Unit 5 Written Assignment
1. There is much criticism that modernization theory is Eurocentric.
Introduction.
“Modernization theory proposes that there are natural stages of economic development that all societies go through from undeveloped to advanced,” (Little & McGivern, 2013, p.560).
One of the criticism of the modernization theory is that, “ widely varying degrees of development observed globally have less to do with natural stages of development and more to do with relations of economic exploitation and geopolitical power, especially those structured by the legacy of the periods of European colonization and American imperialism,” (Little & McGivern, 2013, p.562).
This argument no long hold waters. I was here before. Now looking at the trend of global socio-economic and political development for the past twenty years. I changed mind. Criticism against modernization theory is a mere scapegoating. Political leaders and governors of peripheral nations should be ashamed of themselves. This issue is so personal to me.
Poverty in the 21 century
Every …show more content…
As long as peripheral nations depends on core nations. They will never move forward economically. Modernization theory is a working agenda. As long as nations ad held to the conditions for economic development. They will see the light.
4. Which do you think is more useful for explaining global inequality? Explain, using examples.
I believe the modernization theory explained global inequality. Most of these low income countries are relatively new countries. Most countries in sub-Sahara Africa, got their in the 1960s. Many are plunged by civil war, and disease. On the contrary, the core countries has been there even before the World War 1. It is a matter of time and good governance.
Conclusion
It is a matter of time and good governance. I believe the convergence Theory, “ that societies move towards similarity over time as their economies develop,” (Little & McGivern, 2013,
1. There is much criticism that modernization theory is Eurocentric.
Introduction.
“Modernization theory proposes that there are natural stages of economic development that all societies go through from undeveloped to advanced,” (Little & McGivern, 2013, p.560).
One of the criticism of the modernization theory is that, “ widely varying degrees of development observed globally have less to do with natural stages of development and more to do with relations of economic exploitation and geopolitical power, especially those structured by the legacy of the periods of European colonization and American imperialism,” (Little & McGivern, 2013, p.562).
This argument no long hold waters. I was here before. Now looking at the trend of global socio-economic and political development for the past twenty years. I changed mind. Criticism against modernization theory is a mere scapegoating. Political leaders and governors of peripheral nations should be ashamed of themselves. This issue is so personal to me.
Poverty in the 21 century
Every …show more content…
As long as peripheral nations depends on core nations. They will never move forward economically. Modernization theory is a working agenda. As long as nations ad held to the conditions for economic development. They will see the light.
4. Which do you think is more useful for explaining global inequality? Explain, using examples.
I believe the modernization theory explained global inequality. Most of these low income countries are relatively new countries. Most countries in sub-Sahara Africa, got their in the 1960s. Many are plunged by civil war, and disease. On the contrary, the core countries has been there even before the World War 1. It is a matter of time and good governance.
Conclusion
It is a matter of time and good governance. I believe the convergence Theory, “ that societies move towards similarity over time as their economies develop,” (Little & McGivern, 2013,