Class Notes (836,966)
Canada (509,984)
POL201Y1 (221)
C Jung (55)
Lecture

POL201-Lecture5.doc

7 Pages
106 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Political Science
Course
POL201Y1
Professor
C Jung
Semester
Fall

Description
Political Science 201y1-y Tuesday, October 09, 2012 – Lecture 5 Imperialism and Dependency Last week continuation; article lays out not only its own theory of development but also other theories-common thing academic articles will do. Problems are presented. One of the other theories for why some are wealthier than others is called; Ethno linguistic variation • The existence of many ethnic groups leads to political instability which leads to poverty. • The authors argue this is problematic because this theory disappears at higher rates of wealth – endogenous (internal problem) – not clear which came first. A) ethic fragmentation creates wealth or b) wealth leads to ethic fragmentation Distance from the Equator • Studies show that connection between closest to the equator and poverty. No good explanation of why distance for the equator would lead to wealth. Obviously there is no argument in this to advance-they are trying to come up with some causal correlations- have not come up with anything good. • This argument can be about climate- climate is a factor that could explain poverty- political scientists found the same problem with that of climate. In general the theories have been fairly unsatisfactory-they have a racist overtone – people in hot countries are lazy- they do not have the work ethic. This is also not a valid argument. In countries with high rate with settlers tend to die – extractive economy-high incidence of malaria. They are coming up with theories of distance from equator and climate correlations- distance from the equator determines what kind of diseases people will get. Way of explaining the correlation found between the distance and wealth or climate and wealth. Today, first reading is Lenin • No part of the world left unclaimed- the part that looks claimed have already been claimed and have gained independence • Imperialism represents (powers to colonies) represents a special stage of capitalism that is called monopoly capitalism • Why that? The aim of colonialism is not only to extract resources from the global south but also to control the resources- avoid competition from other countries • Colonies were in fact costly – hard to justify having these colonies even if it was indirect rules, why do we colonize countries when it is so costly to do so? • Why didn’t they just compete to buy the resources? Lenin argues capitalism is on the decline- extending markets- selling products- need of cheap material. The market would run out- you have to produce and sell products cheaply to do this make massive quantities and have cheap raw materials- phase of monopoly capitalism Notion of Resource Extraction • Reinforce the idea that resource extraction that drives colonial action. May have been political prestige, enlightenment ideas of extending civilization onto the world- but resources extraction is the driving force • Prominent theorists were appose to it at first but once it become economically profitable, they looked and strived to make justifications of moral conduct for this kind of action. • The fundamental critique of modernization theory is that this initial economic relationship – resources from some parts of the world for the use of other parts of the world sets up a lasting system of exploitation Modernization and dependency; the basic building blocks Modernization theory is built on division of the world between traditional society and modern (for this, refer to the graph professor showed us on the week of Nigerian colonialism). How do theorists establish as what counts as modernity? They study the features of social and economic life of Britain and America; they count of modernity. What is the main problem with this type of theory? No independent standard of how to judge modernity – no independent way of accessing modernity Traditional Versus Modernity: Modern; Social Mobility –Traditional; hierarchical rigidity, Modern; urban-Traditional; rural, Modern; rational people Traditional; irrational people • Theory is over determined – no way could it be wrong on one level. Expression and cause. No surprise they find exactly what they are looking for • Lerner: In the spring of 1950 researches go out and gather evidence that the people in Balgot are hopelessly traditional. They are not physically and socially mobile; they don’t go to Ankara, they don’t imagine anything other than who they are- rigid hierarchical system of fixity • They find that they are traditional and then in the summer of 1950 these very same people vote almost universally and secondly they vote for the opposition party – not part of the Turkish hierarchy- this party offers and promises modern features of changes that these peasants can benefit from. If they were truly traditional then they wouldn’t have voted for them. Was Lerner wrong? Did the people lie to the interviewers of what they actually believed or they really were traditional but didn’t have predicted power- they changed their minds-have conflicting signs of beliefs- • One reason that reading is important is because the puzzle that motivates the book is in fact usable evidence that these categories don’t have much analytical or predictive power (modern society features versus traditional society features). Lerner is trying to rescue the modernization theory with the grocer- he could have used his finding to turn a more critical eye. ---We do this for him in class • How does modernization theory in fact use this modern-traditional binary? • The states that presently modern are taken as universally useful way of conceptualization of how development occurs – they are models of how the rest of the world will develop • In the countries that modernized first – the process of economic development was endogenous – internal – with Britain that cause the agricultural revolution leads industrial revolution. Everything has an organic from to it; one thing leads to the next and the next. Adam smith – unseen hand of the market- logic to the market that drives this development • Other theorists believe that – late developers are going to learn modern values and learn from early developers (remember how much they look up to the US state policy) you need to open channels for the diffusion of modernity – across boarders into the countries that are late developers. Example; importing students to the US and then sending them back-plus foreign aid • Modernization theory; theorists believe that moderns are rational (what works) and irrational are irrational (traditional values and history) • What is the unit of analysis of modernization theorist? Studying what values people hold can tell us if they are modern or not- massive surveys to find this out. Example US, Great Britain and Mexico – anything they identify in US and Britain is modern and Mexico is traditional. The important point here is that individual particular societies and its own place is the level of analysis Dependency Theory • Developemt and underdevelopemt ermege simutalenoeusly • Development of the core produces the undeveoplent of the periphery. Developed countries and under underdevopled emerge at the same moment because some are developed and some underdeveloped. The peripher and semi-periphery supply low value • Theorits argue that the tradtion-modernity polarity are not useful because all countries that exsist in world historic time are modern- even developing countries are modern- they are locked in a social logic but they are no behind in time. Logic only exsists under modernity. Modernization theoriest have the traditional-modern graph (catching up- moving up) dependacy say no- they are not behind-both countries are modern in the sense that the timing is the same but modernity looks different because Britain is in an extractive postion with mozambiq- this is way they both look differnet. • They are arguing that these countries are not behind- but undevelopment also emerges in a particual point in time- it’s a modern condition- development and underdevelopment are noth in modern condtion- both are new. The reason that some countires are pooer that others and have not undergone industrialization and have populations in agriculture- not because wrong value system or lack of empathy but because how they have been locked in the world system- basic fundamental mechanism of this is this extractive ecnomy – unequal trade is the fundamental or primary problem that sets up the logic for the next 200 years. How is it unequal? This is not just goods cirrucalry are the world but involves more value and less value goods. Primary goods generaly t
More Less

Related notes for POL201Y1

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit