 |
 |
I have written a series of twenty-three blog posts on the Third World project, which I published from July 19 to October 10. Perhaps some members of the List may find them of interest. The posts address the following issues.
(1) The distinction between accommodationist and revolutionary ideologies in the Third World. The former is supported by economic sectors in the neocolony that have an interest in the preservation of the core-peripheral relation established in the colonial period as well as by the middle class and urban residents that have been socialized in private educational institutions and/or have been influenced by the corporate-owned mass media. As a political force, accommodationism represents the interests of the global powers and transnational corporations in the neocolony. In contrast, the revolutionary ideology speaks on behalf of the popular sectors of professionals, workers, peasants, students, women and ethnic groups. It seeks to break the core-peripheral relation and to embark on a process of autonomous national economic and social development. It seeks both true national independence and the social transformation of the nation, and thus it can be called a project of “national and social liberation.”
(2) A New International Economic Order. During the period 1955 to 1979, the radical project of national and social liberation dominated the international projection and diplomatic efforts of the newly independent nations of Asia and Asia, with socialist Cuba also playing an active leadership role. The Non-Aligned Movement and the G-77 were formed during the period, and the Third World proposal for a New International Economic Order was approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1974. The radical Third World project called for an international order based on respect for the principle of the equality and sovereignty of nations. It maintained that all nations have the right to development and the right to control their natural resources. It envisioned a world-system based in cooperation and solidarity, rather than domination and exploitation. However, the global powers dismissed the Third World proposal, and during the period 1979 to 1994, they imposed the neoliberal project on the world.
(3) The renewal of the Third World project of national and social liberation. The radical Third World project did not die after 1979; it was kept alive by the enduring hopes of the people and by the committed work of intellectuals and community organizers and by the persistent commitment of Cuba. During the period 1994 to 2014, the radical Third World project reemerged as an important political force in global affairs. This was especially apparent in Latin America, as is indicated by: the emergence of self-proclaimed socialist governments in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua; the electoral victories of progressive political parties in Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay; the growing international prestige of socialist Cuba; and the formation of regional associations based on cooperation and solidarity, culminating in the formation in 2010 of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States. On a global level, signs of the renewal include the retaking of the radical Third World agenda by the Non-Aligned Movement and the G-77 plus China.
(4) The attack of the renewed Third World project by the global powers. The global powers correctly perceive the radical Third World project of social and national liberation as a threat to the neocolonial world-system. They therefore seek to destroy it through economic and diplomatic support of the accommodationist sector, interference in political affairs, economic warfare, and ideological manipulation.
(5) Subtle Eurocentrism of the Left in the North. Although Leftist academics, intellectuals and activists of the North criticize the imperialist and interventionist policies of the powerful nations, many do not fully embrace the Third World project of national and social liberation. The Left tends not to engage in personal encounter with the Third World movements and the writings and speeches of its intellectuals and charismatic leaders, seeking to discern from them insights into the structures and dynamics of the neocolonial world-system and the possibilities for the creation of a more just, democratic and sustainable world-system.
The twenty-three posts in this series on the Third World project are as follows:
“The significance of the Third World project” 7/19/2016;
“The Third World Project, 1948-79” 7/20/2016;
“The Asian Tigers” 7/21/2016;
“Derailing the Third World project” 7/22/2016;
“Fidel speaks on the global crisis, 1983” 7/25/2016;
“Fidel proposes new global structures, 1983” 7/27/2016;
“IMF & USA attack the Third World project” 7/29/2016;
“The Cuban structural adjustment plan” 8/1/2016;
“Renewal of the Third World project since 1994” 8/2/2016;
“The neocolonial era in Venezuela” 8/3/2016;
“Hugo Chávez Frías” 8/4/2016;
“The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela” 8/5/2016;
“The Chávist presidency of Nicolás Maduro” 8/9/2016;
“The Movement toward Socialism in Bolivia” 8/11/2016;
“The citizen revolution in Ecuador” 9/19/2016;
“The Sandinista Revolution in Nicaragua” 9/20/2016;
“Latin American and Caribbean unity” 9/21/2016;
“The renewal of South-South cooperation” 9/22/2016;
“The spirit of Bandung lives” 9/26/2016;
“The new counterrevolution of the Right” 9/27/2016;
“The subtle Eurocentrism of the Left” 10/3/2016;
“Beyond Eurocentrism” 10/5/2016; and
“The possible and necessary popular coalition” 10/10/2016.
The posts can be found at: http://www.globallearning-cuba.com/blog-umlthe-view-from-the-southuml/category/third-world.
Charles McKelvey
Professor Emeritus
Presbyterian College
Clinton, South Carolina
Section on Political Science from the South
Division of Philosophy and History
University of Havana
Havana, Cuba