Modernization Theory In The 19th Century

In Modernization theory, without looking at the historical and cultural background of the Third World countries they were referred as backward. The so called developed countries assumed that the countries need to be intervened upon, Nandy (1987) argues the infantilization of the Third World was integral to development as a “secular theory of salvation (ibid: 30).

The year 1960 was important in the history of development discourse. It is interesting to note that at the time when the Bretton Woods institutions of the World Bank and IMF had started expanding their Europe-directed framework and integrating Third World countries into the domain of international monetary system, W.W. Rostow’s The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto

The Dependency perspective arose in wake of bankruptcy of United Nations led Economic Commission for Latin America (ELCA) in early 1960’s. Latin American countries witnessed brief economic expansion led by US developmental strategy that called for protectionism and industrialization through import substitution. Nevertheless, the economic boom was short term and in quick time it turned into stagnation. Fuelled by rising unemployment, inflation, currency devaluation there were protests followed by collapse of popular regimes. Frank incidentally happened to be there during 1960’s and was influential in spreading dependency school thoughts in English speaking part of the world. Dependency perspective was a reaction against existing theoretical categories and development policies which were based on historical experience of the European and North American countries.

On dependency theory Frank says, they were directed at once against development theory and policy derived from (or camouflaged by) neoclassical and monetarist development theory; against Keynesian and structuralist explanations; and against CEPAL/ECLA, Alliance for Progress, and orthodox Marxist and Communist party theory, policy and praxis

According to Frank (1975), Underdevelopment is not just the lack of development. Before there was development there was no underdevelopment...[They] are also related, both though the common historical process that they have shared during the past several centuries and through their mutual, that is reciprocal, influence that they have had, still have, and will continue to have, on each other throughout history (ibid:16). In early 1970’s an important development on global economical and political landscape was the emergence of New World Economic Order (NIEO). A Group of 77 (soon 125) "developing" countries "resolved" NIEO through United Nations resolutions in 1974. The argument was (shades of dependence) that the old international economic order hinders development (Frank 1991, 25). Talking about power politics from historical perspective Frank opines that throughout the past sectors, regions and peoples have taken lead role in social and technological development. However, that is not permanent rather cyclical in nature and power gradually recedes, though it takes a lot of time in shifting of leadership and hegemony. Giving a historical narrative that seems to be very relevant in present global scenario where China is emerging as global force to reckon with, Frank