INTRODUCTION
Development,
as variously understood implies economic growth through the adoption of certain
kinds of technology in every society. In fact, when both sections of scholarly
and practitioners of development envision the concept, development, one basic
feature that readily comes to mind is increased adoption and specialization of
western technology, most especially at the detriment of pre-western
technological and social modes of production. Hence, all development across the
world is measured in terms of economic indicators such as Gross Domestic
Product (GDP), Gross National Product (GNP) and other parameters accompanying
the economic growth indicators as prescribed by the west. One basic question
one may ask is; where is the origin of this model of development? Of course,
the answer is not farfetched. The advanced capitalist states of the West are
the major protagonists of such model of development as may be discerned from
various literary works of their theorists and philosophers. The works of Adam
Smith, John Maynard Keynes, David Ricardo and even Karl Popper are clear
examples of scientific foundation to capitalist path to development. The urge
to spread capitalism to the rest of the world gained momentum from the
sixteenth century after the industrial revolution in Europe, and this could be
termed the modernization of the West itself through massive industrialization.
Never the less, does development entail westernization? And does the rest of
the world have to adopt western capitalist mode to development? One of the
theses of development captures the reply to this question best; “western
civilization understands itself as the universal civilization and universalizes
its history as development history for the rest of the world.” (Galtung in Amundsen
ed; 1994: 102-103)
Against this background, Third world
countries pursue development along this line. To them, development is seen as
growth, GNP growth, and transfer of modern technology, export promotion and
attraction of foreign direct investment. With Africa having the bulk of her
countries as third world, her situation can hardly be said to be different from
third world countries elsewhere in the world. To this end therefore, this paper
examines the westernization of development in Africa, and whether that is being
actualized, or not.
While
it is not the aim of this paper to make any general characterization of the
concepts involved here, it is pertinent to define these concepts within our
context of analysis. Westernization implies the assimilation of cultures and
civilization of western European civilizations as they became perfectly embedded
in American style civilization in all its ramifications, and this include the
adoption of western style institutions in all aspects of life. Development on
the other hand denotes the steady progress and improvement of, not just the
living standard of humans but experience of such in non human nature for the
benefit of man in distant future.
OBJECTIVE
The
major objective of this paper is to examine how Africa perceives development to
mean Westernization, and find out whether that is actualizing development for
the continent. In this regard, the paper adopts modernization theory to serve
as the theoretical frame of analysis for the paper.
METHODOLOGY
Secondary
analysis will be utilized for an in depth analysis of African experience in
terms of westernized approach to development. This is particularly justified
since the paper looks at the historical incorporation of Africa, and her
subsequent adoption of western capitalists mode of production and political
structure deemed necessary for development.
REVIEW
OF RELATED LITERATURE
No doubt many have written on
westernization, and whether that denotes modernization is another bone of
contention all together. When one discusses westernization, one thing that
readily becomes apparent is west European cultural and civilization characteristics.
This is indeed true of the characterization of such, with fairly recent
inclusion of United States of America (USA), which has become the perfect
Avatar of Westernization. Philosophical postulations on the ideal state and
society stemmed from ancient Greek writings represented by the works of Socrates,
Plato and Aristotle. Centuries later, Roman philosophy and the codification of
law added to the quantum of knowledge the Greeks had already devised on the
ideal state. Together, the Greco- Roman civilization spread through other
European states and became the perfect description of that which is western.
Pre-capitalist mode of production
has preceded what we now term western economic liberalism. Prior to what we now
see as the perfect model of development, European societies have had
pre-capitalists mode of production, ranging from communalism to feudal
relations of production with each reaching a matured level overthrowing the
preceding one, hence becoming firmly entrenched as the dominant mode of production
interspersed by slave mode of production (Marx, 1846). For Rostow (1955), these
stages differ as they are uni-linear, beginning from traditional, pre-take off,
take off, drive to maturity, up to the stage of high mass consumption. For him,
society reaches its peak when capitalism is entrenched. Capitalism associated
with western European states when, in the beginning, capitalism was agrarian,
as agriculture became highly mechanized, and until early capitalists relied
heavily on scientific discoveries which led to technological advancement
leading to advances in industrialization in all facets of society in late seventeenth
century (Heywood, 2007). Wallerstein (in Mingst and Sneider, 2006) has attested
to this fact by submitting that capitalism emerged in western societies in the
1640s.
Gouddelier (1989) sees the West as a
real and imaginary world in terms of achievement and standards, of modes of
action and ways of thinking, which today, rolled up into a ball of energy that
either attracts of repels people, and revolves around three axis, with three
sets of institutions each with its logic representation and values- capitalism,
parliamentary democracy and Christianity. Gouddelier may have included western
Christianity which stems from Roman style Christianity that spread to other
parts of the world, but westernization for this paper denotes secularism in
terms of capitalism as it relates to liberal democracy and that which is
considered modern in the world today. She had alluded to the fact that
westernization became more widespread with the collapse of the Berlin Wall in
November 1989, when East and West Germany became united as liberal economies
and incorporating along with that, East European nations. In addition, the
disintegration of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) brought about
the spread of liberal economic system to the East and all former USSR states. Marie- Scott (2007) conceived westernization
as the assimilation of western culture, and by western culture here, she refers
to American and West European culture
being grafted unto what hitherto, may be referred to as old and traditional
modes of production(italics mine). Further, westernization, to her is a two
sided process or it becomes colonization. She may have overlooked the fact that
colonization is equally a process which facilitates westernization.
Having discussed westernization thus
far, how is that related to modernization? Owolabi (2001) posited that
challenges of social order, which constituted the prime of social discourse
since the Greeks produced competing ideologies, of which liberalism became the most
admired, at least in Western circles. In Owolabi’s view, since liberalism
encourages competition and free thinking, it engendered the generation of novel
ideas which frequently elevates the competitive society over others. In this
way, modern western societies have become models of progress and technological
advancement. Paradoxically though, it also generates antagonistic tendencies,
that which he characterized as “Economism”.
Przerwovski and Limongin (1997) on the other hand, while citing Lipset,
established a correlation between democracy and development measured in terms
of per capita and (PPP), where specialization allows for ever increasing
complexity in a society thereby overthrowing dictatorships and enthroning
democracy. He mentioned, in addition, that these could be brought about by both
indigenous and exogenous factors to democratization, hence modernization.
Further, technological changes endows producers with autonomy and private
formations leading to the emergence of civil society, leading to the fall of
dictatorial regimes; endogenous explanations to democracy is what he termed
modernization. In addition, he submitted that causal chains consist of
sequences of industrialization, urbanization, education, mobilization and
political incorporation. He added that modernization may be one reason the
incidence of democracy is elated to economic development.
A critical observation of Lipset’s analysis
leave more questions than it addresses on the subject of modernization. In this
regard, O’ Donnell contended that democracy may not endogenous to many
societies which are not western. Societies in Asia, Africa and Latin America
may possess in built democratic structures, and he generalizes European
societies as that which should obtain in the rest of the world. Besides, it all
depends on what one may characterize as democracy anyway. To O’ Donnell,
democracy as referred to by Lipset is what is known as liberal democracy, which
is a corollary to economic liberalism- free market economy. A detailed view of
all literatures presented so far reveals some basic features and historical
process in common in terms of modernization as it relates to westernization.
From ancient periods, western European societies themselves were not
modernized, but from late seventeenth to the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries saw to the modernization of European and American societies, and
these became the symbol of modernization, and is often regarded as
westernization in other parts of the world.
Modernization is therefore, in many
respects westernization. Many parts of the world have increasingly continued to
adopt and graft western development models in the form of liberal economic
structures only with exceptions of China and perhaps Vietnam and India. For
Africa and Latin America development, at least on practical level, means
adapting to western development models at the detriment of pre-capitalist modes
of production. European states have attained modernization on a natural
transition from one phase to another until they have attained development as
often said of them. Westernization therefore is not the only means through
which development can be attained. Alternative means to development have proved
as much effective to development as westernization does. Soviet Russia, Hong Kong,
China and even India have adopted variants of development strategies other than
modernization/westernization, and that is proving effective. Socialist,
Buddhist and Confucian models are proving to be worthy rival schools to western
capitalist model to development. Besides, measuring development in terms of
technological advancement, growth in Per capita income and GDP neglects many
aspect of development such as human and social indices, and the non human
nature such as the environment and other natural space (Galtung, in Amundsen
ed, 1994).
Against this background, this paper
examines development on the African continent and determines whether the model
of development adopted by the continent is native to Africa or that development
is geared towards western and modernized method to societal advancement.
THEORETICAL
FRAME OF ANALYSIS
Judging
by the nature of this paper, Modernization theory has been adopted as our frame
of analysis in order to fully comprehend how development is pursued in Africa.
In Nisbet’s (1969) view, modernization may be conceptualized as industrialization,
economic growth, rationalization, structural differentiation, political
development, social mobilization and/ or secularization or some other
accompanying process bringing about national change in all facets of societal
life. In this respect, modernization has to do with changing all aspect of
societal life with those that are considered modern in place of those which
were traditional, and in the case of our focus of study, African pre-
capitalist mode of production has to be replaced by western model of
productions which are considered modern.
Attempts to expand and establish
modernization on a world scale stems from the response of America to post World
War II political configuration, with the tensions brought about by cold war and
the emergence of third world on the heels of colonization. The intention of
America was to bring about political stability, economic development, social
and cultural changes in third world countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America
(Tipps, 1973). Reconstruction of war ravaged aspects of Central European states
had been considered a huge success, and that experiment is being transferred to
other continents of the world to see whether that could work as it did in
Europe, most especially in Germany, Hungary and other Scandinavian states as
Sweden and Denmark. Tipps adopted his views from the literatures of
modernization scholars such as Talcott Parson, David Easton, David Apter,
William Todaro, Everett Rogers and all other modernization scholars.
To him and these other scholars,
development is a state every state in the world aspires. In this regard,
development should be pursued through jettisoning all hitherto tradition modes
of production and adoption western European models of development for speedy
and sustained development. They posited that most Third world countries still
remain underdeveloped due to the fact that they have not been able to overcome
traditional modes of production, which they termed as superstitious and
regressive. Of note, particularly, is Arthur Lewis’ hypothesis that in third
world, most especially African, there are two sectors of social relations of
production- one traditional, and the other modern. Lewis submitted that the
traditional sector is characterized of base subsistence production, crude
technological implements, zero net savings and abundant of labor whereas the
modern sector is highly sophisticated in method, employs huge amount of labor,
rationally complex and advanced in technology with high level of savings and
investment. To him, it is the traditional sector that slows the pace of
development in third world countries, and the only means through which development
can be attained in these countries is to adopt modern development methods as
exemplified by west European and American economic liberalism (in Mafeje,
1978).
PROCESS
OF MODERNIZATION IN AFRICA
Prior to her contact with the West, Africa can
be described to be at various levels of development. These range from primitive
communal, pastoralist aristocratic and remotely feudal settings. These kinds of
arrangement did not fully develop into what could be termed ‘African mode of
production’, hence Africa could not be regarded as having reached a level of
maturity in terms of social relations of production (Mafeje, 1978). At its
contact with the west in the 1500s, Africa and Europe were within the circles
of mercantilist relations. European traders traded in pearls and ivory at an
early stage of their relations with Africa. This intensified after the
industrial revolution made necessary for more raw materials to be sought on
behalf of capital Europe. Expansion of trade from coastal regions to hinterland,
further into the Grassland and Sahel regions culminated in exposing the
resource base of Africa to capitalism. Prior to industrial revolution,
Europeans engaged in slave trade with African merchants who cared to deal in
such. Due to the lucrative nature of such trade, Queen Elizabeth I dedicated a
ship named ‘the Jesus’ to that effect. The details of such may not be necessary
here for want of time (Rodney, 1972).
Many have documented how Africa was
incorporated into world capitalist system. Ake (1981) had identified three
major phases to the incorporation of Africa into global capitalism as firstly colonizing
the continent through intrigues and brute force; secondly, monetizing the
African economy through introduction of standard bills of exchange and establishment
of commercial banks and insurance corporations; thirdly, imperialism of trade
through establishment of trading spheres of influence and foreign investment in
the form of Multi- Nation Corporations (MNCs). Similarly, Amin (2002) averred
that Africa got integrated into global capitalist system as earlier as that
system became established. Early mercantilist period in the 15th, 16th
and the 17th centuries brought about incorporation of Africa into
World capitalist system, albeit in a dangerous manner through slavery; but with
the improvement in technology and abolition of slavery, colonialism became the
next viable option in order to ensure continuous supply of raw materials and a
ready market for already finished products of the already technologically and
industrially driven economies of the West. Amin posited that colonialism lasted
approximately from 1880- 1960, and this corresponded to further incorporation
of Africa into the system through colonial policies tilted in favor of western
capitalism until the time Africa became independent along with other countries
in Asia and Latin America earlier than that, then neo- colonialist relations
turned out to be the most lucrative means for continued supply of raw materials
and market for the west.
In Mafeje (1978)’s submission,
African integration into global capitalist web was rather late compared to
other parts of the world, especially the third world. This took place in late
19th century, where one sector of the economy cannot support other
sectors even after independence since barely fifty years after colonialism
started, Africans began agitation for independence. Both Amin and Ake have
equally alluded to this disarticulation and segregation, making it possible for
neo-colonialism to flourish after African states have become ‘sovereign’.
Writers who have equally attested to this integration of the third world into
global capitalism also included Gunder Frank, Immanuel Wallerstein, and almost
all dependency theorists. In fact, for Mafeje, these disarticulations led to
the inability of African countries to sustain themselves even immediately after
independence, hence relying on foreign capital to keep their economies running,
and this is the exact description of neo- colonialism. In as much a detailed
discussion in his work (1978), he submitted that it was these African leaders
that initiated the move for reliance on foreign capital owing to the fact that
they cannot sustain the economy on their own as a result of inadequate economic
and leadership skills to do so.
In neo- colonial era, the activities
of World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) perpetuated this third
world, and most especially African dependence on metropolitan capital through
implementation of the Washington Consensus policies in the form of the
Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP). The conditions accompanying SAP further
attempted to modernize African states by instructing that they liberalize their
economies to align with western capitalist economies in order for them to
attract foreign investment and adopt more of export promotion kind of
production even though their economies have not been what Amin (2000) called ‘auto-
centered’, i.e. inward looking economies. Resultantly, Africa cannot produce
autonomous national capital of its own.
MODERNIZATION:
THE RIGHT DEVELOPMENTAL MODEL FOR AFRICA?
Modernization took place in Africa
through the centuries. Although, dependency theorists disagree on the actual
beginning of modernization in Africa, one thing that remains clear is that
modernization occurred in the continent regardless of the starting period. It remains
therefore, to ask whether modernization brought about or is bringing about the
necessary development Africa anticipates. Careful and critical analysis of the
African continent depicts a gloomy picture, as far as development is concerned.
Classifying the world into three world typology- the first capitalist world,
the second socialist world and the third world on a development rating suggests
that most, if not all of Africa falls on the third world category of
underdeveloped countries of the world (Heywood, 2007). In addition to this, a
fourth world has been identified, and the bulk of the fourth world countries
are African countries, where politically, they are unstable, socially, they are
backward and economically, they are stagnant or retrogressive. Incorporation of
Africa in world capitalist system has been done in such a nature Africa only
specializes in the production of primary, agrarian commodities they cannot
process on their own without aid from metropolitan capital.
It will be worth remembering that metropolitan
capitalism started through agriculture, but as capitalism advanced, capitalists
and financiers relied heavily on scientific discoveries to advance agriculture,
which made it mechanized for the west as against the labor intensive method it
used to rely on prior to capitalism. As mercantile capitalism grew, industrial
capitalism became entrenched in the eighteenth century, where the need for raw
materials and market spread industrial capitalism to the rest of the world. Colonialism
being one of the means through which Africa was firmly integrated into this
system, all policies administered on Africa then were tilted towards the
benefit of metropolitan capital at the detriment of Africa. Ake, Amin and
Rodney have made available staggering statistics that point to the fact that
the nature of African incorporation into global capital made it impossible for
Africa to develop even after independence since independence in this case, to
use Nkrumah’s words, is ‘mere flag independence and not economic independence’.
Haven been integrated, African
countries have not been allowed to enjoy comparative advantage on trade
relations with other continents of the world since they exist within the same international
economic relations as equal partners in global trade. Unfortunately,
commodities Africa specializes in are determined, not by so called market
forces of demand and supply, but by the whims and caprices of powerful Organization
of Economic and Cooperation and Developed member countries (OECD). These
asymmetric relations in terms of trade perpetuate underdevelopment and heavy
dependence on metropolitan capital for development in Africa. In fact, African
economies have been, as a result of the incorporating process been rendered
outward looking, hence most productive activity is not being channeled for
domestic needs but rather production has been geared towards export, where
export itself is carried out in an exploitative manner at both individual and
national levels. Nigeria, Kenya, Ghana, Congo Democratic Republic (DRC), Zambia
are made to produce, in terms of agriculture, cocoa, gum, palm oil with all of
these countries not having the technology to process these commodities on their
own; and on extractive industries such as copper, gold, diamond and even
petroleum without they having the capacity to process same for local
consumption. The production of these is done in the producing country where
manufacturing to the final stage is carried on elsewhere in the west, where
surplus realized on the finished commodity are ten folds or more of the price
of the primary commodities.
Further, African countries rely on imported
technology as against locally developed technology, where manpower does not
exist to see to the application of these technologies, but for technical
support to be imported into Africa for exorbitant amount to be paid by the host
country. Traditional technology is considered superstitious and backward for
African countries while historically, Africa had its own technology and
institutions prior to its contact with Western Europe, although Mafeje (1978)
had pointed to the fact that Africa had not fully developed its own mode of
production prior to that contact. This is not to say that there is no African
mode of production, rather the mode of African productions had been very slow
compared to other parts of the world, especially European modes of production.
Furthermore, all pre-capitalist mode of production, if we are to consider
Marxian materialist conception of history, it could be discerned that one phase
of economic relations have to reach maturity before it can be overthrown by another
as society advances with human intellect and technology. Such was not allowed
to take place in Africa when Europe colonized it (Ibid).
In an attempt to catch up with western development, African countries
have had to go through series and waves of democratization accompanied by
economic liberalization as preconditions for trade and political relations with
the west. In the third wave of democratization, coinciding with independence,
Africa adopted democratic governance alongside non-align economic policies due
largely to the fact that they want to enjoy the benefits of befriending the two
major economic blocs in the developed world- capitalism and socialism. With the
disintegration of the USSR, and what Heywood (2007) characterized as East
European revolution in 1989, the fourth wave of democratization swept through
Africa like wild fire. Western democratic institutions were literally imposed
on the continent, and these were accompanied alongside the conditions attached
to Structural Adjustment Program (SAP), which demanded that Africa liberalize
their economies in order to attract foreign investments. The details of
conditions need not be mentioned here for want of time. What this stands to do to African economy is
to make it outward looking as against being what Amin called auto- centered
economies of the west. They are basically fashioned towards export without
regard for domestic consumption needs. In essence, westernization has not
promoted development in Africa since modernization has not developed on local
modes of production, but rather it has supplanted it as the dominant mode of
production which requires foreign expertise to maintain.
CONCLUSION
While development is what every
nation aspires, it has been established that every state pursues its
development as it deemed fit. Western European capitalist mode of production
has been entrenched in almost every region of the world with only a few
exceptions in some Asian countries. Economic liberalism has been introduced in
Africa through mercantilism, slavery, Colonialism and neo-colonial economic
relations. In this kind of economic relations, the world had been segmented
into two asymmetric sections, where one dictates what the other produces, at
what price it sells, and at what price it gets its own necessities. African
countries fall within this category of third world countries which are
dependent on western capitalism for the extraction, processing and the
exportation of their commodities in addition to the fact that they have been
confined to the status of primary producers within the global scheme of
economic relations. African states have struggled to keep pace with
modernization since independence. Right from their process of state formations,
they have strived to adopt western technology and modes of production at the
detriment of African modes of production. The consequence of that is the
increased journey to bewildering methods of carrying out production, where
there is no specialization in any economic activity, but rather, to rely on
foreign technical assistance for even the simplest task of processing the
primary commodities they specialize in producing. An instance could be made of
oil producing countries in Africa, where exploration, extraction and onward
exportation have to be carried out by foreign expertise. For African states
therefore, the pursuit of development have to be dictated from the west and is
not being hatched from within the continent, and this poses a serious challenge
to the development of Africa, as African states cannot pursue development on
their own terms.
REFERENCES
Ake, C. (1981), A Political Economy of Africa, New York, McMillan Publishers
Haywood, A. (2007), Politics, Hampshire, Palgrave MacMillan
Marcussen, H. S. and Torp, E. J (1982), Internationalization of Capital,
London, Zed Books
Mingst, K. A. and Sneijder, J. L. (2006), Essential Reading in World Politics, New
York, W Norton and Company
Owolabi, J. K. (2001) Globalization, Americanization and Western
Imperialism, Michigan, Michigan State University Press
Mafeje, A. (1978), Science, Ideology and Development: Three essays on Development theory,
Upsala, Centre for African Studies
Rodney, W. (1972), How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, Johanesburg, Panaf Publishers
Amin, S. (2002), Africa: Living on the
Fringe, in New Agenda, Issue no 7 pp. 19- 27
Galtung, J. (1994), Ten theses of Development theory: Practice and Methodology in
Amundsen ed. Knowledge and Development, pp 93- 114, Centre for Environment and
Development studies
Phillips, A. (1974), The concept of Development, in Taylor
and Francis, Review of African Political Economy, no. 8 pp. 7- 20
Przerwovski, A. and Lomongin, F. (1997),
Democracy and Development Vol. 49,
no. 2 pp. 155- 83
Tipps, D. C. (1973), Modernization theory and comparative study
of society: A critical perspective in the study of Society and History, Vol.
15 no. 2 pp. 199- 226
No comments:
Post a Comment