NIck wrote:
>Nations such as mongolia are at a different stage in their development
>than many
>other 'more developed nations', and indeed within that there may be a
>multitude
>of mongolian cultures, each themselves at different stages of development. My
>point is that each individual, group, culture, state & nation will continue to
>develop.
Yes, but what are these nations 'developing' (to use the word if I can this
once, in a neutral sense as meaning changing, moving - which I will not do
in general) towards. I can't accept that there is one destiny for all human
cultures along the pathway towards which we can place different places at
different points or stages. This is too teleological and it assumes that
cultures existing at the same point in time can be judged by a universal
standard of progress determined by the most economically powerful.
>My point is that most people want change, but some are ready for it sooner
>than
>others.
>My point is that at what point do we take the hand of those that extend it
>towards us?
>I agree that we should not accellerate those countries that aren't ready
>for it
>- just so that we "more developed" (note I use speech marks to denote the
>pejorative) nations can exploit their resources for capital gain.....the
>argument goes on.
It does not follow that because we are 'more developed' (on a scale defined
by our own culture) that we are in a better position even to advise other
nations and peoples what to do. Does 'more developed' mean wiser, more
understanding of the planet and its diversity of peoples and other living
organisms, or does it simply mean more economically powerful - a post hoc
justification of domination?
>I believe development is inevitable - even if we all agreed not to
>intervene the
>model below would come into play? no? yes?
Change is inevitable. 'Development' (in the loaded western sense) is not.
Just because a process is justified under the existing economic order, it
does not make it right or inevitable.
>Cultures Diversify -> Each is Educated -> Each Tries to Understands The
>Other ->
>Each Learns abot the other -> Some Adopt Appealing elements of the other
>-> New
>Identities develop.
Nice model. I wish it were true. I suppose the question is how to do we
make it true. Banishing development 'experts' and learning from each other?
Certainly by resisting the impositions of the TNCs, Western / Northern
nations, and the illegitimate supranational organisations (World Bank, WTO,
IMF etc.) and helping others to do the same, as with for example "People's
Global Action" and the "Third World Network"... another huge subject!
>Excuse my ignorance if I have displayed any - I only wished to register a
>comment to what I feel is an important disussion point.
>
Don't apologise for taking part in a debate. You've certainly got no more
to apologise for than me!
David.
David Wood
PhD Student ('The Rural Peace Dividend')
Department of Agricultural Economics and Food Marketing
University of Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 7RU
Tel: 0191 222 5305
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|