Global Inequality and Development - Essay Example

Global Inequality and Development Introduction It has been relevant for ages to explore and explain social events and social order in accordance withtheories developed by the science of sociology. In the modern times it is too hard to systematize social events with regards to sociology only. It is necessary to expand the limits of our worldview in terms of globalization processes, globalized economical and social context of the modern world. Globalization has captured all the spheres of human activity around the world. The most important function of globalization is to delimit poverty and wealth, create conglomerates and unions in favor of common globalized world. It sounds utopian, is not it? So, we will take for our discussion only those aspects of globalization used for social development analysis. There is a huge gap between developed and developing societies nowadays. That is why, it is important to discuss different aspects of their peculiarities in order to claim whether the world’s society is close or not to the globalization processes. Modernization theory and Dependency theory: the basics The main difference between these two theories should be considered in terms of social development of developed and developing states. In the process of human history, many states have been able to develop its scientific and cultural potential. Nevertheless, due to many reasons only a few of countries managed to function at the fullest capacity. Thus, it is important to discuss peculiarities of social development of different states, but not to make stress on the process of deficiencies elimination in the countries of the third world (Adjibolosoo, 1999). Western Europe has taken a place of a leader in terms of self-sustaining economy of capitalism. Thus, supporters of Modernization theory claim that political progress of western countries coincides with their economic development. On the basis of comparison and contrasting Modernization theory and Dependency theory further discussion will be focused on social development of the modern world in developed and developing countries. Moreover, another privilege of the theories comparing and contrasting is their focus on international relationship between developed and developing countries, future prospects of their relations. Finding similarities and differences between these theories is helpful for giving an objective assessment to existing inequalities between different states. Modernization theory and Dependency theory: common grounds and reasoning At first, opponents of the Modernization theory have united their efforts in order to provide a valuable opposite example to the theory. They developed Dependency theory. Still, both of these theories are focused on a gap between states with different level of development. The Western countries are positioned in terms of these theories as world’s leaders, thanks to their dominant developments and progress over the Third World states (Held, 1992). Therefore, developing states have to pursue the line of economic, political, social and cultural aspects of developed countries. The latter countries are leaders dictating rules of existence to developing countries. This position is expressed by Modernization theory and Dependency theory. Still, despite the constant attempts made by developing countries to catch up with developed countries levels, the latter play their roles behind the scenes. Communication between different states occurs, but it is dictated by the developed countries. The latter countries are directors of the films, where roles are played by developing countries. Their interaction is not a unified set of actions. There is an evident “inequality in relationships between developed and developing countries” (Utopian Delusions, 2005). Both theories are focused on dependency of poorer countries on the West as the only one alternative way of development. The dominant position of the Western world cannot be questioned either by representatives of the Modernization theory or by the followers of the Dependency theory. It would be better for Modernization and Dependency theories to suggest alternative ways of development for advanced developing countries or countries with a greater potential. The first and foremost difference dictated by the Modernization theory is that the development of the international relationships between different states, which have different positions at the moment are dictated by the West. Therefore, proponents of the Modernization theory claim that it is necessary to develop relationships between these countries in order developing countries would come closer to the developed countries (Taétreault and Abel, 1986). The Modernization theory insists on the necessity for the countries of the Third world to adopt the experience from the western countries practices. In such a way, economic, social and cultural changes would be adopted by the representatives of the Third World. Therefore, a cooperation of people from the Third World in different spheres should be helpful in advancing representatives of the Third World to the highest level. Developed countries should be assistants for the developing countries in their advancement in different spheres of life. Thus, the right way to wealth is acknowledged by the representatives of the Modernization theory. On the contrary, Dependency theory is focused on the western way of development, but developing countries are depending on this way of development. In providing more details in favor of supporters of Dependency theory it can be claimed that the western way of development is preferred, in spite of the fact that western countries intervene in the process of the developing countries advancement. Disobedience from developing countries can be threatened by the military attacks from the developed countries (Inglehart and Baker, 2001). Dependency theory was mainly developed on the basis of the concept of   underdevelopment. This concept is usually interpreted as: “a failure to develop -- to complete the historic transition from traditional to modern society” (Smith, 1997). The main reason for underdevelopment should be found, in accordance with the supporters of Dependency theory in “the internal structure of traditional society, and that development requires either a restructuring (modernization) of those elements that inhibit or block development, or more generally, an influx of developmental conditions from societies that have already completed the transition” (Stromberg, 2006). What is more important is the fact that the supporters of “the dependency theory claim that development and underdevelopment are opposite faces of the same coin” (Jaffee, 1998). Moreover, another essential contribution made by supporters of Dependency theory is their differentiation of social relationships between the richest and poorest people in the human society in the modern economic and political contexts. Thus, in accordance with Bryan Roberts “capitalist elites have a harder time withholding citizenship because of their neo-liberal economic policy, which focuses on the individual. If this is true, it bodes well for the future, given the current trend towards privatization” (Norlock 2004, p. 249). Let’s focus our attention on the International Monetary Fund (IMF). It takes care about its own power, while the economy of the state are gradually failing. In accordance with considerations of the leading economists, there is a growth of investments in manufacturing. In such a way, it can be claimed that Dependency theory is not a panacea from all problems of the developing countries. A socio-economic breakthrough is impossible in case a growing dependency of poor countries on rich ones is propagated. On the contrary, Modernization theory claims that socio-economic progress of the developing countries is possible in the process of their close cooperation with developing countries. Therefore, concerning similarities and differences between these two theories, it can be claimed that their starting point is common: both of them are focused on the western approach to growth as the most relevant to developing countries. If to claim in more details, the leadership of western countries cannot be denied. The same fact, which cannot be denied, is that underdeveloped countries lack of socio-economic and political backwardness. Communication between developed and poor states is growing and developing at the fullest pace. A possible integration between developed and developing countries cannot be denied as well. Nevertheless, it is desirable to note that in terms of the Modernization theory such kind of “cooperation and integration is a conscious act of the developing countries” (Hirst, 1999). The westernization is gradually turning into a controlling alternative over developing countries advancement. “At the same time, the two theories agree that the cooperation between western countries and developing countries is constantly growing and leads to their integration” (Hirst, 1999). Westernization as the only right direction is acclaimed by the followers of Modernization theory on the basis of historical experience of international relationships between different states. Modernization, from their perspective, is the only right way to stop a process of backwardness experienced by the developing countries (Harrison, 1991). In accordance with the Modernization theory, such kind of interaction looks like a voluntary act mediated by developed countries, which must be followed by developing countries. The proponents of Dependency theory underline that a growing dependency on developed countries is a remote process from global integration and modernization. Therefore, in terms of social development both theories are limited in their considerations about relationships establishment guided by the western countries and followed by the developing countries. To overcome underdevelopment: possible or not? On the one hand, the concept of underdevelopment has been studied by the supporters of Dependency theory, but on the other hand the roots of underdevelopment are often sought in European powers and resulted poverty of the third-world countries. Historical roots of socio-economic differences of development can be found in capitalism centennial existence. Nevertheless, the most relevant explanation can be found in roots of the third-world countries in European colonies. Having introduced structural constraints, European powers influenced on export prices decline thus increasing wages in the richer countries and decreasing wages in the third world countries. Supporters of Modernization can express their idea that poverty of the third-world countries is the result of their underdeveloped cultures. Thus, they believe that cultural transformation of the third world countries may result in their life level advancement. A transformation of a traditional way of life of the third-world countries can lead them to successful lives. Moreover, the followers of Modernization theory can be supported because of their claim that representatives on western countries are good examples of mistakes, which should be avoided by the representatives of the third-world countries (Grancelli, 2011). Thus, it is important for developing countries to follow paths of the western countries. It is not always wise of developing countries to reject from assistance suggested to them by the international financial organizations and voluntary communities. Still, it is important for theorists of Modernization theory to develop alternative vision of the western world development. For example, it is a well-known fact that when countries prosper, they stay afloat. Conclusion Therefore, we have been considered Modernization and Dependency theories on social development in the modern globalized context. On the one hand, it is clear that the limits of vision of the theories should be expanded and western direction of the global development should be reconsidered. On the other hand, it is relevant to refer to the roots of the theories and their interpretation in the modern political, economic and social contexts in order to evaluate international relationships between developed and developing countries. Works cited 1. Adjibolosoo, Senyo B-S. K 1999, Rethinking Development Theory and Policy: A Human Factor Critique. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. 2. Grancelli, Bruno 2011, "Local Development in the Rural Regions of Eastern Europe: Post-socialist Paradoxes of Economic and Social Entrepreneurship." Journal for East European Management Studies 16:31+. 3. Harrison, David 1991, The Sociology of Modernization and Development. London: Routledge. 4. Held, D. et. al 1992, Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture, Cambridge University Press. 5. Hirst, Paul and Thompson, Graham 1999, Globalization in Question: The International Economy and the Possibilities of Governance. London: Routledge. 6. Inglehart, Ronald, and Wayne E. Baker 2001, "Modernizations Challenge to Traditional Values: Whos Afraid of Ronald McDonald?." The Futurist, March, p. 16. 7. Jaffee, David 1998, Levels of Socio-Economic Development Theory. 2nd ed. Westport, CT: Praeger. 8. Norlock, Kathryn 2004, "The Case for Our Widespread Dependency." Social Theory and Practice 30:247+. 9. Smith, Alan G 1997, Human Rights and Choice in Poverty: Food Insecurity, Dependency, and Human Rights-Based Development Aid for the Third World Rural Poor. Westport, CT: Praeger. 10. Stromberg, Joseph R 2006, "On Misplaced Concreteness in Social Theory." Freeman, May, pp. 29+. 11. Taétreault, Mary Ann and Charles Frederick Abel, eds 1986, Dependency Theory and the Return of High Politics. New York: Greenwood Press. 12. "UTOPIAN DELUSIONS; How Abstract Theory Dangerously Distorts Reality." 2005, The Washington Times, March 13, p. B08. Read More