Abstract:Developmentalism is the idea that progress entails the temporal movement of societies along a universal trajectory. Prevailing accounts conceptualize Eurocentric developmental discourses as ideological weapons of imperial domination, specifically because they defer colonial claims to popular self-rule. Rejecting the idea that these historical entanglements exhaust the meanings of developmental thought, this article sheds light on anticolonial debates over developmentalism. Turning to Guyanese scholar-activist … Show more
“…Such Southern development imperatives remain as salient as ever as the economies of former colonies in Asia, Africa and Latin America remain largely undiversified (UNCTAD, 2021) and thus highly vulnerable to external shocks and constraints such as commodity price fluctuations. The recent work of Temin (2022) on Rodney and Third World developmentalism — or what Temin terms ‘popular anticolonial developmentalism’ (ibid. : 235) — is relevant here: The conceptual field of developmentalism is not intrinsically bound to Eurocentric origins or Eurocentric frames of analysis ….…”
Section: Universalistic Framingsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such Southern development imperatives remain as salient as ever as the economies of former colonies in Asia, Africa and Latin America remain largely undiversified (UNCTAD, 2021) and thus highly vulnerable to external shocks and constraints such as commodity price fluctuations. The recent work of Temin (2022) By failing to acknowledge or engage with these intellectual inheritances and reducing development to the Truman version of Northern aid to and intervention in the global South, the authors erase Southern visions and imaginings of development from sight.…”
The COVID‐19 pandemic motivated calls for the field of development studies to be recast. This article analyses two prominent, future‐gazing ‘pandemic papers’ to illustrate salient features of the ascendant trend towards a new ‘global development’ paradigm. By unpacking and interpreting major lines of reasoning put forward by two agenda‐setting articles, this contribution appraises how these texts make the case for the future of development studies. Through this analysis, the article questions the core arguments that seek to shift the contours of the discipline, and thus the study of development generally. In making their call to adopt a universalist or global development framework that includes a focus on Europe and North America, the authors of the ‘pandemic papers’ overlook the Southern origins of and justifications for the North‒South framework they seek to overturn. The present article acknowledges the importance of and supports returning to and advancing — rather than jettisoning — the intellectual lineage anchored in non‐Truman understandings of development, including as a popular project of Southern emancipation from colonial, imperial and structural subordination. Rather than de‐centring the global North‒South framework, it suggests that the analytically more useful way forward is for development studies to (re)centre the global South and use global South theories and lenses to better understand the world economy and the majority world.
“…Such Southern development imperatives remain as salient as ever as the economies of former colonies in Asia, Africa and Latin America remain largely undiversified (UNCTAD, 2021) and thus highly vulnerable to external shocks and constraints such as commodity price fluctuations. The recent work of Temin (2022) on Rodney and Third World developmentalism — or what Temin terms ‘popular anticolonial developmentalism’ (ibid. : 235) — is relevant here: The conceptual field of developmentalism is not intrinsically bound to Eurocentric origins or Eurocentric frames of analysis ….…”
Section: Universalistic Framingsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such Southern development imperatives remain as salient as ever as the economies of former colonies in Asia, Africa and Latin America remain largely undiversified (UNCTAD, 2021) and thus highly vulnerable to external shocks and constraints such as commodity price fluctuations. The recent work of Temin (2022) By failing to acknowledge or engage with these intellectual inheritances and reducing development to the Truman version of Northern aid to and intervention in the global South, the authors erase Southern visions and imaginings of development from sight.…”
The COVID‐19 pandemic motivated calls for the field of development studies to be recast. This article analyses two prominent, future‐gazing ‘pandemic papers’ to illustrate salient features of the ascendant trend towards a new ‘global development’ paradigm. By unpacking and interpreting major lines of reasoning put forward by two agenda‐setting articles, this contribution appraises how these texts make the case for the future of development studies. Through this analysis, the article questions the core arguments that seek to shift the contours of the discipline, and thus the study of development generally. In making their call to adopt a universalist or global development framework that includes a focus on Europe and North America, the authors of the ‘pandemic papers’ overlook the Southern origins of and justifications for the North‒South framework they seek to overturn. The present article acknowledges the importance of and supports returning to and advancing — rather than jettisoning — the intellectual lineage anchored in non‐Truman understandings of development, including as a popular project of Southern emancipation from colonial, imperial and structural subordination. Rather than de‐centring the global North‒South framework, it suggests that the analytically more useful way forward is for development studies to (re)centre the global South and use global South theories and lenses to better understand the world economy and the majority world.
“…Nyerere's projects to rebuff capitalist exploitation curbed local accounts of development in part by implicitly accepting capitalist temporalities. Time becomes analytically important for evaluating anti-capitalist strategies in order to theorize, for example, generative gaps between "Third" and "Fourth World" struggles (Manuel and Posluns, 2018), or paths for "popular anticolonial developmentalism" (Temin, 2022;also Rodney (2018also Rodney ( [1972) that, as I apply it here, must hold in tension a community's many coeval inheritances if it aims to leave potential historical trajectories, routines, and identities radically open.…”
Section: Proletarianization: Marginalization and Relegation To The Pastmentioning
Scholars have revived the concept of primitive accumulation to describe how explicit violence is an ongoing and structural, rather than simply historical, tool for capitalist domination. However, the relationship between the logic of capitalism and history of capitalism remains obscured. Capitalism is politically enforced and hegemonic, but ongoing instances of capitalist violence repeatedly appear as though they were breaking new ground or finding new frontiers for capitalist growth. In this paper, I offer a novel framework for understanding how primitive accumulation not only creates a capitalist material order but also a temporal order that motivates and reproduces capitalist violence. Focusing on Maasai conflicts over conservation lands in Kenya and Tanzania, I describe how primitive accumulation imposes the historical narratives that naturalize capitalism, ecological rhythms that suppress competing lifeways, and identity categories that marginalize dispossessed populations by characterizing them as primitive. This account advances key debates about settler-colonialism, racial capitalism, and potential resistance by clarifying how disproportionate harm against particular populations is justified, how those justifications reproduce and naturalize capitalist domination, and how temporality represents not only a site of domination but also political struggle.
“…As such, this book can act as an open invitation for social scientists to engage with the discipline of philosophy. Likewise, I hope Táíwo's future research agenda will wade deeper into the current critical sociological investigations on ecological unequal exchange, environmental (in)justice, anti-colonial theory and worldsystemic approaches theorizing the linkages between, and legacies of, underdevelopment, capitalism, slavery and colonialism (see Burden-Stelly, 2020;Givens et al, 2019;Kvangraven, 2021;Pellow, 2021;Temin, 2022) There is much to gain from building a transdisciplinary research agenda on global inequality, underdevelopment and the relationship between capitalism and racism. The time for such an analysis is long overdue and Reconsidering Reparations pushes us in this direction.…”
Section: Aidan O'sullivan Birmingham City Universitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As such, this book can act as an open invitation for social scientists to engage with the discipline of philosophy. Likewise, I hope Táíwo’s future research agenda will wade deeper into the current critical sociological investigations on ecological unequal exchange, environmental (in)justice, anti-colonial theory and world-systemic approaches theorizing the linkages between, and legacies of, underdevelopment, capitalism, slavery and colonialism (see Burden-Stelly, 2020; Givens et al, 2019; Kvangraven, 2021; Pellow, 2021; Temin, 2022)…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
