The Gap Between Advanced Northern Countries And Developing Southern Countries

There is an extensive history empirical power, repeatedly and successfully controlling another state or group of people in order to exploit it economically. In Southeast Asia there were 5 colonial powers; the United Kingdom, France, Dutch, America, and Japan, their primary motives for establishing colonies in the region was to get control of trade routes, to get access to the natural resources and raw materials, and the cheap labor, as well as to establish naval and military bases so that they could amass influence in the region. Prior to World War II, a third of the world 's area was colonized by European colonial powers between the 15th and 19th centuries, and another third of the world 's population were in colonies, dependencies, protectorates, or dominions. In this essay, I will focus on the British and French colonization in Southeast Asia. The British-controlled Burma, most of the Malayan peninsula, and Singapore, which was a strategic port and later became a naval base for the British. Meanwhile, the French controlled the adjoining countries of Vietnamese, Cambodia, and Laos, collectively known as French Indochina. This period of colonization in Southeast Asia brought many changes to the regions society, politics, and the economy. For instance, both colonial powers introduced political changes such as introducing a centralized form of government and changes to the justice systems in many of the colonized countries. There were also social impacts resulting from the

Throughout history, there have been many geographic differences between the North and the South that have lead to economic differences between them. Some of these differences, such as the climate differences, have had many effects on the economy in these to regions.

From its establishment until the Civil War, the United States remained divided between the Southern slave states and the Northern free states. This issue became more prominent and problematic as new territories applied for statehood and occasionally tipped the balance of free and slave states. In 1820, the Missouri Compromise established a line at 36 degrees 30 minutes - the northern boundary of Missouri - that allowed slavery south of the boundary line and prohibited it to the north. However, the admission of California as a free state, despite it being divided by the 36°30' line, as well as the establishment of popular sovereignty - the ability of the citizens of the states to vote whether it would be a free or slave state - in Kansas

The American Civil War was the bloodiest war ever in the history of the country. The war which started in February 1861 and ending in the spring of 1865 saw 642,427 Union and 483,026 Confederate soldiers die. The Union consisted of all 6 New England states as well as: New York, California, Nevada, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Oregon, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Iowa. The Confederate states included: Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia. The battle between the North (Union) and South (Confederates) was caused by numerous disagreements and opinions, one of the main reasons being the economic differences between the North and South which lead to insurmountable disagreements about the way the country should be run.

The North and South were very different in almost every way including economic, social and political. The North’s economic was booming and was based on industrial manufacturing. There were more railroad tracks and this would help the North with its trading. The South’s economy was mostly based on cotton and the slaves. The banks in the South were primarily there for the financing of the plantations. These differences would lead to conflict and then to the start of the Civil War.

Many historians view the Civil War as an inevitable consequence of conflicts between the northern and southern states. The northern and southern sections of the United States developed into two divergent societies. The South remained primarily as an agrarian economy and dependent on slaves, while the North became more industrialized. This led to disagreements on the complex issue of slavery. Slavery had become inevitably entwined with the economic development of both sections.

The structures of colonial social formations took a different shape, Using India as a classic example. The resulting structure was neither the unchanged pre-colonial system nor was it identical with that of conventional capitalism. It is properly designated as, I have suggested, a colonial mode of production.

We believe that the economic differences between the North and South were not the main cause of the war. Alternatively, we believe that there were other greater differences between the North and the South that foreshadowed the war, such as slavery. Slavery was a debate between the North and South that grew as the years went on. Slavery was embedded into the countries roots, with slaves being imported into the colonies since the late 1650s. Economic differences had little to no effect on how the North and South began to debate the topic of slavery, as northern abolitionists only had one idea on their mind: ending slavery. So, when you put slavery against economic differences, it does seem like economic differences played a microscopic role in

The economical reason the south wanted to succeed from the nation was the addition to laws that only benefitted the northern states. In the south there was a plantation based economy, this means the economy was solely based on agriculture. In the south they would export there goods, mostly cotton, to other countries and the rest of the United States. In the north the economy was based on industry. This means they would use resources from other places, such as the south for cotton, and create products useable by the rest of the nation and other countries. In 1828 there was a tariff passed on imported goods. A tariff is a tax that is placed on goods from outside countries. This was passed to promote the buying of products in the U.S. In the south

In the beginning of the 1800s, it was kind of easy to tell that the North and the South were not alike since, in the North, slavery was forbidden, while in the South, it was the most important part of the community. As years passed by, differences became more evolved, especially when the North became more industrial, and its economy became a market economy. Though the North and South both have different economies, and different daily lives, they both have similarities.

In the reading, Krasner argues that many of the institutions that have been put into place to ensure that these nations prosper are aiding in the issues that these countries possess. The two institutions that are primarily used as policy tools for dealing with these states are governance assistance and transitional administration.

What effect has decolonization brought? The decolonized nations cope with their own course of action on all fronts - economic, social, political and cultural. Even as they struggle to rid themselves of the shackles of the erstwhile influences, they try to regain touch with their ‘golden past’ and also believe in a brighter future. With centuries of economic exploitation to undo, it does seem to be a daunting task. However, colonial theorists like Frantz Fanon believe that the colony regaining its place in the order, returning to its hierarchic origin is but inevitable.

Most of the developing countries are mired deeply in economical obstacles, which prevent them from development significantly. In order to overcome those embarrassments world’s society struggles to find the efficient solution for poor countries’ economies. Historically, developed countries undertook policy of giving aid to their colonies, afterwards by the end of The Second World War the United States and United Nations embarked the global sponsorship to the developing countries and countries of the Third World due to humanitarian considerations. Since then many other countries have joined in the effort to provide financial aid to lesser developed or poverty ridden countries. But none of those countries that received an aid had experienced a prosperity phase and rapid economic growth.

In the Acemeglu, Johnson and Robinson article, “Institutions as a Fundamental Cause of Long Term Growth”, the authors emphasize how institutions are the main determinant of economic development because stronger institutions allow for more growth in education, security, and health. To observe whether strong institutions determine economic growth it is important to mention the characteristics of a strong institution that allows for fast growth. Strong institutions are able to enforce property rights, a fair judiciary, efficient bureaucracies, intellectual property rights, corporation government bankruptcy laws, and democracy (e.g. “(Lecture 13)”). Going in depth

Why Nations Fail takes an in depth look into why some countries flourish and become rich powerful nations while other countries are left in or reduced to poverty. Throughout this book review I will discuss major arguments and theories used by the authors and how they directly impact international development, keeping in mind that nations are only as strong as their political and economical systems.