The Influence of W W Rostow and Neo-Liberalism - Essay Example

Neo-Liberalism And The Thoughts Rostow By Insert Name Institution Instructor Date Neo-Liberalism And The Thoughts Rostow Introduction Walt Whitman Rostow, the famous US economists and political scientists, served as the national security advisor in the Lyndon Johnson Administration between the first day of April 1966 and the 20th day of January 1969. Walt Whitman Rostow was the seventh person to hold this important position in the government of the united states. Born on the 7th day of October 1916, Walt Whitman Rostow grew to be the most prominent anti-communist economist who believed in capitalism and free enterprise. Walt Whitman Rostow is known for the prominent role he played in advocating for the involvement of the UaS in the Vietnamese war (Nafziger & Nafziger 2005). The war which was a continuation of the cold war, saw communist countries rise to oppose capitalism in the country, Vietnam. Walt Whitman Rostow is also known for the role he played in shaping the US foreign policy in South East Asia. When he died in the year 2003, the US lost a great economist and a significant political theorist whose impact on US politics was heavily felt in the 1960s. The theories and concepts explained by Walt Whitman Rostow with regard to development are so much aligned with neo-liberalism – a concept that is so much opposed to the communist manifesto as explained by Karl Marx. Neo-liberalism, a concept associated with the communist west, explains why different countries have achieved differential levels of development. This paper is a comprehensive explanation of the extent to which the theories and contention of Walt Whitman Rostow, and then neo-liberalism adequately explain why development has not occurred in many Majority world countries.  An Overview of Neo-Liberalism The term neo-liberalism has its roots in Germany, having been coined by scholar Alexander Rustow in the year 1938. Neo-liberalism simply refers to a new form of liberalism. It is referred to as new because, essentially, there is an old form of liberalism. In the year 1776, renowned economist Adams smith and other like minded thinkers came up with liberal principles, which in their views, were the most effective way of shaping the economy. One integral feature of the principles that Adams and others came up with was the proposal that the government was not supposed to interfere with commerce and business endeavors. Essentially, therefore, they advocated for an economy that could be controlled through the forces of demand and supply. This means that the economists wanted an economy with not barriers such as tariffs and taxation procedures. After the recession of the seventies, a new form of liberalism associated with capitalism started picking up the pace, and gaining ground internationally. The encouragement of the spreading of neo-liberalism can be attributed to the effects of the post cold war period. Essentially, the cold war was about communism versus capitalism. Catalyzed by the great recession of the seventies, neo-liberalism crept into most parts of the developing world amid tremendous aid from the west. Capitalism took root in the developing world, as the poor and weak post colonial governments could not sustain communism. Essentially therefore, the spread of Neo-liberalism in the developing world can be attributed to western dominance and globalism. Globalization is one of the forces modifying the way things are done in the world today. Neo-liberalism has had many notable effects on the cities of developing nations in terms of life, family structure, society and politics. Talking of society, Neo-liberalism in world cities has widened the gap between the rich and the poor. Fundamentally, this is because the market forces are never in favor of social equality. This is why the developing countries are characterized by extremely rich suburbs and pitiable slums. South Africa, for instance, has the most magnificent cities in Africa, such as Johannesburg. Similarly, it houses the largest slum in the world – Soweto. Neo-liberalism has instigated a situation where the income of the average person is low. This has affected the family structure in the sense that people have to raise smaller families for sustainability purposes. Neo-liberalism has increased the levels of unemployment in developing nations – a situation that has precipitated social evils such as prostitution and crimes such as mugging (Nafziger & Nafziger 2005). This has caused the government to intervene by providing security and calling for mass community policing. Neo-liberalism has seen the private sector dominating most sectors of the economy, causing such public utilities as hospitals and schools to become inaccessible to the poor, especially the well performing private schools. Neo-liberalism emphasizes economic, political and individual independence. However, this has not been the case in most parts of the developing world. The governments of most developing countries realize that they cannot leave the provision of such public goods as roads to the private sector (Nafziger & Nafziger 2005). As such, they have had to intervene, by providing such goods as roads and general infrastructure. Similarly, the city businesses are regulated by taxation through the relevant revenue bodies, local governments and the central government. The governments own commercial buildings within the major cities, and are shareholders in many big organizations. As such, Neo-liberalism has some aspects of government interference – and substantial participation. Neoliberal approaches explain why most countries have not sufficiently developed. Today, it is a matter of common knowledge that the western countries are, on average more developed than the eastern countries. The explanation is simple – different extents of neo-liberalism adoption. The western countries, right after the Second World War went the capitalism way. On the contrary, the eastern powers opted for the infamous communism – a political and economic philosophy that saw the governments take center stage in controlling public goods and capital resources. The different rates at which the countries developed can as well be explained through the theories and contentions of Rostow. According to Rostow, development is a five step process, which entails gradual moves from one stage to another. Rostow’s Five Step Process According to Rostow, development of countries follows the steps: traditional society, pre-conditions for take off, take off, drive to maturity, age of high mass consumption . The traditional society The traditional society is a step that prominently describes a country at the elementary stages of development. The stage is prominently associated with the basic sectors at their modest forms. For instance, the country may be characterized by simple agriculture, hunting and gathering as well as fishing. Worth noting is that at this stage of development, the society executes this economic activity using the most elementary methods. For instance the community exercises farming using the basic tools such as the hand tools. Fishing is done using elementary equipment such as the hand driven boats. At this stage, technology is at its minimum. Due to the prominent presence of elementary activities and the use of poor technology, the society is static and development is at a standstill, for both individuals and the society as a whole. Precondition for take off At this stage, external demand for the products of the elementary economic activities starts to instigate economic changes. The demand for raw materials at this stage comes from the developed countries and societies. The society at this stage adopts more productive economic activities. The most prominent example is the adoption of ore productive large scale agriculture. This stage is associated with enhanced investments that are aimed at improving production. This may include the use of irrigation through the building of canals and other relevant equipment. Unlike the initial stage, this stage is associated with the use of a little technology. Social change is evident at this point, with structures marking clear boundaries among the various classes in the society. Mobility is also noticeable at this level, especially at the individual level. National identity and the essence of shared economic interests begin to take root. The take off This scale is characterized by a significant increase in the degree of industrialization and manufacturing. Manufacturing takes place for goods that are meant for both local and international consumption. At this juncture, the battle between the secondary and the primary sector shifts gears in favor of the secondary sector. The manufacturing sector, for instance, exceeds the role of agriculture. This can best be explained through the illustration of the industrial revolution in Great Britain. Drive to maturity The main feature of this stage of development is diversification of industry. The industries are diversified from say, clothes and garments to embrace other things such as electronics and so on. The manufacturing concerns change from investment driven to the making of consumer durables for domestic consumption. This is marked by a shift from the capital goods to the consumer goods(Gillespie & Nicholson, 2005).The stage is as well characterized by the rapid development and expansion of infrastructure, especially the transport and communication systems. The drive to maturity is characterized by extensive investment in social infrastructure. This includes schools, hospitals, universities and recreation sites. The age of high mass consumption This is the stage that describes the most developed nations in the world today. Such countries as Australia and the united states are at this developmental stage. This stage is characterized by a situation where the industrial sector exceeds the primary sector. The main feature of this stage is the widespread and normative purchase and consumption of high value goods such as expensive electronics and automobiles. The average consumer at this level has adequate disposable income, and not just the elementary basic needs. The combination of neo-liberalism ideas and the contentions of Rostwo explain why different countries were not able to develop to equal extents. They do so because they imply that communism, or socialism is not a good economic policy. They tend to uphold capitalism because, despite the above discussed negatives of neo-liberalism, capitalism creates a sense of competition, which attracts creativity and innovation – forces that cause the advancements I technology. Such advancements create a gap between the rich and the poor nations. The differences between communism and capitalism explain the differential development levels. The history of communism and capitalism Social scientists argue that, capitalism was born a brutal concept. Conversely, the more equitable communism is a political concept that is naturally associated with some form of social equality. The clash between communism and socialism was most pronounced in the post world war II period. During the end times of the World War II, the United States of America and the Soviet Union, then popularly referred as the USSR, had emerged as equal but opposite superpowers – opposite in the sense that they supported different political and economic ideologies (Gillespie & Nicholson, 2005). With the United States upholding capitalism and the USSR communism, the two giants viewed one another as enemies – at least in the ideological sense. As a result, the two nations engage one another in a race for military might. This gave birth to the nuclear weapons, which market the epitome of the enmity between the two superpowers. Apparently, the two could not engage one another in a war for the fear of massive destruction by the nuclear weapons (Lee, 2013). As such, they found a new tactic of engaging one another, and this was the use of other countries, usually the developing economies such as Vietnam. Countries in the global world are divided in different ways, but the most striking divide is seen in collectivism mentality versus those with individualistic mentality. The division goes deeper than economics; as people’s perception of the world. Individualism is described as a tendency for people to look after their immediate family and themselves only. Collectivism is a tendency for people to belong to collectives or groups, and to look after each other in exchange for loyalties.In this argumentative essay I will support the idea of collective values preferable to individualistic values in a capitalist society. A capitalist society is the one with corporate or private ownership of capital goods. In a capitalist economy, the government control is very minimal, in this sense investors are free to sell, distribute, and buy goods and services with the price established through the demand and supply of goods in the free market (Cudd & Holmstrom, 2001, p. 293). In a capitalist society the main elements include competitive markets, price system and capital accumulation. From the historical past, capitalisms have existed in various forms of the government, in many different cultures and different places. Considering the fact that capitalism can take different forms depending on the perception taken by those applying its concepts, capitalism in action can take or rather align its actions along either individualism or collectivism (Kim, 1995, p.9). Collectivism is a theory that in practice views the group as the essential unit of economic, social and political concern (Archer, 1995, p.33). In the modern capitalist society where collectivism is profoundly functional, the claims of groups and associations normally supersede the individual claims. Apparently, a collectivist society practicing capitalism view the society as above all the individual members in the society, the major collective forms include race, tribe, and state. A modern capitalist society on the other hand that applies the use of individualism concepts base its actions on individual gains. Basically individualism is the act or rather a belief that everyone in the society ought to stand by himself or herself, in this sense he or she should support and take care of themselves (Giddens, 1971, p.240). In practice, a collectivist culture in the modern capitalist society considers the needs of an individual rather than a group as compared to the collective society. By reflecting on the applications of collective and individualism concepts in the contemporary capitalist society, this paper will present arguments on how a modern capitalist society ought to organize itself by aligning its actions along individualism concepts rather than the collective notions. For the modern capitalist society to align its concepts based on individualism, individuals will have the freedom and pride in working towards achieving their own personal gains (Massengill, 2013, p.35). For instance, employees are expected to defend their rights whenever possible. Considering that in a capitalist society the poor are more likely to be oppressed by the rich, the rich will do anything to gain private wealth without considering the consequences of their actions to other particularly the poor. In essence, the rich will overwork the poor and mistreat them with the aim of gaining personal wealth. The modern capitalist society ought to create a culture where the society has profoundly established rights and every citizen has rights that cannot be violated or overstepped in any way by the government, group or any individual (Shain, 2007, p.22). Individual success ought to be paramount. There should be minimal consideration to groups or family over aspirations. For the modern capitalist society to establish itself base on individual values rather than the collective values, the culture of any group ought to be off no consideration, individuals should not be confined to some specific cultural practices, in contrast, they should be given the necessary freedom of choosing any a culture or way of life they aspire to have. The modern capitalist society should not despise anyone who adopts his or her own way of dressing, fashion, and lifestyle, instead they should give every individual the freedom to do what they thinks it’s best for them. Collectivism and individualism Studies by Donald Hirsch also indicate that collectivism can be an important aspect in Education, poverty overcoming challenges. His study shows that the whites are mostly low achievers in their education. Those of the Afro- Caribbean origin are the least successful as those of Indian and Chinese origins are successful in avoidance of low achievement. According to him if a white student is on free meals; this can strongly predict low achievement for the student compared to other races. He further indicates that once the white student starts under- achieving, they are most likely to persist I the under- achievement. This study indicates that white children face difficulty in overcoming poverty and other negative effects difficulties. The research shows that the difficulty is caused by difference in confidence and the relationship between other adults and the children. Adults need to be involved in encouraging the child and showing them that education is important, and they can thrive in the system. This shows collectivism on part of the parents and the child to achieve performance by the student. Findings in the research show that giving attention to small groups is important. This shows the negativity of individualism as it creates loneliness, because teachers will tend to think that private life of the child is not part of his or her work. Skilled staff is also crucial in talking to the child in negotiation rather than giving instructions(Gillespie & Nicholson, 2005).This shows collectivism, as they have to reach a consensus unlike individualism where instructions would just have been given. The study also shows that activities outside school are crucial in building the confidence of the child. These activities are helpful in building a relationship with the instructors and other children. The studies further shows that children from better backgrounds go to private school, engage in out-of school activities. Students from poor backgrounds do not participate in out- of school activities. This affects their formal learning in school. In Hirsch’s research, homework was also an issue which affected those who are disadvantaged; this is because disadvantaged most of them got help from a parent on a regular basis. On the contrary, better-off-children were helped by their parents, stretching their thinking and speaking skills. The research shows that what happens in the children’s life is also reflected in their classroom work. Activities inside and outside the school contribute to the child’s education either positively or negatively. In conclusion, it is clear that, from the foregoing, the level of development of a country or any society depends greatly on whether the country adopts a collectivist or an individualistic approach. Clearly, even the education system of a country will affect the extent to which the country is developed. Apparently, almost all developed nations have capitalistic structures. Such structures create some form of competition, which leads to creativity and innovativeness that boost development. Notably, neo; iberalism and the contentions of Rostwo uphold capitalism. The main reason why other countries have not developed is because communism wants people to move as a group. Considering group dynamics, moving from one stage to another becomes a big problem. Reference List Lee, S. W. (2013). HIST 481-01, Cold War in East Asia, Spring 2013. Cudd, A. E., & Holmstrom, N. (2011). Capitalism, For and Against: a Feminist Debate. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Kim, U. (1995). Individualism and collectivism: a psychological, cultural and ecological analysis. Copenhagen, NIAS Archer, M. S. (1995). Realist social theory: the morphogenetic approach. Cambridge [u.a.], Cambridge Univ. Press. Giddens, A. (1971). Capitalism and modern social theory: an analysis of the writings of Marx, Durkheim and Max Weber. Cambridge [U.K.], University Press. Shain, B. A. (2007). The nature of rights at the American founding and beyond. Charlottesville, University of Virginia Press. Nafziger, E. W., & Nafziger, E. W. (2005). Economic development. New York: Cambridge University Press. Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press Nafziger, E. W., & Nafziger, E. W. (2005). Economic development. New York: Cambridge University Press. Massengill, R. P. (2013). Wal-Mart wars: moral populism in the twenty-first century. Read More