Globalization and Development of Human Condition in African By Eugene Anowai PhD (Louvain)
Globalization and
Development of Human Condition in African
By
Eugene Anowai PhD (Louvain)
COOU, Igbariam
Email:chukwueloka@yahoo.co.uk
&
Festus C. Ajeli
Nwafor Orizu College of Education, Nsugbe
Email: actionblack28@gmail.com
Abstract
Africa has witnessed
during the colonial era and this era which this paper regards as the era of
neo-colonialism that the developed nations in their relationship with her, see
anything beyond their own personal interest and welfare as irrelevance. Africa
becomes poorer because of the predatory activities of advanced nations. Hence,
the general welfare, freedom, self-development and self-survival of Africans
deteriorate progressively. So, as it stands, the developing nations wield
political, economic, military and social powers to the disadvantage of Africa.
And this is an important phenomenon of this age of globalization. Therefore,
the gap between Africa and developed countries is ever widening. Rich countries
are becoming richer while the poor ones are becoming poorer. Africa cannot pay
her debt. Interest on loans is mounting by leaps and bounds; our income per
capita is at the lowest ebb. Unemployment, hunger and malnutrition are still
with us. Technologically, we are backward. Instability has become a permanent
feature of African political system. Moreover, international financial
organizations give to African countries conditions which are politically and
economically unpalatable. So, this paper submits that even though there are
some positive aspects of globalization, its disadvantages to African human
condition are incalculable. Thus, any agenda for globalization must put into
consideration all these predicaments caused by exploitation and subjugation of Africa
by the advanced nations so that there will be equity and egalitarianism.
Failure to do that, Africa will continue to be disadvantaged in globalization
arrangements.
Keywords: Africa, Human Condition,
Self-development, Freedom, Globalization, Colonialism, Neo-colonialism, Advanced
nations exploitation
Introduction
Globalization, origin and concept
When a
new word becomes popular, it is often because it captures an important change
that is taking place in the world. A new idea is needed to describe a new
condition. A case in point is, when philosopher Jeremy Bentham coined the term ‘international’
in the 1780’s, it became popular because it highlighted a deepening reality of
his day, namely, the rise of nation-states and of cross-border transactions
between them. People had not spoken of ‘international relations’ before this
time, since humanity had previously been organized into national communities
governed by territorial states.
However,
two hundred years later, in 1980’s, talk about ‘globalization’ become rife. The
term quickly entered standard vocabulary; not only in academic circle, but also
amongst journalist, politicians, theologians, philosophers, bankers,
advertisers, and entertainers. It has entered simultaneously across many
languages. Hence ‘globalization’ in English has been parallel by Quan Qui Hua
in Chinese, globalizzazione in Italy, Globalization in German, jatyanthareekaranaya
in Sinhalese. It has become common to speak of global markets, global
communication, global politics, global conferences, global threat, and so on.
Historically,
we can say that there are no obvious and exact watersheds on which everyone
will agree regarding the origin. Researchers have variously dated its onset
from the dawn of human civilization, or from the start of modern era or from
the middle of the nineteenth century or from the late 1950’s etc.
However,
it can be defined as “the intensification of worldwide social relations which
link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by
events occurring many kilometers away and vice versa”[1]
Globalization is derived from the word globalize, which refers to
the emergence of an international network of economic systems[2].One
of the earliest known usages of the term as a noun was in a 1930 publication
entitled, ‘Towards New Education’, where it denoted a holistic view of
human experience in education.[3]
It has been viewed as ‘a set of processes by which the world is rapidly
being integrated into one economic space via increased international trade, the
internationalization of production and financial markets, [and] the
internationalisation of a commodity culture promoted by an increasingly
networked global telecommunications system’[4]. It is
widely argued that the nature of contemporary globalisation is best viewed as a
multifaceted rather than a singular condition and that it is associated with
various consequences at the economic, political and socio-cultural levels.
Writing in 1992, the sociologist Roland Robertson suggested that
'globalisation as a concept refers both to the compression of the world and the
intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole'[5]..He
argued both that there were objective changes taking place and that an effect
of these changes was that people's subjective views of the world and their
place within it were changing.
The processes of globalisation have widespread economic, social,
cultural and political consequences for African person. This work regards it as
what Africans have for several centuries called colonization and now
neo-colonization which has adverse effect on African Human condition.
African Human Condition
Usually when the ‘modern African’ thinks about his human
situation, what Ali A. Mazuri calls “The African condition”[6], he intuitively recalls
three historical events which has anguished his spirit immensely, namely
cross-Atlantic slavery, white or European colonialism and neo-colonialism or
imperialism. It must be noted that neo-colonialism is still very much in Africa
as well as other developing nations and constitutes part and parcel of their
existential frustrations in their quest for self-sufficiency, self-reliance,
independent existence and self-development.
Development and Underdevelopment
In recent history, the elusive terms
'development and underdevelopment' have claimed the attention of many economists,
government officials, political analysts,
academicians, industrialists and people from all walks of life. Some people have seen development in terms of an increase
in the national income of a country. National income is the sum total of
goods and services produced in a country
over a period of time. When national income is divided by the population of that country, what we get is per
capita income. In both cases, the inadequacies
of these definitions are very clear. However,
the term ‘development’ originally and etymologically means a positive movement
towards growth, progress and positive realisation of the potentialities of the
entity or process or event in question[7]. In our context, in general,
development means equitable economic growth, which supports better education,
housing and health care etc. worthy of mention here is Walter Rodney who in his book How Europe
Underdeveloped Africa,
mainly looks into
the concept of development and underdevelopment. The concept underdevelopment is characterized by a number of things. First, Rodney
emphasizes the comparative nature of the concept of development. Africa, Asia, and Latin America
are only underdeveloped in
comparison with Europe, North America, and the few other industrialized nations of the world. Second, underdevelopment does not
simply describe the relative economic
inequality of different countries or continents; but it also implies a relationship of economic exploitation between two
or more countries, the exploiter
becoming developed and the exploited becoming underdeveloped. Fidel Castro’s stand can be taken as further
insight into the evil of neo-colonialism. He noted:
“Growth
often rests on the accumulation of consumer goods, which contribute nothing to
true development and a better distribution of wealth. The truth is that after
several decades of neo-liberalism, the rich are becoming richer while the poor
are both more numerous and increasingly poor”[8]
The Evils that hold Africa
in Chains
Let us examine these evils that hold Africa everywhere in
chains. It must be said however that slavery and colonialism are now very much
extinct in Africa and generally outdated in contemporary civilization. Actually,
neo-colonialism does not differ in kind but only in degree from colonialism. It
is colonialism in different form. Now, it has achieved a new guise, it has
become globalization. Hence as Nkrumah noted, it is “the last stage of imperialism”[9]. It is evil for it is
political, social, economic oppression and exploitation of another; the
domination of the weak by the strong; the poor by the rich; the developing by
the developed nations. It is a total invasion of alien consciousness for the
sake of subjugating and exploiting weaker peoples. This is a philosophy of self-aggrandizement,
the direct and overall subordination of one country to another on the basis of interconnectivity.
Fidel Castro states categorically that “the wealthy world
tries to forget that the sources of underdevelopment and poverty were slavery,
colonialism and the brutal exploitation and plunder to which our countries were
subjected for centuries. They attribute the poverty we suffer to the inability
of Africans, Asians, Caribbean and Latin Americans, in other words,
black-skinned, yellow-skinned, indigenous and mixed-race peoples to achieve any
degree of development or even to govern ourselves”[10]
In summary the essential exploitative philosophy is to keep other
people in perpetual political subjection and to make possible the maximum
exploitation of their resources.
Imperialism/Neo-colonialism
Kwame Nkrumah in his work Neo-colonialism the
worst form of imperialism remarked that the neo-colonialism of today
represents imperialism in its final and perhaps its most dangerous
stage. In place of colonialism as the main instrument of imperialism
we have today neo-colonialism which is for us another form of globalization..
The essence of neo-colonialism is that the State which is
subject to it is in theory, independent and has all the outward trappings
of international sovereignty. But in reality, its economic system and thus its political
policy is directed from outside. Moreover, international financial organizations
give to African countries conditions which are politically and economically
unpalatable.
Also according to Walter Rodney, in his text named ‘How Europe underdeveloped Africa’ in the 15th
century, European technology was not totally
superior to that of other parts of the world.
There were certain specific features which were highly advantageous.”[11] So the likely outcome is exploitation which is
Balkanizing Africa. One of the ways in which
they did this was to break their colonies into units of unviable territories so as to make them
politically and economically subservient to the masters (Europe & North America). It is this conscious policy
of divide and rule that came to be known
as Balkanization. As we can see, this poses a serious problem to Africa but it was carefully formulated and scrupulously
implemented for the benefit of the imperialists.
In fact, the policy
of international balkanization of Africa for manipulation by neo-colonialism “can be more dangerous to our
legitimate aspirations
of freedom and economic independence than outright political control”[12].
We note that Balkanization is not only a potent
instrument of neo-colonialism but an unmistakable
mark of it. It is a part and parcel of neo- colonialism.
Power, Exploitation and Globalization
The
result of neo-colonialism is that foreign capital is used for
the exploitation rather than for the development of the less
developed parts of the world. And globalization will increase this situation. Investment
under globalization increases rather than decreases the gap
between the rich and the
poor countries of the world. The
capital of the developed world is used for operating in less developed countries. Their financial power is
being used in such a way as to impoverish the less developed.
Dialectics of development in Globalization
In
order to make globalization attractive to those that operate
it, it must be shown as capable of raising their living
standards, but the economic objective of globalization is to keep
those standards depressed in the interest of the developed countries.
Chinweizu
Ibekwe's classic ‘The West and the Rest of Us’, is widely quoted and suggested as essential
reading for anyone who wants to understand the dialectics of
the development of western civilization, and the underdevelopment of Africa and
the rest of the world. He accurately places our Human
conditions as African people into the context of a conquered nation. He makes
it clear that we do not suffer from a "colour" problem; we suffer
because we cannot protect our nation from attack[13].
European Capitalism and Globalization
Africa's
contribution to European capitalist development during the pre-colonial era
shows the radical inequality of trade relations which saw the
transfer of wealth from Africa to Europe, was a direct consequence of trade
internationalization which elevated Europe's status as the dominant section of worldwide trade system Europe was a confirmation of the dependent
status of the European national economies which is in inter-connectivity with the world at large. Surplus resources
were drawn from Africa to develop capitalism
in the metropolitan sector. "Colonialism was not merely a system of exploitation but one whose essential purpose was
to repatriate the profit to the so called
mother land" .It means that the development of Europe as a part of the
same dialectical process (mentioned above) in which Africa was Underdeveloped. African labour was
cheap. The employer often required more from the worker but paid him less not even enough to maintain his
physical self and this was
not the case in Europe. In Europe, Employers paid their employees a living wage. Wages paid to workers in
Europe and North America was far higher than
that of Africans. The Africans were discriminated
from occupying official positions and even when they did they were paid
less compared to the wages of the European officials. Hence, our main preoccupation here is to explain how much greater
was the exploitation of African workers and to point out that this situations
continue till date. This is glare when we note some basic facts of the happenings
in foreign Aids and international
Financial Organizations which also
give credence to our contention.
Foreign Aid and Globalization
Formally, the idea of foreign aid was that of a harmless
and charitable notion in international politics. It was seen as
something designed to help poor countries who grapple with their
economic problems. Were this understanding of foreign aid to
square with fact, then there would have been no problem. As it stands, the way
and manner in which aids are given, it’s dubious but
carefully veiled objective, together with the strings attached
to it, have made foreign aid a confirmed instrument of neo-colonialism.
It is doubtful whether foreign aid is purely a philanthropic affair.
Kenneth Kaunda rejected it in every shape and form when without mincing words; he
expressed the fear that, the obligation of the rich to help the
poor is
partly a matter of morality but can also be justified
on the grounds of enlightened self-interest. His message runs thus: “Rationally
applied, economic aid is good business sense because it will provide a
scope for private investment, and help create
an ever-larger would-be market”[14].
If this is anything to go by, it is ironical to remark
that the benefit which goes with foreign aid is at best illusory. In
the final analysis, the donor gains more than what
he has given while the recipient loses more than what he gained. In point of fact we see foreign aid as a
paradigmatic case of doubtful philanthropy.
Another problem with foreign aid in relation
to African countries is that it is always too small to be of any
meaningful use to the receiving country. It is nothing when compared
with what was given to Western Germany under the Marshall plan. This led to the
economic recovery of Western Germany in a record of time after the Second World
War.
However, the worst aspect of foreign aid is
the string attached to it. If the aid is in form of a loan,
the recipient has to sell sufficient goods to the donor country so
as to raise enough money required to repay the loan. There are other
harsh conditions which include agreements for economic
cooperation, obligation to buy and sell goods to the donor country, the right
to influence internal matters like currency and so on. These conditions are so harsh
and pervasive that they affect almost every sector of the economy. In fact, for
any African country to receive foreign aid with earning is to hand over
her sovereignty to the machinations of neo-colonialism.
In this regard, Nkrumah remarked that, “one
of the worst things that can happen to less developed and emerging
countries is to receive aids with political and economic strings attached”[15].
This argument sounded persuasive and continues to sound persuasive when one observes
the problem foreign aids create to the countries that receive them.
Unfortunately, most African countries have
fallen victims to foreign aid. The result is that they hardly pursue
any foreign policy without considering the reaction of their
foreign donors. It is in recognition of this fact, that Mboya’s message struck
meaning to his hearers when he said that: “Aid of any
kind... has a way of bending the attitudes and
policies of the recipient, however much he
may protest to the contrary”[16].
Realizing
the economic implications of foreign aid, Nkrumah sounded a note of warning that the granting of economic ‘aid’ from capitalist countries is “one of the most insidious ways in which neo-colonialism hinders economic progress in
the developing world, retarding industrialization and delaying the development of a large proletariat”[17].
International Financial Organization
As we have seen earlier, the cardinal aim of colonization
was to exploit the natural resources of Africa for its own
benefit. This was accomplished through marginal colonization but
when the collapse of colonialism in Africa became as sure
as death, it occurred to the colonial powers that they would still achieve the
same aim through other means. One way in which they did this was through the
formation of joint economic ventures. It is not surprising that between 1952
and 1961, the following international joint ventures were
formed:
1. European
Coal and Steel Community in 1952,
2.
European free Trade Area in 1956,
3.
European Economic Community in 1958,
4.
Organization of Economic Cooperation and
Development in 1961
In one of his Kwame Nkrumah Memorial lectures, Awolowo
noted two common features of the above organizations: Firstly they came into existence in rapid Succession at a
time when colonial territories in Africa were also attaining independence in
rapid succession, secondly, the primary aim of each and every one of them is to
promote the economic prosperity of the member countries.
Certainly, the rate of their formation could not be a
mere coincidence. This conclusion has empirical justification in the
deteriorating economic conditions of underdeveloped countries
since the inception of these organizations. This notwithstanding, some African
countries were naive and simplistic enough to join European
Economic Community. Thus from improving their economic lot, it has worsened
it. Is this not a clear pointer to the fact that these organizations were
established not to help Africa but to perpetuate her economic and political bondage?
Other financial institutions in the service of
neo-colonialization are International Monetary Fund (IMF),
International Bank for the reconstruction and Development (IBRD),
World Bank and a host of others. These agencies have the
habit of forcing would be borrowers to submit to various
offensive conditions, such as supplying information about their economies, submitting
their policies and plans to be reviewed by the world bank and
accepting agency supervision of their use of loans.
In itself, there is nothing wrong with
foreign borrowing but the problem is how to obtain capital investment and still keep it under sufficient control to prevent undue
exploitation and how to preserve
integrity and sovereignty without crippling economic or political ties to any country, bloc or system.
Almost all African countries that have gone to IMF for
foreign aid end up with more economic problems than they were having
before. Among African heavy debtors to IMF are Gambia, Sudan, Ivory Coast, Democratic Republic of Congo and Tanzania. It grew without saying that these
countries use a material proceeds of their foreign exchange earnings to service
these debts which they do not hope to
repay in any foreseeable future.
Besides, the conditions to be met before
these loans are granted make it absolutely difficult to convince any right
thinking person that IMF is not at the service of neo-colonialism.
In the case of Nigeria for example, trade liberalization, Devaluation,
removal of petroleum subsidy and other conditionalities were demanded
by IMF.
The sum and substance of what we are saying is that
foreign loan from IMF is not bad per se but Western capitalism has turned it
into a potent instrument of neo-colonialization. So African countries should bear
this in mind each time they want to borrow money
from IMF if we go by this logic, it could be argued that IMF is not a
charitable organization it
is only an instrument for perpetuating underdevelopment in third world countries. No wonder
Joseph Stiglitz, the 2001 Nobel Laureate in Economics; a former chairman of the
council of Economic advisers to president Clinton of the United States of
America from 1997-2000, said the following regarding decimation of third world
economies by the IMF-World Bank and Multi-national companies “When I was at
World Bank, I saw firsthand devastating effect that Globalization can have on
developing countries, especially the poor within those countries”[18].
Also the
Supreme Pontiff Pope John Paul lI was articulating a widely acclaimed
fact on solution to debt problem of third world countries when he hit the nail
on the head by asserting that, above and beyond the blind justice of
financial mechanisms we must arrive at solutions that reflect
both complete justice and mercy. Mark and Louise
Zwick in their fascinating article titled ‘Pope John Paul II’s Dream of Debt Forgiveness Partially Fulfilled” made
an analytical and critical remark by saying:
For decades, as financial
policies were imposed upon countries around the world with strict control by
the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank the people were told that
this neo-liberal economic system will raise all boats, eventually. Each year,
however, the yachts of the rich countries have become bigger and more elegant,
and the small boats of the poor around the world have been slowly
sinking[19].
In a message to the “Make
Poverty History” rally held in Scotland in July 2005 around the G-8 meetings
(the Group of Eight wealthy nations which decide the financial fate of countries
of the world), Pope Benedict XVI encouraged world leaders to do their part in
ensuring a “more just distribution of the world’s goods” by accepting the
burden of debt reduction and fulfilling pledges made to reduce world poverty[20].
In a similar clarion call manner, in an interview
with Cuba's President Fidel Castro conducted by former UNESCO director general
Frederico Mayor Zaragoza, published in Cuba's Granma
newspaper, he submits that the debt cannot be paid; for compelling people
to do so will be to kill them with poverty, hunger and disease. In
his words, “the foreign debts are largely a political problem, and therefore call for a political solution”[21].
It is remarkable that in the
years before the Jubilee of the year 2000, Pope John Paul II campaigned for
cancellation of the foreign debt for the poorest countries. His dream was partially
fulfilled when in June, 2005, G-8 finance ministers agreed to cancel more than
$40 billion dollars in debts owed to the World Bank, the International Monetary
Fund and other lenders by some of the world’s poorest nations.
The majority of countries whose
debts will be forgiven are in Africa: Benin, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana,
Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania,
Uganda and Zambia. Four others include Bolivia, Guyana, Honduras and Nicaragua
Drawing
from these words of eminent leaders and scholars, we refer to some who argue
that globalization results in improving the lots of global citizens as not
having the whole truth. This is because we can see vividly how devastating globalization
can be to poor countries. In sort, its obvious disadvantages abound.
Poorer countries suffering
disadvantages
While it is true that free trade encourages
globalization among countries, some countries try to protect their domestic
suppliers. The main export of poorer countries is usually agricultural
productions Larger countries often subsidize their farmers (e.g., the EU's
Common Agricultural Policy), which lowers the market price for foreign crops[22]
Joseph Stiglitz argues that countries that have
managed globalization on their own have succeeded in reaping benefits from
globalization, while countries that were economically managed by international
institutions such as the IMF have not gained as much from globalization[23].
Economic inequality and International inequality
Increasing international commerce with high barriers to entry, corporate consolidation, tax havens and other methods of tax avoidance, and political corruption have all caused increases in income inequality and wealth
concentration. There is increasingly
unequal distribution of economic assets
(wealth) and income within or between global
populations, countries, and individuals. Let us see the Economic
inequality and International inequality.
Economic
inequality
Economic inequality varies between societies,
historical periods, economic structures or systems (for example, capitalism or socialism), ongoing or past wars, between genders, and between differences in
individuals' abilities to create wealth. There are various numerical indices for measuring economic inequality. Economic
inequality affects equity, equality of outcome, and equality of opportunity. Although earlier thought
considered economic inequality as necessary and beneficial”[24].
It has more recently come to be seen as a growing social problem[25].
Early studies suggesting that greater equality inhibits economic growth have been shown to be flawed because
they did not account for the many years it can take inequality changes to
manifest in growth changes. In
fact, one of the most robust and important determinants of sustained economic
growth is the level of income inequality.[26]
International
inequality
International inequality is inequality between countries. Economic differences between rich and poor countries are
very large. The German bishop’s conference research group on the universal
tasks of the Catholic Church describe globalisation as: „An intensification and
acceleration of cross-border interraction which actually and potentially links
all individuals, and institutions and states into a complex structure of mutual
but frquently imbalanced dependencies“[27]
Also according to the United Nations Human Development Report for 2004,
the GDP per capita in countries with high, medium and low human development (a
classification based on the UN Human Developmen Index) was 24,806, 4,269 and 1,184 PPP$, respectively (PPP$
= purchasing power parity measured in United States dollars)[28]
No wonder the magazine Commonwealth Currents points out that “one
of the greatest challenges facing humanity today is how to ensure that
globalisation is managed in a manner which attaches the highest priority to the elimination of poverty and the creation
of a more just world in which people are at the centre of development and are
empowered to participate in decision affecting other lives“[29]
At this juncture, we hazard to make the following concluding remarks.
Concluding
Remarks
We conclude by underscoring the dooms of Africa that made globalization
a big problem. With the activities of the West, the political and economic structures in Africa have been upset to its benefit. Worse still, the African is subjected to self-devaluation. This
permanently inhibits the discharge of
his creative energy for the development of his continent. After going through the ordeals of
the West from colonial time till now, it gives us a rational ground for holding that neo-colonialism is
still a real road block to African development. The Africa is not yet free from economic
exploitation, political subjugation and cultural assimilation. African countries are still
traditional suppliers of raw materials and cheap labour. They are still the dumping ground of
finished products. There is still international conspiracy to keep down prices of raw materials together
with a renewed threat to use synthetic
alternatives. International Associations are still being manipulated to serve the interest of Western Capitalism
On
the whole, our position in this matter is crystal clear. And that is, Africa
must stand up,
to lift herself from the morass of abject poverty, to free herself from economic exploitation and collective imperialism,
in order to experience the hurricane of development. Africa must band together to fight for the
establishment of a new economic order, against the backdrop of the fancy
dreaming and system-mongering of intellectuals called globalization. Actually, globalization have moved some
countries backward instead of developing them
The age long problem of Balkanization is still a constant source
of political instability in Africa. Multi-national corporations are still in control
of vital sectors of the economy of
many African nations today. As a matter of fact, any country whose extractive, manufacturing and constructive industries and whose
distributive and commercial services
are left in the hands of foreigners is not likely to achieve any substantial
development. All along, the effect of foreign aids on African countries had
been and is still to bind them
politically and economically to the donor countries. Moreover, International financial organizations
have complicated the problem of underdevelopment in Africa. Hence, all the aforementioned predicaments
lend support to our unalloyed position that globalization is unjust, unequal
and exploitative and therefore adverse to African Human Condition.
Endnotes
[1]
Scholte J. A., The
Globalization of World Politics, in Baylis J & Smith S Eds The
Globalization of World Politics, An Introduction to International Relations (Oxford Uni Press,, 1999) 14
[4] Tatto, M.T Education
reform and the global regulation of teachers’ education, development and
work: a cross-cultural analysis, International journal of educational research,
45, 2006, .:231-241.
[5] Robertson, R., Globalization: social theory and global
culture. (London: Sage, 1992) 8.
[6] The African Condition, the title of Ali mazrul’s
1979 Reith Lectures (London: Heinemann,1980)
[7] Njoku F. C, in Corruption The Bane of
Nigeria’s Development, E. C. Anowai (ed.) (Demercury Bright P &Publisher,
2011)32.
[8] FIDEL CASTRO: cancel Third World debt, end
corporate tyranny. Interview published Granma newspaper, July 26, 2000.
[9]
Nkrumah K., Neo-colonialsim: The
last stage of imperialism (London: Heinemann, 1965) 31.
[10] FIDEL CASTRO: cancel Third World debt, end
corporate tyranny.Interview published Granma newspaper, July
26, 2000.
[11] Rodney, W. How Europe Underdeveloped Africa (Enugu: Ikenga Publishers 1984) 177.
[13] Chinweizu, The West and The Rest of Us, (Lagos, Nok Publishing Co., Ltd., 1978), 207.
[14] Azikiwe
N., Renascent Africa (London: Frank Cass and Co., Ltd., 2000) ,196
[15] Nkrumah, K., Class Struggle in Africa, 48- 49.
[16] Mboya, The Challenge of Nationhood; (Ibadan Heinemann
Educational
Books 2000), 234
Books 2000), 234
[17] Alimoo Y., "The-.Course Towards Non-Alignent African Countries' Foreign Policy; (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 2000), 46.
[19] Mark and Louise Zwick Pope John Paul II’s Dream of Debt Forgiveness
Partially Fulfilled
August 1, 2005
[21] FIDEL CASTRO: cancel Third World debt,
end corporate tyranny.Interview published Granma newspaper, July 26,
2000
[22]
Hurst E. Charles. Social Inequality: Forms,
Causes, and consequences, 6th ed.41
[23] Lechner,
Frank (2011). The Globalization Reader. Wiley-Blackwell; QQQQ4th ed. ISBN 978- 0470655634.
[24]
U.S. Income Inequality: It’s Not So
Bad By Thomas A. Garrett| Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis|
Spring 2010
[25] Wilkinson,
Richard; Pickett, Kate, The Spirit Level: Why More Equal
Societies Almost Always Do Better. Allen Lane, 2009. 352. ISBN 978-1-84614-039-6.
[26] Berg,
Andrew G.; Ostry, Jonathan D. (2011). "Equality and Efficiency". Finance
and Development (International
Monetary Fund) 48 (3).
Retrieved September 10, 2012.
[27] German Bishop’s conference, the
research group, the many faces of globalization-Perspectives for Human world
order Deutsche Commission Justicia Pax, Boon, 2000, 12.
[29] Commonwealth Current, “The New Challenge for
the World: Globalization with a Hearth. 3. 1999,. 4-5.
Post a Comment