for a more understandable version, check out There You Go by Oren Ginzburg for Survival International

Each society has its own epistemological (essentially - body of knowledge and discourse shared by or common to most people) basis for pursuing its own unique path of progression to a more advanced form. The discourse is unique in what is perceived to be progress, and positive change, and the praxis for the same. Each culture has its own schema for how to proceed with paradigmatic changes to the status quo. Assuming that there is one such “right” path, or even that there is a certain goal towards which a society should proceed has been rampant in development discourse, particularly post World War 2, a turning point in the political trajectory of the world (major L). First, one must examine the inception of the notion of development, as an end goal for governments, and the discourse surrounding the rhetoric and methodology of it. While the definition has shifted over years, there are several contested ideas within development practices. The spotlight has once again been cast on privilege and the othering of indigenous cultures and side-lining them as primitive or backward.

 Indigenous knowledge is a “complete knowledge system with its own concepts of epistemology, and its own scientific and logical validity” (Battiste, 2002, p.7). since the 15^th-century expansion of European countries through colonization of states in the other continents, the expansionist and exploitative acts were guised under rhetoric that justified colonialism as an opportunity for indigenous tribes, who were presumed to be backward, to evolve into a Eurocentric idea of civilized society. Most of these societies had rich traditions involving sustainable growth and tolerant cultures that stressed harmony and well-being  (Magni, 2016). While these are more desirable development goals in the present scenario, they were perceived as backward and uncultured, hence the “white man’s burden” to raise human condition in these colonies. While former colonial powers credit themselves on introducing infrastructure like the railways in the case of India, it often conceals the scale of exploitative draining of resources and the calamitous mismanagement of domestic issues. The Indian GDP growth rate shrunk to 4.2% in 1940 from 24.4% in 1700 (Madison, 2003).

With the shift in dominant political ideologies brought about after the second world war, development was seen as a race towards economic superiority and capitalist expansion led once again to several exploitative relationships between the industrialized and developed countries (erstwhile colonial powers) and the low- and middle-income nations in the global south. The creation of supposedly unbiased and neutral inter-governmental organizations such as the World Bank or the IMF, or even the UN, has only strengthened this hegemony. Forcing structural adjustments and unbalanced terms of trade have further enabled richer nations to strongarm the former colonies into exploitative deals that further widen the gap.

Earlier this year, Exxon allegedly coerced officials in Guyana to grant them the Stabroek license, in a deal that has cost Guyana US$55 billion. Guyana is one of the poorest countries in the region and has a GDP of US$4 billion. They rank 123 on the HDI and 160 by GDP, and one of its most pressing developmental needs is protecting 90% of its citizens against rising sea levels. This exploitation is not just limited to corporations.

Since 1980, developing countries have reportedly lost US$16.3 trillion due to structural adjustments imposed by developed nations through foreign aid and development loans (GFI, 2015). Repayments and capital outflows from these countries often prove to be an additional burden, further draining capital resources vital for development projects (Khalil-Tari, 2017).

President Truman’s 1947 address is a testament to the tone that development was to take:

“I believe that our help should be primarily through economic and financial aid which is essential to economic stability and orderly political processes.”

Seemingly innocuous, it does hint at an ideal form of economy and political structure that all nations should aspire to, and one which the USA would provide aid to achieve. In hindsight, this was a policy that served to preserve the capitalist expansion undertaken by the West and keep communist notions at bay. However, similar ideas of “support free peoples” have been used to justify unbalanced terms of trade and international relations that have led to exploitation of the “free peoples”.

To conclude, though the current discourse has been changed to one that includes positionality and acknowledging indigenous knowledge to create more sustainable and inclusive development goals and participatory methods of achieving the same, the assumption that there is a one-size-fits-all approach to 'doing development’ implies that there is a set goal. Additionally, the idea that the goal can be achieved only through foreign aid, which tends to conceal the vested interest of the provider of aid further paints development as a synthesis of colonial ideologies.

References:

Battiste, M., Bell, L., & Findlay, L. M. (2002). Decolonizing education in Canadian universities: An interdisciplinary, international, indigenous research project. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 26(2), 82.

G.F.I (2015). Financial Flows and Tax Havens. Combining to Limit the Lives of Billions of People. Washington.

Jiménez Peña, Gabriel. (2015). Is Development a form of Neo-Colonialism?. Dialéctica Libertadora. 7.

Khalil-Tari, D. (2018, February 09). Foreign aid in Africa: Help or exploitation? Retrieved October 08, 2020, from https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/opinion/foreign-aid-africa-help-exploitation/20/07/

Maddison, Angus (2003): Development Centre Studies The World Economy Historical Statistics: Historical Statistics, OECD Publishing, ISBN 9264104143, pp 261

Magni, G. (2017). Indigenous knowledge and implications for the sustainable development agenda. European Journal of Education, 52(4), 437-447.

McCullough, David (1992). Truman. New York: Simon & Schuster. pp. 547-549.

*essay previously submitted at IDS for assessment