PLS 327 Pol Developing Countries Essay
Thinkers, Globalization, and Industrialization
Developing countries have faced many struggles in the post-war era. The income gap between rich and poor nations has increased while conditions continue to change for development. Several social thinkers have laid out plans by which they believe developing nations can succeed. However, the conditions for development have changed in the postwar era that has caused many nations to reject this thinking while setting out on a new track for success. These nations have dealt with an increase in foreign competition, globalization, a perceived cultural bias against development, and democratization.
During the Pre-war era, fewer countries were developed. Those who were, either were growing regional powers (Japan and the United States), or conflictual European powers. Nations did not have to contend with foreign markets invading their country by flooding it with imports of higher quality and greater quantity. States have turned to import substitution industrialization (ISI) to promote industrialization within their own economies. Import substitution industrialization works by creating large trade barriers in certain industries where a nation is almost exclusively reliant on imports, and then either subsidizing domestic manufacturers or allowing them to develop on their own. This is an attempt to diversify the economy of the developing state. The problem with this approach is that it takes time for industry to develop. This leads to an increase in the gap between rich and poor at the beginning. Later in development, this gap begins to shrink if ISI is successful. However, the demands of global trade have ended most attempts at ISI.
Globalization has played a key role in keeping the rich countries much richer than the poor countries in the postwar era. By globalizing trade, industrialized nations have been able to open up markets to their goods. The sheer force of goods and the cooperation of international economic organizations have worked to destroy ISI programs in many countries. International organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization (WTO), have made reduction of protectionist tactics a tenet of membership. Without membership in such organizations, developing countries would have severely limited foreign markets for their goods. So nations face a threat from the globalization of the economy by the already developed nations and the economic international organizations.
Developing countries are facing a cultural bias to development. Many influential thinkers such as Weber and Rostow have presented a case in which less developed nations lack a cultural quality that makes them inferior to the developed world. Weber argues that the reason Europe was the first to industrialize was the Protestant Ethic. This Ethic promotes Christians to be “diligent and frugal.” Weber theorizes, it would be difficult to industrialize because there would be no work ethic instilled in the people. This is how Weberians explain the economic growth of Asia in the late seventies and early eighties. They state that Asians possessed a similar work ethic to Protestants through the teaching of Confucianism. Rostow goes on to further demean developing nations “traditional society.” He states the countries are unlikely to not have “preconditions arise … endogeously but from some external intrusion by (a) more advanced society.” Under this thinking, developing countries are incapable of development because they do not possess an advanced sense of what it takes to become successful. This also provides justification of developed nations to either exploit nations who are developing, or to enter into a militarily controled mercantilistic relationship. The latter was seen in the invasion of Egypt by the British to open the Suez Canal. The Egyptians attempted to socialize the operations of the canal, the British did not see this as a positive move to their economy, so they solved the situation militarily. It seems that the West has a ethnocentric view at times when it comes to economic advancement.
Developing nations have also faced a burden by changes in their governmental structure. In the recent postwar era, there has been a trend around the world to democratization. Mitchell Seligson lays out the argument of others, “democratic political systems are less capable than their authoritarian counterparts of setting a clear economic agenda.” However, in the international system, this theory has been disproved. No where is there a clearer example of this than in the Marxists nations of Eastern Europe and Central Asia. In Marx’s Communist Manifesto, he presents the four stages of economic development. These are laid out as an eventuality that all capitalist states will socialize, and then communize. Marx paints a picture where the lower classes (proletariat) rise up against the upper classes (bourgeoisie). The only solution to Marx is one which the state represents the collective interests of the people, and not just a pawn of the economic elite. States who established a Marxist system immediately after the inception of the postwar era are now emerging from that authoritarian system, and are facing new challenges in democratization. Seemingly, democratization and capitalization go hand in hand because states are converting their economies as well.
States are also attempting to battle the income gap among their citizens by instituting social welfare programs. Certainly for men like Kutznets, the development of the social state should be unforeseen. If the income gap will eventual close following development, then it is better to let the situation run it’s course and adopt a laissez faire attitude towards social welfare. Marx would argue that the only reason for the existence of the state is to provide social support to its citizens. He takes a stand on the fact that war is a characteristic of the bourgeoisie-controlled state. He states that the upper classes “become antagonistic … with the bourgeoisie of foreign countries” and that it is then compelled to “appeal to the proletariat … [and] drag it into the political arena.” Meaning the interest of the upper classes have sent the state into war. Rostow actually states that nations should not concern themselves with the gap between rich and poor until the nation is developed. He justifies this by claiming that a welfare state will be a diversion to a developing economy. The welfare state is a relevant issue that will continue to exist until states can learn how to promote economic development without massive urbanization or unemployment.
So, developing nations will continue to endure problems in development. The resolution to a global problem of income inequality among states has not been solved. In many ways, the world today is worse off as a whole than it has ever been. Humanitarian needs are not being met around the globe, and nations continue to struggle. As for the thinkers, they must keep on thinking.

Simon Kutznets, “Economic Growth and Income Inequality,” in The Political Economy of Inequality, ed. Frank Ackerman (New York: Long Island Press, 2000), 44
Max Weber, “The Protestant Ethic,” in From Modernization to Globalization, ed. J. Timmons Roberts and Amy Hite (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), 73
W.W. Rostow, “The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto,” in From Modernization to Globalization, ed. J. Timmons Roberts and Amy Hite (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), 100
Rostow, 102
Mitchel Seligson, “The Dual Gaps: An Overview of Theory and Research,” in The Political Economy of Inequality, ed. Frank Ackerman (New York: Long Island Press, 2000), 7
Fredrich Engels and Karl Marx, “The Communist Manifesto,” in From Modernization to Globalization, ed. J. Timmons Roberts and Amy Hite (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), 33
Kutznets, 47
Engels and Marx, 33
Rostow, 106

3 messages | gimmie a ring