Hey Everyone! Because Chris was so well prepared for this week I have designated him as discussion starter.... :) Just teasing!
First of all, Moss points out at the very beginning that "j there are no clear answers as to why Africa has performed so poorly in the past". I just read that and thought... isn't that motivating :)
So Some areas I thought would be interesting to discuss are:
Are global markets fixed to keep countries intentionally dependent?
During one class period someone asked if change happens at the individual or governmental level. Moss brings up the point that there is this third, uncontrollable area including:Geography, Climate, Demography, and Ethnicity. How much does this third aspect weigh in development? How do you address it?
Aide. Huge topic. There have been donations to Africa for an extended period of time. Should we there be strings attached? Are there ethical boundaries that have been crossed?
Also with the Women and Development article: What was your reaction? Should America be involved to bring equality among genders in Africa? There are many cultures that have built in beliefs that seem discriminatory to Females. Where is the line between allowing a culture or ideology continue or force change?
So there are a few questions to get the ball rolling! See you all tomorrow!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Regarding the question "Are global markets fixed to keep countries intentionally dependent?" I almost feel like you might be trolling for and angry response. I'll try to contain myself.
ReplyDeleteLets talk about some possible assumptions that need to be in place for such a statement to be true. You would have to assume one, more or all of the following:
1. Rich powerful entities in the global economy have consciously and strategically shaped the global economy to be that way.
They call this dependency theory where the core keeps the periphery close enough to be useful but far enough away to be subservient.
1b. Rich and powerful entities CAN shape the global economy enough to reach that end.
2. The global economy is inherently organized that way.
This one is a stretch because the global economy is far from liberal or completely lazies fair (sorry i dont speak french) and it is a common argument that fully free markets lead to a pyramid shaped economy with the elite proportionate to the area closest to the pinnacle and the poor represented by the large base.
I tend to move away from dependency theory because that theory is becoming less and less true with the anti examples being the rise of the global east and its Asian tigers and the slump in influence of the US economy against rising powers such as China.