Question 3: The development project

embodied certain assumptions about the process of development, its location, and its future
outcomes. What were these assumptions, and how did they square with, confirm, and or
challenge the world order at that time?

The Development Project:

Assumptions and the World Order

“The old imperialism—exploitation for foreign profit—has no place in our plans. What we
envisage is a program of development based on the concepts of democratic fair dealing.”
- President Harry S. Truman, January 20, 1949 (McMichael, 2017: 45).

While the above proclamation indicates the development project was publicly focused on
equal progress and reflected optimistic intentions, in reality, the development project as an
international program furthered the strength of colonial powers and put the Western world view
world on a pedestal as the ideal and dominant model. The impacts of colonialism gave colonial
powers the resources and tools to shape development in their favour. The development project
thus became a way to make the so called “free world” safe for business for “developed” nations
(McMichael, 2017: 53). In this essay, I will define what the development project is, explore the
assumptions and motivations of the project, before turning to how the project impacted the post-
colonial world order.
The idea of “development” as a global project emerged after the political independence
of the colonial world (McMichael, 2017: 26). The development project took place between the
1940s until the 1970s and embodied many ideas about the world at the time. The project was
simultaneously a “blueprint for the world of nation-states and a strategy for world order”
(McMichael, 2017: 46). The United States was a large proponent for this international project
because after World War II they were eager to expand their markets and the flow of raw
materials (McMichael, 2017: 42). The U.S. saw development as a national enterprise that could
be repeated in a post-colonial world of sovereign states where some nations were “developed”
while others were “developing” (McMichael, 2017: 42).
One of the assumptions of the development project was that some nations are developed,
while others are developing. Colonized nations were defined as developing because they had less
power, infrastructure, different cultural traditions, and a lower gross national product (GNP).
Even the nomenclature of developing versus developed countries sets up a “us” and “them”
relationship where one is superior and the other inferior. This hierarchical relationship was
capitalized on during the development project because “developed” nations had the resources to
dictate the terms of the project. According to McMichael, this application of “development” is
understood as related to predominantly economic development and growing consumption (4).
This strictly economic understanding of development is problematic in the sense that it obscures
inequalities among social groups, fails to capture quality of life and environmental concerns, and
discounts the value of non-monetary activities (Hooks, 2020: Lecture 3: Instituting the
Development Project).
Post-World War II, in the era of decolonialization and the cold war, the world was
divided into three segments: The First World, the Second World, and the Third World
(McMichael, 2017: 43). The First World was the capitalist Western world, the Second World
was the communist Soviet blocs, and the Third World captures the postcolonial nations
(McMichael, 2017: 43). While the development project was multilayered, another assumption
that underpinned the program was the idea that the Westernized way of doing things was
superior. Westernization was promoted in the realms of politics, economics, and culture (Hooks,
2020: Lecture 3: Instituting the Development Project). The United States during the time of the
development project was the most powerful economic state and with this power dictated
development plans (McMichael, 2017: 43).
According to Lecture 2: Development: Theory and Reality (Hooks, 2020), development
required the restoration of capitalist world markets in order to sustain First World wealth, while
providing the opportunity to Third World nations to achieve First World “civilization” and living
standards. The consequences of this program can still be felt today, as the top 1 percent of the
world’s population owns more than 50 percent of global wealth (McMichael, 2017: 14). In terms
of achieving the First World’s living standards, in 2019, almost 80 years after the development
project begun, 821 million people were estimated to be food insecure (Oxfam, 2020: 1).
According to proponents of the development project such as President Truman, the program was
supposed to improve and benefit underdeveloped areas (McMichael, 2017: 44-45), the reality of
our vastly unequal world reflects the failure of the program.

References

Hickel, J. (2017). Aid in reverse: How poor countries develop rich countries. Retrieved October
25, 2020, from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/
2017/jan/14/aid-in-reverse-how-poor-countries-develop-rich-countries

McMichael, P. (2016). Development and Social Change: A Global Perspective. Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE Publications, inc. 

Oxfam (2020). The Hunger Virus: How Covid-19 is Fuelling Hunger in A Hungry World.
Retrieved from https://owl.uwo.ca/access/content/attachment/67b28974-57e8-4a5f-9100-
11961d3a3bdc/Forums/a03da699-b24b-46a3-889d-9942f0be6fbe/mb-the-hunger-virus-
090720-en.pdf

And the failing

*Finish this paragraph and add conclusion*

In conclusion,

This is evidenced in an Oxfam report that 2016 marked the threshold of the top 1 percent of the world's population
owning more than 50 percent of global wealth
  Development required restoring capitalist world markets to sustain First World wealth
through access to strategic natural resources and opportunity for Third World nations
to emulate First World civilization and living standards (Hooks, 2020: Lecture 2:
Development: Theory and Reality)

◦ Westernization promoted in politics, economics and culture, limiting sovereignty

and diversity 

“In the era of decolonization, the world subdivided into three geopolitical segments. These
subdivisions emerged after World War II (1939–1944) during the cold war, dividing the
capitalist Western (First World) from the communist Soviet (Second World) blocs. The Third
World included the postcolonial bloc of nations. Of course, there was considerable inequality
across and within these subdivisions, as well as within their national units.

 across the Cold War divide, involving financial, technological, and military assistance
from the United States and the Soviet Union. In United Nations terms, development was
a timely ideal, as formerly colonized subjects gained political independence, and all
governments were enjoined to implement a human rights-based social contract with their
citizens, even as this ideal was unevenly practiced. This book traces the implementation
of this project,

 Development required restoring capitalist world markets to sustain First World wealth
through access to strategic natural resources and opportunity for Third World nations
to emulate First World civilization and living standards (Hooks, 2020: Lecture 2:
Development: Theory and Reality)
 The development project was multilayered, as national strategies of eco- nomic
growth dovetailed with international multilateral and bilateral assis- tance. The Third
World as a whole was incorporated into a singular project,
 espite national/regional variations in resources, starting point, and ideo- logical
orientation.
 Military and. economic-aid programs shaped the geopolitical contours of the "free
world,;~ integrating Third World countries into the Western orbit. They also shapeq
patterns of development through technological transfer and food subsidi~s to
industrialization programs. Food aid was significant in securing geopolitical alliances,
as well as in reshaping the international division of labor via support of Third World
manufacturing. As develop- ment economists predicted, Third World industrialization
depended on the transfer of rural resources. But this transfer was not confined to
 national arenas, as exports of First World food and agricultural technology consti-
tuted a global rural-urban exchange.
 77-78


Assumptions about nations being developed versus developing:

The development project refers to a program of economic growth across the Cold War
divide that was financed by

Because develop- ment was both a blueprint for the world of nation-states and a strategy for world order,

Eager to reconstruct the post-World War II world to expand markets and the flow of raw mate- rials, the United
States led an international project, inspired by a vision of development as a national enterprise to be repeated across
a world of sovereign states. 42-43 ?

Define the development project:

 The mid-twentieth-century development project (1940s-1970s) was an internationally
orchestrated program of nationally sited economic growth across the Cold War divide,
involving financial, technological, and military assistance from the United States and the
Soviet Union. In United Nations terms, development was a timely ideal, as formerly
colonized subjects gained political independence, and all governments were enjoined to
implement a human rights-based social contract with their citizens, even as this ideal was
unevenly practiced. This book traces the implementation of this project,

Assumptions: There were a variety of assumptions that underpinned the development project
including westernization, modernization, and the ideological conflict between the West and East
Soviet bloc.
◦ Westernization promoted in politics, economics and culture, limiting sovereignty and
diversity lecture 3 (Hooks, 2020: Lecture 3: Instituting the Development Project)
◦ it implies a "development-centrism"-where (idealized Western) development is the term of reference. In
this regard, Wallerstein has argued that given the power hierarchy of the world system, (idealized Western)
development represents a "lodestar," or master concept, of modern social theory.11As such, the privi-
leging of Western-style development denied many other collective/social strategies of sustainability or
improvement practiced by non-Western cul- tures. (7)
o The lesson we may draw from this episode of reform is that neither the resettlement of
peasants nor their integration into monetary relations is always a sustainable substitute for
supporting agroecological methods that preserve natural cycles of regeneration of land,
 water, and biodiver- sity. The assumptions of the development project heavily
discriminated against the survival of peasant culture, as materially impoverished as it
may have seemed. (77)

Impacts on the world order:

such as the destabilization of third world cultural and economic systems.

 noting its partial successes and ultimate failure, in its own terms, to equalize conditions
across the world, and the foreshadowing of its successor, the globalization project, in
laying the foundations of a global market that progressively overshadowed the states
charged with development in the initial post-World War II era. (McMichael, 2017: 21).

Effects on the world order: destabilization of third world cultures and economic systems
The effects of the development project has persisted:
 In 2012, the last year of recorded data, developing countries received a total of $1.3tn,
including all aid, investment, and income from abroad. But that same year some $3.3tn
flowed out of them. In other words, developing countries sent $2tn more to the rest of the
world than they received. (Hickel, 2017

Assumptions of the project: westernization, modernization, linking these to the ideological

conflict between West and East Soviet block

Effects on the world order: destabilization of third world cultures and economic systems
The effects of the development project has persisted:
o In 2012, the last year of recorded data, developing countries received a total of
$1.3tn, including all aid, investment, and income from abroad. But that same year
some $3.3tn flowed out of them. In other words, developing countries sent $2tn
more to the rest of the world than they received. (Hickel, 2017).

— Cold War Rise of U.S.-centered world economy

◦ Military and economic largesse secured informal empire
◦ Freedom of enterprise
◦ U.S. Dollar as international currency
 – U.S. Federal Reserve System led central banks in regulating international
monetary system
◦ Military and financial aid assisted Third World national development targets

Conclusions:
.

´ Third World governments’ development policies systematically privileged urban interests

´ expressed a modernist belief in peasant redundancy
´ Growing rural poverty and marginalization stimulated the land reform movement
´ U.S. Alliance for Progress (1961) Program coordinated nationally-planned agrarian
reform across Latin America
´ to undercut insurgencies
´ to stabilize rural populations via a U.S.-inspired family farming model
week 4: development project: international framework

"development" emerged as a comparative

construct, in context of European colonization of the non-European

world.

(McMichael, 2017: 21).

It became so only in the mid-twentieth century, as newly independent governments embraced development as an
antidote to colonialism, with varying success. -21

— A political and intellectual response to world conditions at time of decolonization

— Understood social change as economic
— Nation-State as framework
◦ Territorially defined political systems based on 19th century European
government-citizen relationship
◦ Arbitrary boundaries drawn in Africa
– In spite of African anti-colonialists who advocated pan-African federalism
– Arbitrarily drawn borders separated peoples and created states divided by
conflict
— Economic Growth
◦ Objective of 1945 UN Charter was “rising standard of living,” measured by gross
national product (GNP) or national average of per capita income
— Introduction of market system
◦ Need to overcome “traditional obstacles,” i.e., wealth sharing, cooperative labor
◦ Solution: Introduce private property and accumulation of wealth
 ◦ Required introduction of banking, accounting, education, stock markets, legal
systems, and public infrastructure
— Both Cold War blocs understood development as destiny
◦ West:
– Goal of free-enterprise capitalism
– Jeremy Bentham’s utilitarian philosophy of common good arising from
pursuit of individual self-interest
◦ Communist bloc:
– Goal of central planning and abolition of private property
– Karl Marx’s collectivist “from each according to their ability, and to each
according to their needs.”
— Idea of development emerged during colonial era
— Colonialism disorganized non-European societies
◦ Reconstructed labor systems toward specialized, ecologically degrading, export
production
◦ Disorganized subjects’ social psychology
— European liberal discourse on rights fueled anti-colonial movements
— The Development Project
◦ A plan for national political-economic development
◦ Plan to make the “free world” safe for business
◦ Westernization promoted in politics, economics and culture, limiting sovereignty
and diversity 

References

Hickel, J. (2017). Aid in reverse: How poor countries develop rich countries. Retrieved October
25, 2020, from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/
2017/jan/14/aid-in-reverse-how-poor-countries-develop-rich-countries

McMichael, P. (2016). Development and Social Change: A Global Perspective. Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE Publications, inc. 

Oxfam (2020). The Hunger Virus: How Covid-19 is Fuelling Hunger in A Hungry World.
Retrieved from https://owl.uwo.ca/access/content/attachment/67b28974-57e8-4a5f-9100-
11961d3a3bdc/Forums/a03da699-b24b-46a3-889d-9942f0be6fbe/mb-the-hunger-virus-
090720-en.pdf

Development: discontent with the here and now

“developing” nations are not underdeveloped: they are overexploited.