Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (620,000)
UTSG (50,000)
POL101Y1 (1,000)

Outliers or Models: Dependent Development

Political Science
Course Code
Jeffrey Kopstein

This preview shows pages 1-3. to view the full 13 pages of the document.
POL101 Outliers or Models?February 7th 2011
Dependent Development
What is Development?
Human development
Looking at the micro level, individual human beings and their experiences of
Interested in health, education, literacy, infant mortality, etc.
Indicators that are important to the individual lived experience
Equitable development
Interested in terms of the redistributive consequences of development
Not just looking at national economic growth rates but how this wealth and
prosperity is distributed through the political economic system through the
highest income households to the lowest income households
Having the skills and education and experience and technology in order to
continually develop over time
So, not just about growing your economy but having the economic capacity to
sustain that growth
Sustainable development
Often thought of in economic degradation
About sustaining over the long term economic development
Ensuring that as we are developing as economic societies we arent at the
same time destroying the very foundations of that growth
Political development
How the system develops and reformats
So development can be defined along all of these dimensions, but generally a sense of
progress and improvement over time

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

POL101 Outliers or Models?February 7th 2011
Dependent Development
For the purpose of today’s lecture, were going to focus on aggregate economic
How economies grow
Why economies grow
How economies in the aggregate improve over time
How to explain growth? How do we explain aggregate economic growth?
Many different theories, but what is the role of theory?
Theories help explain the world, they also prescribe, and they endeavour to predict
Theories then, as explainers, prescriptions, and predictors thus represent different
vantage points of how we understand the world
A Theoretical Conversation
The Cosmopolitical View
How do you understand the world?
Smiths cosmopolitical view is that the invisible hand should guide the market
According to the cosmopolitical view of the world, the key to the global
economy is specialization
Its also in this view that human effort is important
Capitalism isnt good for lazy people
Capitalism rewards those who work hard, those who are rational
This, then, will lead to global productivity and through global productivity
there will be global prosperity and thus global peace
So, its a positive sum view, meaning that everyone will benefit as long as
you arent lazy or behave irrationally
The Mercantilist View
List and Hamilton would disagree

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

POL101 Outliers or Models?February 7th 2011
Dependent Development
They would argue that of course Smith, the British person, would argue for
free trade because hes the hegemon
They would argue that what matters for the global economy are nations
The unit of analysis for the cosmopolitical view is the individual level, the
hard working individual
For List and Hamilton, its nations
What List and Hamilton see is a negative sum system
That the benefits of capitalism is disproportionally beneficial to the hegemon
Its great for England, its bad for Germany
Idea that an established economy like England vs. a new economy like the
US could compete on equal terms is impossible
For Smith its the invisible hand of the market, for mercantilists like List and
Hamilton its about the visible hand of government
That in order to create more equal terms for c countries like US and Germany
to compete requires the visible hand of government to create comparative
Efforts by governments to grow their own industries
The Leninist view
Inspired by Marx
Marx basically argued that capitalism was inherently contradictory
That there were fundamental contradictions in capitalism largely because of
the exploitative nature of capitalism that would eventually lead to the end of
capitalism through the revolution of the proletariat which would lead to the
end of capitalism
For Marx, capitalism would sow the seeds of its own demise, that its
contradictions would eventually end capitalism
Lenin had a fundamentally different view
Lenin argues that imperialism is the substitution for capitalism monopolies for
capitalism competition
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version