Chapter 11 of the book The history of development: from western origins to global faith by Gilbert Rist provides a scope of the author’s opinions on the development of the South since the very beginning of the 1990s. The whole discussion in the chapter is dedicated to the development of southern countries after global changes in the world. The author wants to follow the process of political and economical transformations in Southern countries up.
The question is that there is no division of the world into two after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the implosion of the USSR. It was time to make positive development going on in such countries as Tanzania, Liberia, Uganda, etc. Moreover, the main role is underlined in the chapter as referred to by the UN. Its commissions and subsidiaries on finding out a constructive decision should serve, as the author admits for the best way out in each case. In this respect, Rist claims the following rhetoric question: “Did the industrial countries not persist in defending their own interests and international negotiations, and give support to regimes that cared little for the well-being of their subjects” (Rist 198)?
The author then criticizes the actions and initiatives of the South Commission on the need for ‘development’. The thing is that such reports should not look like just ranting. Pointing out and defining such terms as ‘true development’ and ‘a life of dignity and fulfillment is not fully correct when such countries need immediate reforms. Such harsh evaluation of Rist goes with his outlining the real key to the problem that lies in “hunger, disease and want” (204). The author strives to pay more attention to the new order implied and elaborated internationally on grounds of basic needs. It is to be done, as Rist points out, to break down current obstacles for countries toward prosperity and stabilization of economy along with the political course.
Rist criticizes the report for its bearing rather Western values. He even states on such philosophers as Aristotle, Adam Smith, Marx, and others who never claimed first for the material amenities of some groups of people but the well-being of the nation. In such evaluation, Rist designates the true intentions of chiefs who are in charge in different influential international organizations. Moreover, Rist lays more emphasis on rational and so needful donorship support from the part of developed countries. It should measure the real interests in the internal needs of a country. Once again, when looking on afterward reports, Rist notes on their normative character. There is a lack of solutions to the roots of the problem. Thus, Rist determines North majority as opposed to Southern countries. “North patiently erects a wall to keep out the “new barbarians” (210).
My opinion is rather close to that of Rist. In fact, since the time of early 1990s, there were almost no shifts toward progress in the South. Most of the developed countries under various conventions tried to penetrate these countries to have some benefits. It is no surprise. People living in these countries are suffering as the poorest and most-in-need human beings on the planet. However, nobody cares. Noble tries of UN, IMF, etc. failed to meet short of really needful reforms for South. Thus, it is an ongoing task for developed countries whether to make the world change for good or leave South out.
Works cited
Rist, Gilbert. The history of development: from western origins to global faith. Ed.2. London: Zed Books, 2002.