What do the colonialism, development and globalization projects have in
common and how are they different from one another? Describe an
alternative global project that could lead to/have led to a more equal world.
[Think about how you would answer this question .What, in general, do you think
would be needed to answer this question well? What
examples/arguments/texts/stories would you draw on to support your answer?]
Answer 1 [Is this a convincing argument? What elements in it work, work well, or
don’t work at all? What elements are missing? What could have been done to
improve this answer? What grade would you give it?]
In class, we were involved in 3 key projects that involved colonialism, development
and globalism/globalization. Through several research and time spent on these
projects we came to realize some common things distinguished between these 3
projects. First, we learn that in some way some how they inter connect with each
through the world aspect such as countries. In all countries throughout the world no
matter what, had to go through some sort of development in order for the country to
develop to where it is today. Each or several countries have gone through some sort
of colonialism where physical or psychological force of one culture by another
through some military conquest of territory of stereotyping the relations between
tow cultures (McMichael, pg. 27). Each country or nation came through the
realization of global development either through new class, gender, race, and ethnic
inequalities. Also these 3 projects have in common the ability to improve
humankind that in some sort of way we may be able to see improvement in past
daily lives through economic growth, exchanged manufactured goods, and free
markets. All 3 projects are different from each other by the way their actions take
place in the way countries are distinguished. Development was done physically with
the way things were built to improve the living and working conditions of
humans/citizens. Globalization dealt with the way things were more globally
developed through strategies such as the privatizing of public functions and freeing
of the markets and labor. This was more vocally done that hands on like
development. Colonization was different from these two through more of
psychological force or way to develop countries through stereotyping. A global
project that may lead to a more equal world would be to have one equal dollar
around the world which would be able to make living conditions a little bit better
since people would be working for almost the same type of currency, maybe not as
much but the dollar would be equal.
Answer 2 [Is this a convincing argument? What elements in it work, work well, or
don’t work at all? What elements is it missing? What could have been done to
improve this answer?]
The major similarity and common reason for the dominance of colonialism,
development, and globalization is based on ability of each of the projects to infect
this common political and economic discourse of powerful industrialized nations. In
essence, since the beginnings of colonialism, as we see in the “Columbus Coyote
Story”, the common value among colonial powers was to expand economically as
well as influentially through religion. While not exactly the same, development
stemmed from similar roots in that the first and second worlds were ultimately
looking to expand their influence into other state as a means of competing against
one another. The common discourse between these projects and that of
globalization is that powerful nations were trying to profit and grow by exploiting
other people. One way in which these projects differ, however, is in the way in which
they were legitimated. For example, as we see in Equiano’s story as well as other
colonialist ideas, slavery, cultural genocide, and monoculture farming were not
justified by encouraging growth of different area, but rather through notions such as
manifest destiny, and the need to expand Christianity. Development and
globalization, however, are defined by the promise for “developing” people that
“they will have a chance of becoming rich themselves (McMichael, 2009, p. 231).
Despite the discrepancy between “developing” and “developed” nations, this
justification for both development and globalization ultimately tries to take the poor
economic, political and social conditions and tell people that the projects are in
place to make them better.
An alternative global project that could lead to a more equal world is found
aptly in the case study discussing the “cultural affirmation” of the Andean people. In
essence, rather than having external and disengaged
nations/organizations/companies, try and decide the best method of growth, having
local groups use local cultures to develop in a manner that is regionally appropriate
is much more productive. Ultimately, as Sir Ken Robinson notes in his (2006) TED
TALK, Western Culture as taken it upon itself to develop in an “industrialist” manner
and he uses the example of education saying that “education is based on and
industrial model” and in essence it kills creativity. Similarly, colonialism,
development and globalization kill(ed) the creativity of local cultures. and in order
to establish a more equal society, it is imperative to adopt a more cospolitan idea of
development wherein local culture grows in a natural manner.