Re: M-TH: Development

[Sam Pawlett <rsp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mario Jose de Lima wrote:
>
> Sam
>
> What you think about Colin Leys?
>

 Hi, i think his books on Britain and his *Underdevelopment in Kenya*
are very good, the latter a classic of dependency theory. His essays on
development are a mixed bag. The critiques of modernization and rational
choice are masterful polemics. His essay on dependency theory is
disgraceful. He gives this big sweeping critique of dependency theory
yet only mentions 1 paper by Cardoso, 1 book by Norman Girvan and 2
books by Frank. There are hundreds of dependency theorists, most of whom
have never been translated into English.
  The more empirical stuff on Africa is interesting, trying to steer a
path between the 'stagnationists' (development in Africa is not possible
under capitalism) and the modernizers/(Living)Marxists who think that if
only the productive forces are unleashed, presto! Sudan becomes Swedan.
He thinks that capitalist development has been impeded by the lack of a
bourgeoise in Africa to carry out the necessary tasks of accumulation
and there is a  lack of a proletariat to make socialism. 'The devil and
the deep blue sea' so to speak. He might be right but that type of
thinking is by no means original and certainly isn't constructive.
  I read *Africa's Choices* by Michael Barratt Brown not too long ago.
I'm surprised at just how pessimistic many of the left development
economists have become with regards to Africa. Both Brown and to some
extent Susan George now think the World Bank is really the only option.
Its sort of like when they talk about Peru. Everything has been tried
and failed including neo-liberal capitalism. This pessimism is what
leads to Islamic fundamentalism, Shining Path and other millenarian
tendencies as well as the romantic yearning for an idyllic past that
Basil Davidson sometimes falls into. I'll go with Samir Amin on Africa.

Sam Pawlett