The neo-colonialism theory is a theory that was developed in the 1970s during decolonization to explain why Third World countries were not developing further. Even though decolonization was occurring, it was mostly just a ruse because neo-colonialism was still occurring under the surface. Through this, the capitalist first world was holding the third world back through exploitation. Most of this exploitation came from Multi-National Corporations (MNCs).
Multi-National Corporations are the main cause of neo-colonialism. MNCs are corporations that are headquartered in one country but do business in many other countries. These corporations are very large, powerful, and industrial; some even have GDPs that are greater than individual countries. MNCs purposely drive countries under so the countries they are located in can’t further develop. These corporations are just there to make as much profit as possible in as little time as possible. They also tend to pull allegiance away from the country it is in to the MNC itself causing people to feel more loyal to the MNC than the country itself and sometimes even immigrate to the MNCs headquarters.
Some argue that MNCs actually encourage local business to flourish by encouraging competition, but most local business could never possible compete with these giant corporations. People also argue that they provide technology that wouldn’t be there otherwise that aid their economic development. Even though they may now have this technology, local business still are in no shape to compete with these companies that have so many choices at such low cost. Many defenders of MNCs also argue that they are truly part of the solution for third world countries, while the third world countries disagree bec...
... middle of paper ...
... of thought that will truly apply is now globalism. The theory was developed to fill the void that realism and idealism didn’t quite fill as they are older theories. However, I do believe that the three schools of thought can work together in our world politics, just like ideas do now. While I do think globalism fits best; I really do not think that we will ever have one school of thought that truly explains the way world politics work because they all are so different. We can take different aspects from the three to work together in order to cater the schools of thought to what we need at the time. Because even though globalism does help with the technology we have now, sometimes it is necessary to have the thoughts of needing war when it comes down to it (realism) as well as working toward world government to aid nation states working with each other (idealists).
Following the globalization, many companies in developed countries move factories to developing nations. As a multinational company, there is at least one facility in one country other than its home country. Those companies have offices and factories in different countries and usually have a centralized head office in their home country. Advocates of multinationals say they create jobs and wealth. And multinationals can improve technology in developing countries, which are in need of this. On the other hand, critics say multinational companies often barely pay employees enough to live on in developing countries, and it is unethical to pay cheap wages.
Post-colonialism is a discourse draped in history. In one point in time or another, European colonialism dominated most non-European lands since the end of the Renaissance. Naturally, colonialists depicted the cultures of non-Europeans incorrectly and inferior. Traditionally, the canon has misappropriated and misrepresented these cultures, but also the Western academia has yet to teach us the valuable and basic lessons that allow true representations to develop. Partly in response, Post-colonialism arose. Though this term is a broad one, Post-colonialists generally agree on certain key principles. They understand that colonialism exploits the dominated people or country in one way or another, evoking inequalities. Examples of past inequalities include “genocide, economic exploitation, cultural decimation and political exclusion…” (Loomba 9-10). They abhor traditional colonialism but also believe that every people, through the context of their own cultures, have something to contribute to our understanding of human nature (Loomba 1-20). This is the theme that Lewis prescribes in his, self described, “satirical fantasy”, Out of the Silent Planet (Of Other 77).
Throughout history, many powerful nations interfered with nations that were weaker than they were. This form of sabotaging a nation is economic, political or cultural life is called as imperialism. Imperialism is often separated into two sects. The first one is old imperialism, which was the period from the 1500s to the 1800s, where European nation started to colonize many areas such as the Americas, and parts of Southeast Asia. On the other hand, the new imperialism was the period between the years “1870-1914”, where Europe became more focused on expanding their land into Asia and Africa. Imperialism had many pros and cons. In addition, it also had many causes led by the feeling of nationalism.
Post-colonialism expresses the opposite idea of colonialism. Hence, post-colonialism literature is a consequence of colonialism. Post-colonialism continues to be a process of hostility and reform. One scholar suggested that although most countries have gained independence from their colonizers, they are still indirectly subjected in one way or another to the forms of neo-colonial domination. (Ashcroft et al.
Political Analysis Political analysis is the method by which the judgement upon any political event, in any part of the world, is performed. It is based on the perception of the political reality of the region or the country in question and the perception of the relationship of this political reality with international politics. In order to perceive the international situation and international politics, it is imperative to have general outlines that explain the political reality of every state and the relationships of these states with the other states of the world, especially the major powers that influence the progress of events in the world. Since the Islamic Ummah is commanded to carry the Islamic Da'wah to all people, it is therefore obligatory upon the Muslims to be in touch with the world with awareness of its conditions and perception of its problems. The Muslims must acquaint themselves with what motivates the states and the peoples and pursue the political actions that occur in the world.
Colonialism has plagued indigenous people worldwide and has spelled disaster for countless cultures, languages, and traditions. Over the past 500 years there have been different phases of colonization in Africa as well as other various parts of earth. There were many reasons behind exploration and colonization including economic and tactical reasons, religion, and prestige. Colonialism has shaped the contemporary understanding of individuals from Niger as well as other parts of Africa and other places too, like the Chambri and Tlingit people; mainly in economics. Because of the colonial past of so many cultures, numerous indigenous people today face many issues. Today colonialism is still active, known as Neocolonialism, which has devastating effects on global cultural groups.
In order for countries to cohesively overcome international barriers, frameworks of ideal political standards must be established. Two of these frameworks constantly discussed in international relations are the theories of Neo-realism and Liberalism; two theories with their own outlook at the way politicians should govern their country as well as how they should deal with others. Neo-realism lies on the structural level, emphasizing on anarchy and the balance of power as a dominant factor in order to maintain hierarchy in international affairs. In contrast, Liberalism's beliefs are more permissive, focusing on the establishments of international organizations, democracy, and trade as links to strengthen the chain of peace amongst countries. Liberalism provides a theory that predominantly explains how states can collaborate in order to promote global peace; however, as wars have been analyzed, for example World War II, the causes of them are better explained by Neo-realist beliefs on the balance of power and states acting as unitary actors. Thus, looking out for their own self interest and security.
Aristotle, Locke, and Hobbes all place a great deal of importance on the state of nature and how it relates to the origin of political bodies. Each one, however, has a different conception of what a natural state is, and ultimately, this leads to a different conception of what a government should be, based on this natural state. Aristotle’s feelings on the natural state of man is much different than that of modern philosophers and leads to a construction of government in and of itself; government for Hobbes and Locke is a departure from the natural state of man.
The first paradigm of international relations is the theory of Realism. Realism is focused on ideas of self-interest and the balance of power. Realism is also divided into two categories, classical realism and neo-realism. Famous political theorist, Hans Morgenthau was a classical realist who believed that national interest was based on three elements, balance of power, military force, and self interest (Kleinberg 2010, 32). He uses four levels of analysis to evaluate the power of a state. The first is that power and influence are not always the same thing. Influence means the ability to affect the decision of those who have the power to control outcomes and power is the ability to determine outcomes. An example of influence and power would be the UN’s ability to influence the actions of states within the UN but the state itself has the power to determine how they act. Morgenthau goes on to his next level of analysis in which he explains the difference in force and power in the international realm. Force is physical violence, the use of military power but power is so much more than that. A powerful state can control the actions of another state with the threat of force but not actually need to physical force. He believed that the ability to have power over another state simply with the threat of force was likely to be the most important element in analysis the power of as state (Kleinberg 2010, 33-34).
Dicken believes that most TNCs are capitalist enterprises driven by profit. He argues that they are the primary movers and shapers of the global economy with the power to easily control or coordinate production networks across the world. In chapter four Dicken challenges a view that with time TNCs are going to abandon their country of origin, and take over the smaller weaker firms.
Gilpin discussed the MNC’s evolution through the lenses of a number of business economic theories. Using Raymond Vernon’s Product Cycle Theory, the overseas expansion of American companies until the 1960s was shown as a means of preempting foreign competition and preserving monopoly positions, which was possible then because of the wealth and technology gaps that existed between the US and the rest of the world (282-83). Following the closing of such gaps, Dunning and the Reading School’s Eclectic Theory explained the next stage of the MNC’s evolution as propelled by the great leaps made in technology and communication, which made internationalized management both possible and viable (283). Michael Porter’s Strategy Theory, meanwhile, asserted that the MNC is now in the era of strategic management, wherein activities and capabilities spanning borders allow it to “tap into the value chain” in the most advantageous positions (285-85). Gilpin made an interesting point, however, that MNCs are oftentimes the result of market imperfections and unique corporate situations. In many instances, the decision to expand a firm’s operations in another country was a means of circumventing protectionist measures and trade barriers, or simply to curry favor with governments, as practiced by IBM (280...
Colonialism, which was a major cause of the north-south gap that occurred in the period following the Second World War, is the takeover by a nation of foreign territories; making them part of it to aid its own economical, social and political structures. The mother countries succeed in doing that by using the colony’s natural resources, money savings, and their lands, which leads the colony to rely on the mother country and therefore, leaving the country underdeveloped. Hence, the world wide scramble for colonies, particularly in the late 19th – early 20th century, had a tremendous negative effect on the economic, social, and political structures of indigenous, non-industrialized peoples.
Mira Wilkins defines a multinational enterprise (MNE) as a “firm that extends itself over borders to do business outside its headquarters country.” By 1870, a period denoted as industrial capitalism, MNCs started to evolve and the nature...
Colonialism was a concept of superiority of one territory over another; it was a concept that originated centuries ago. Colonialism had been put into action throughout a long line of history and did not end after World War II in 1945. Even with resistance and efforts from independent states after the war, colonialism did not disappear and continued as a dominant system. It remained and changed its form, resulted in the process of globalization, which continued to control over newly independent states following World War II. Globalization, a form of colonialism, maintained power for the system over states or regions through economic terms with the development of the World Bank, and its derivation of structural adjustments. This financial institution was formed and contributed to colonialism; it assisted in the economic affairs of colonized nation(s). Along with class, professor Manfred B. Steger's book, Globalization: A Very Short Introduction, and I.B. Logan and Kidane Mengisteab's article, "IMF – World Bank Adjustment and Structural Transformation in Sub-Saharan Africa," discussed the indirect rule of colonial powers through globalization.
What is politics? Throughout history, people have participated in politics on many different levels. They may have participated through a direct democracy, in which they directly governed, or they may have participated through a representative democracy, in which they participated by electing representatives. As citizens’, people have participated in politics to attain the things they needed or wanted, the valued things. Participation in politics has been the way that people have a voice and change the things that directly affect their lives. Throughout the course of history, politics has been the competition of ideas; they decide who gets what, when, where and how.