The anti-dependence strategy of development : an evaluation of the theories and the strategy with reference to Tanzania 1961-1981

Abstract

This thesis first discusses the views of dependence theorists, focusing on Frank, Amin, Cardoso and dos Santos. Frank asserts that relations of production in Latin America and the rest of the Third World are capitalist, and that capitalism does not generate development in those countries, since it has not done so during the long time it has structurally dominated them. Therefore reforms within this dependence structure will bring neither autonomy nor development. Only a socialist revolution may effect any real change. U n d e rstan d in g the problems of un d e rd ev elo pm en t and dependence in terms of the logic of the worldwide accumulation process, Amin concedes that capitalism can be a source of development in the 'centre' and in the 'periphery', but in reality only a limited and skewed form of development occurs in the latter. This is because of the Third World's limited control over the accumulation process. Only a significant disengagement from current global arrangements of production and distribution can bring permanent benefits. Industrial production of essential goods, as opposed to the export of primary goods, will help greatly but will not be enough. Cardoso argues that although the structure of dependence is primarily economic, it can be changed qualitatively by social forces and political actions. In addition the structure is continually modified according to time and place, and therefore there is no reason to think that it can never change. Though skeptical of current Third World industrialization, he believes that real changes are possible through industrialization, dos Santos sees the inflexibility of social and political, rather than economic forces at both the local and global level as the major obstacles to change, and thus his solution, like that of Frank, focuses on a socio-political revolution. Critics of dependence are also discussed, showing in particular that empiricist critiques of dependence fail to conceptualize the problem, and that others, such as Warren, paint an erroneously rosy picture of capitalist development in the Third World. A particularly interesting critique of dependence through the "merchant capital" thesis of Kay is also rejected, mainly for blaming the problems of Third World development on a form of capital which ceased to operate globally a long time ago, and for ascribing to capitalism only a faultless progressive mission. Some of the critics of dependence, however, remind us all in the process that the vital ingredients required for development are capital and industrialization. This is acknowledged, and it is combined with the awareness within the dependence framework, of global structural constraints which also manifest themselves locally, to map out what anti-dependence programmes may look like. Programs of an anti-dependence strategy may differ from each other, and must be expected to be modified by the circumstances of each country. But they must focus on industrialization, and on a capital goods sector as the vital ingredient in a process of development which undermines dependence. The general measure of achievement for a country pursuing an anti-dependence strategy is whether that country has set in train a process that is reducing dependence and is more likely than not to eliminate it altogether. The pre-independence situation in Tanzania fits the theoretical thesis of the global incorporation and subordination of a Third World country, as well as demonstrating a case of original underdevelopment, which the incorporation did not change and even maintained. In 1961-1966 the Tanzanian leadership and others in society had begun to accumulate some knowledge of the incorporation and subordination. They then took some nationalist economic measures, later perceived as important but inadequate in confronting the unsatisfactory relationship with external economic interests. In 1967 the Tanzanian leadership, which had also been questioning the internal make-up of social relations and the way they were likely to develop in the future, was finally able to translate its ad hoc pre-1967 nationalist economic measures into a coherent statement of intent for changing its relations with external interests, and for confronting the internal social relations. The statement was the Arusha Declaration of February, 1967. Both the statement and the subsidiary or complementary policies subsequent to it reflected not much more than a reaction to years of economic neglect, a frustration with the slow pace of development, and the limitation of decolonization. By being reactive, the policies (the strategy, collectively) could not produce a document covering all important areas of dependence. In time, its ideological accompaniment, Socialism, became the more prominent and acquired a life of its own, thereby affecting the ability to produce a better formulation of some important aspects of the strategy. In later years the strategy was defined in more specific terms in relation to industry, identifying the type of industrialization best suited to the struggle against dependence and underdevelopment, and even following it up with a significant level of implementation. Other aspects of the strategy were not adhered to due to constraints of an economic nature, some predictable from the point of view of theorists of dependence, and some not so predictable. Some constraints merely modified the strategy in its practical application in Tanzania; others proved to be total barriers to aspects of the strategy. Programmes of an anti-dependence nature are difficult to implement, and, at the end of the period under study, there was reason to doubt that the Tanzanian version would continue. Show more