by A critical uncertainty affecting the timing of After Capitalism is whether it can happen locally and regionally, or must it be global from the outset? I think we’d agree it should be global, but….
the developed world’s track recording of helping the developing world is not great.
I thought it would be helpful to revisit some history on developed and developing world relationships. My son (a super-aware undergrad) suggested a classic he had just finished: How Europe Underdeveloped Africa by Walter Rodney.
The current criticism of capitalism is not new. Rodney’s 1972 book observed: “at the moment capitalism stands in the path of further human social development.” What’s changed today is that it’s not just Marxists who are questioning it.
The gist of the book is that slavery and then colonialism/post-colonialism have rigged the development game in favor of the developed at the expense of the developing. The weaker of two societies (i.e., the one with less economic capacity) is bound to be adversely affected — and the bigger the gap between the two societies concerned the more detrimental are the consequences. Even well-intentioned aid efforts end up reinforcing the inequitable relationship.
Rodney makes the case going back several centuries up to the 1970s. While it may be fair to say improvements have been made in the developed-developing world, it is certainly still an enormous problem.
What can we “After Capitalists,” do? I’ll have more to say about this as I work my way through some more Ken Wilber. Perhaps I can tease you in suggesting that the solution may involve the jump to second-tier thinking, which fans of Spiral Dynamics and Integral Futures might recognize. – Andy Hines
[…] teased the global question a few years ago. I reframed the work to be more globally representative. But I might be accused […]