into account countries' relations in terms of their systematic levels (external) and sub-systematic (internal) and how these relationships can be transformed into positive elements for the development of peripheral nations. O'Donnell studied the case of relative autonomy between economic and political elements in the context of the conditions of Third World countries, especially countries in Southeast Asia. Evans studied the comparative advantage that Brazil has over its neighbours in South America, and Gold studied the dependency elements operating at the beginning of the process by which Taiwan became a country with considerable economic potential. An important new study of dependence is that while the orthodox position of dependency does not accept the relative autonomy of the government of powerful elites, new authors in this school recognize a range of government action in the sense of giving space to pursue his own agenda. These arguments include mainly the work of Nikos Poulantzas. For this political scientist Third World governments have some level of independence of the real axis of power in the country. One of the main criticisms of current dependency theory and modernization is that both continue to base their assumptions on the results of nation-states. This is an important point that allows us to separate schools above the theoretical perspective of global or globalization theory. These latest moves
focus their attention primarily on the linkages between countries, especially those related to trade, international financial systems, global technology and military cooperation.
Colonialism Colonialism territory occupied and administered by a gobernment previously unknown to them, by conquest or settlement of his subjects, and imposing a foreign authority. We can speak of colonialism when a people or government extends its sovereignty establishing political control over a territory or foreign nation as a source of wealth and power. The relationship ends when the subjugated people reach their sovereignty or when incorporated into the political structure of colonial power on equal terms. Colonialism is an issue that has come to raise a moral and political debate in our time, especially since World War II. Although some states have tried to justify the creation of colonial empires in the past, many former colonies have defined colonialism as a system of exploitation that the strongest powers imposed on the weakest and which caused a situation of economic backwardness and conflict racial and cultural rights in the colonized areas. Colonial relations have changed considerably throughout history. Some of them have been subjected to strict control by their colonizers, but in others has been only cursory and informal control. Some have been based overseas, and others have established a territory adjacent to the colonizing nation.
Imperialism a practice used by powerful nations or peoples to expand and maintain control or influence over weaker nations or peoples. Scholars often use the term more specifically to refer to the economic expansion of the capitalist states, other scholars characterize it with the European expansion which took place after 1870. Although imperialism and colonialism have a similar meaning and can be equally applied sometimes appropriate to have some differences. Colonialism usually implies formal political control involving territorial annexation and loss of sovereignty from the colonized country. Imperialism, however, has a broader meaning referring to control or influence exercised over another region, whether or not officially and directly, and whether they affect the economic or political grounds.
History The origin of imperialism dating back to antiquity and has adopted various models throughout history, some of which are more common than others within a particular historical period. In the ancient world, the practice of imperialism resulted in a series of great empires that arose when people,
usually representing a particular civilization and religion, attempted to dominate all others by creating a unified control system. The empire of Alexander the Great and the Roman Empire are some examples of this type. By contrast, European imperialism of the early modern era (1400-1750) was characterized as a colonial expansion in overseas territories. There was a country that tried to unify the world but of many nations competed to establish their control over southern and south eastern Asia and the Americas. The imperial system is structured in accordance with the doctrine of mercantilism: Each metropolis sought to control the trade of their colonies to monopolize the profits. A mid-nineteenth century appeared another variant, the imperialism of free trade. This arrangement lasted in this period despite the commercialism and the creation of formal empires was declining significantly. The power and influence in Europe, especially Britain, had extended informally, that is, using diplomatic means and economic means, rather than following official channels such as the creation of colonies. However, free trade imperialism gone in the late nineteenth century, European powers had returned to practice imperialism in the form of territorial annexation, expanding into Africa, Asia and the Pacific. Since the end of World War II most recognized empires dissolved, imperialism has prevailed as what might be now called modern economic imperialism, where the domain is not officially expressed. For example, the United States exercises considerable control over certain Third World nations because of its economic power and influence in some international financial organizations such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF). Similarly, European powers have continued to intervene meaningfully in the political and economic life of their former colonies, which have been accused of practicing neo-colonialism, which is to exercise the sovereignty of a nation without a colonial government official.
Justifications of imperialism The reasons why states have aspired to create empires throughout history are diverse, and might be categorized broadly into three groups: economic, political and ideological. They can distinguish among several theories on why the element is given more importance.
The economic motives Economic interests are the most common when it comes to explaining this phenomenon. Proponents of this view argue that nations are driven to dominate others to expand their economies, to acquire raw materials and labour, or to provide an outlet for surplus capital and production. The most notable theory linking imperialism with capitalism is that of Karl Marx. Lenin, for example, considered that the nineteenth-century European expansion was the inevitable consequence of the need for European capitalist economies to
export their surplus capital. Similarly, contemporary Marxists explain the expansion of the United States in the Third World based on economic imperatives.
The political motives Other authors emphasize the political conditions, and argue that the primary reason that states tend to expand is the desire for power, prestige, security and diplomatic advantages over other states. According to this line, the goal of nineteenth-century French imperialism was to restore the international prestige of France after the humiliation that was the defeat in the FrancoPrussian War. In this sense, the expansion of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in Eastern Europe after 1945 can be explained as a security measure: the need to protect against another possible invasion from the western border.
The ideological motives The third explanation focuses on ideological or moral motives. According to this view, some countries are encouraged to extend their influence to spread their political values, cultural or religious. One of the factors that led to the establishment of British colonial empire was the idea that it was the responsibility of the "white man" civilized peoples "backward." German expansion that took place during Hitler's government relied heavily on the belief in the inherent superiority of German culture. The U.S. desire to "protect the free world" and the interest of the former Soviet Union to "liberate" the peoples of Eastern Europe and the Third World are also an example of this type of imperialism.
Imperialism in response to external conditions Finally, other theories explain imperialism based on the political circumstances of the weaker nations, rather than emphasizing the motives of the powerful nations. The interpretation offered notes that it is possible that the strongest powers do not intend to expand, but they are forced to do so due to instability in other nations, the commitments to the empires of the past are the cause of new imperialist actions. The conquest of India taken by Britain and the Russian colonization of Central Asia in the nineteenth century are classic examples of this type of imperialism.
The consequences of imperialism The effects of imperialism often revolve around economic issues, since this is the prevailing perspective in discussions about their possible motives. The controversy arises between those who believe that imperialism implies exploitation and is the cause of underdevelopment and economic stagnation in poor nations, and those who argue that, despite the advantages provided
by this situation to the rich nations, poor nations also benefited, at least in the long term. It is difficult to opt for one or another approach for two reasons: 1)
Conclusion Is not easy to separate the internal causes of poverty in a nation of which are international by nature. What is clear is that the effect of imperialism has been mixed: some countries have achieved greater economic benefits than others in contact with wealthier powers. India, Brazil and other developing countries have even begun to compete economically with their former colonial powers. It would therefore be advisable to consider the economic impact of imperialism in response to each particular case. The political and psychological consequences of imperialism are equally difficult to determine. This has proven to be destructive and creative at the same time: it has destroyed traditional institutions and ways of thinking, and has been replaced by the customs and mentality of the western world, and considered this a benefit or a detriment.
References (Books) TEORÍA Y POLÍTICA DEL DESARROLLO ECONÓMICO, chapter 11, "Las Formas Históricas del Desarrollo",# and 17, "Subdesarrollo y Dependencia Externa", Siglo XXI, México, 19681972 DEPENDENCIA Y CAMBIO SOCIAL, chapters I, II, III y IV. Cuadernos de Estudios Socio Económicos, Universidad De Chile, 1970 DEPENDENCIA E INDEPENDENCIA, Chapter. 7, "Teoría de la dependencia", Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas, Madrid, 1979 André Gunder-Frank, "Nueva visita a las teorías latinoamericanas del desarrollo" Vania Bambirra, (1973) CAPITALISMO DEPENDIENTE LATINOAMERICANO, Cuadernos CESO, SANTIAGO Chile. (Websites) http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/ (Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism) http://www.michaelparenti.org/Imperialism101.html (Imperialism 101) http://www.britishempire.co.uk/ http://www.essortment.com/all/imperialismwest_ridb.htm (The age of Western Imperialism) http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-media-imperialism.htm (What is Media Imperialism?) http://www.revolutionarycommunist.org http://gsevenier.online.fr/culturalImperialism.html http://www.britishcouncil.org/history-why-cultural-imperialism.htm
2704 words. 8