Debt, the Nation-State and Theories of the World Economy

Abstract

Recent debates on global development have revealed the existence of three clear and competing perspectives. On the political Left there is the radical school, associated in geography with Harvey, Peet and Blaut (among many others).¹ The main tenet of this school is that capitalism (variously defined) is incapable of promoting the development of the Third World (however defined). Indeed, most radicals believe that a capitalism centred in certain core countries has actively under-developed the periphery by pillage, by colonialism, and by the sort of neo-colonialism now being directed by the transnational corporations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. In their judgement the capitalist world economy (see Lee, Chapter 2.4 and Taylor, Chapter 5.1) is structured by a host of unequal and asymmetrical power relations which work to the disadvantage of the South in terms of trade, aid, finance, industry, agriculture and just about everything else.²