The Expansion Of Capitalism Has Hindered The Developing Countries Of Asia, Africa And Latin America

Assess the significance of three factors which might limit economic development in the developing countries.

In the late 1800’s Europeans took over Africa, took their resources,enslaving the Africans, and changed the course of history. The Europeans took over Africa, which is called The Scramble For Africa, in 1884-1914. The Europeans took over because Africa was rich in raw materials, they wanted power, and they thought their culture was superior. The driving force behind imperialism was need for resources, political competition, and technological advances. One driving force behind imperialism was need for natural resources. Document E uses a bar graph to show imports and exports in 1854, and 1900 between Great Britain and South Saharan Africa. Great Britain made 3 million British pounds in 1854, and 21

Some believe that Capitalism is the cause for much of the poverty in the nation today, but any hardcore capitalist will tell you that capitalism inherited poverty, and far from being a cause of poverty, it is the only solution.

Assess the significance of three factors which might limit economic development in the developing countries.

There are many ways in which Africa has been exploited by the international world historically. One way was through slavery. From when the first Portuguese ships arrived on west African shores in 1444 until 1885, the transatlantic slave trade has dominated the oceans for 440 years. Europeans set up the triangular trading system that exchanged enslaved Africans and plantation produce for European goods. Exploitation began with wars that were used to obtain slaves, and this is how the strongest and most fit Africans were exported out of their homeland. The slave trade caused the forced removal of millions of Africans, many who were skilled tradesmen and people with a variety of occupations. African societies became weak without them. Another common way Africa was taken advantage of was by colonization. After America had been thoroughly discovered and Native Americans had been pushed off their land, Africa became the next frontier. Colonization in the 19th century was for the sole and selfish purpose of benefiting other countries. Europeans literally “drew the map of Africa to divide and conquer it.” Areas of Africa that were unrightfully placed under direct control of the government became colonies. The colonies were actually extensions of European countries, easily gave Europeans agricultural and mineral resources at an extremely cheap price, and were the markets for manufactured goods from Europe. Africans in these colonies were not allowed to manufacture in their own

Africa was one of the main targets, in this race for land, and by the early twentieth century, most of Africa had been colonized by Europe. “Britain, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Portugal, and Spain were competing for power within European power politics”. Thus, acquiring land, was one way for them to show off how much power they really had. But all this colonization without problems, since the industrialization was such a large part of this change, social problems such as unemployment, poverty, homelessness, etc. grew bigger because there wasn’t a place for these people in the new industrializing world. One way some

Although there were institutions that were set to ensure that there were equitable allocation of colonies during the scramble and partition for Africa and Asia a keen look reveals that some countries might have conspired against the others so as to increase their wealth. Prior to the World War 1 due to the increased rates of industrialization, there was more demand for resources and labor for this industries and the main source of both was from Africa, this mean that despite any talk that were to be held among the colonizing countries, each wanted more territory so as to meet their own individualized demands (Etienne et al 16). As it is

Africa was colonized in the 1870s, an era of colonization and European capitalism. At this time period, land was more powerful than any type of currency. (“European Colonization of Africa and Asia”). For some countries in Europe, like Britain, getting profitable regions of Africa meant land, raw materials, and a legacy of a world power.

The Enigma of Capital and the Crisis of Capitalism is a forum for author David Harvey to voice his concerns on the contemporary global capitalist model. As a Marxist geographer and anthropologist, Harvey analyzes modern capitalism through a lens of skepticism that results in a scathing renunciation of the capitalist goals of perpetual accumulation and creative destruction. Harvey argues that in a world constrained by scarce resources and burgeoning social barriers, the capitalist process produces a strange dynamic that oscillates between periods of crisis and boom (40). In the end the capitalist may be able to hedge against her losses, but the vast majority of the population will wallow in the doldrums, enslaved by the power of capital and unable to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Such is the extent of the problem we face in the wake of the Great Recession. The economy continues to grow modestly, while median household income shrinks (Noss 2). The capitalists are reloading once again at the expense of Main Street. As Harvey points out, there is a great need to reevaluate of our views of modern capitalism. The Enigma of Capital is just a starting point.

The dominating capitalist ideology from superpowers has led to extreme inequalities between core and peripheral nations, which has resulted in an unstable relationship with the developing world. Neocolonialism is a geopolitical practice in which a superpower perpetuates its economic and political hegemony on underdeveloped nations. This indirect and ‘disguised’ Imperialism has continued in variable degrees between colonial powers and peripheral regions including Asia, Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America.

Africa has in fact in its midst a hard core of bourgeoisie who are analogous to colonists and settlers in that they live in positions of privilege-a small, selfish, money-minded reactionary minority among vast masses of exploited and oppressed people. . . Their survival depends on foreign support (Class 12)

Capitalism appears to satisfy the ‘need’ for power and acquisition above all else, and the evidence is seen in the growth of global wealth, which certainly does not amount to equal wealth. The

With the end of the slave trade and the beginning of “legitimate trade,” European countries began to set up forts and colonies along the coasts of Africa. These forts and colonies began to nibble at the continent bit by bit; within thirty years, almost the entire continent had been claimed by colonial powers. Since there was a rise in nationalism among European countries, Africa provided these colonizers with their own market to produce raw materials and goods that would be used to benefit Europe’s Industrial Revolution. And so, with the increasing need for raw materials and a new market the ‘Scramble for Africa’ brought political as well as economic impacts to the continent. The main goal of these colonizers were to exploit African

Globalization is the proximate and multidimensional set of political, economic, social, and technological integration around the globe. The increasing interconnectedness among countries can be seen through the prism of globalization. Essentially, the lives of people living in distant cities like Bangalore and Silicon Valley are brought closer as a result of this phenomenon. Drivers of this adjacent include; the expansion of trade, technological exchange, labor movement and investments (Stearns 2017). The discourse of globalization encompasses several multidisciplinary themes. The paper, however, concentrates on the economic factors, “which, entails the closer economic integration of countries of the world through increased flow of goods, services, capital and even labor.” (Stiglitz 2007: 4). The paper focuses on economic globalization and elucidates whether the globalization has reduced poverty and inequality or had reproduced the reversed implications. Meanwhile, the paper reveals if the developing world has benefited from the set. This seems to be the central question that policymakers, development economists, and politicians have been grappling with for years. The paper is presented in three parts. Part one reflects on the historical context of the problem statement. The second part compiles literature and juxtaposes with cases to corroborate the globalization-poverty-inequality triangle. Finally, the conclusion represents the author’s viewpoint on the

Indeed, for many people in Latin America and Africa, globalization was merely a new, more attractive label, for the old imperialism, or worse - for a form of re-colonization. The left-wing reaction sweeping Latin America, from Mexico to Argentina, is a direct consequence of the fault lines opened by policies designed to benefit Wall Street, not the people in the streets of Asmara, Nairobi or