Banglore ISI

8/10/2019 Banglore ISI

1/11

1

Development as Domination/Reproduction: Postmodern Interrogations

S. Lourdunathan

What do we mean development when we mean development?

1. Development Camouflage: The usage of the term development is at onceperplexing (for me) since it is used synonymic with words/ideas such asprogress, growth, good and sometimes happiness. The question is - are theseterms equivalent in the sense of similarity (same as)? If they are used assimilarity, what do they refer to? Similarity as a notion (I hold) is so confusingthat it need not have an empirical content. One can speak of a familymembers being similar in certain features but each member is specificallydifferent. So the case with the use of the term development. If and whendevelopment is used as progress, as growth, as good and as happiness though

one can note a sort of family collectiveness (family resemblance), each ofthese terms refer to different sensibilities. And to use all of them under theumbrella called development is to miss boat. It is a sort ofdisguised/disgusted usage where nothing specific/concrete can beaccounted. Since the very specificity of reference to development ismisleading, it does as well lead to misleading references of developmentactions/agencies.

2. Development and Growth: Let us take for instance, the use of the termsdevelopment and growth. Do these two terms mean the same? Are they similar

notions? One can speak of the growth of the butterfly in different stages likeegg, larva, pupa, adult butterfly and finally death of the butterfly. Ifdevelopment means growth (economic growth), do we mean thatdevelopment is a process of having an egg stage, a larva stage, a pupa stage,an adult stage and finally a death? One can say the child is growing fromchildhood to manhood. But one cannot claim that the child is developing. Tosay that the butterfly/child is growing is agreeable where as to claim that thebutterfly/child is developing is not-that-agreeable if not ridiculous.2.1.

If you agree on this meaning-conditionality, then, the claim thatdevelopment means growth vis--vis growth means development is

rather a disguised notion if not a ridiculous notion. Growth is normallymeant the biological sense of it where as development is normallymeant the cultural (social, political, economic factors) dimension. Fromthe above illustration we may infer that development does not actuallymean growth and growth does not mean development and this implythe fact that one cannot afford to situate sensibilities purely in terms ofresemblance or similarities for they are quite misleading, misleadingboth in conceptual bearing and in practical application through which

Paper presented at National Seminar on, Democracy, Development and Governance: An Analytical and

Critical Quest org., by Indian Social Institute, Bangalore on November 21st

to 23rd

, 2014. Dept of Philosophy, Arul Anandar College, Karumatur, Madurai e-mail: [email protected]

Mobile: (0)9566477696.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/11

2

the user/utterer/promulgator/performer/agent can easily flee/veilfrom any sort of accountability of the practical implications ofdevelopment.

3. Development and Happiness: The other similarities, development ashappiness is also misleading. One can be happy, for instance, a robber orcorrupt agency when not punished or escapes legalities can be happy. AChristian for instance celebrates the death of Christ in crucifixion and still behappy because he believes death will eventually bring about resurrection.Does this happiness of the robber or the Christian be called development? Isthe robber/corrupt developed when s/he is not punished for his crimes? Isthe Christian believer who celebrates suffering and death, though happy, cans/he be called developed? Take for another instance, when the poor peopleare gifted with free/welfare scheme aids (Food, Medicine, Kitchen Utensil,household things, laptops in Tamilnadu, some % of reservations etc) they aresaid to be happy. Does it mean they are developed because they are happywith/about such welfares/charity/corporate social responsibilityprogrammes?3.1. I believe, happiness is psychological, connected with ones mood,

emotion, mental dispositions. It is cannot and does not meandevelopment. They are two different notions with differentia ofsensibilities. To combine both in terms of similarity is again misleadingand deceptive of the common man. Thegiver/utterer/promulgator/performer/agent of welfarism induces thepsychological disposition that development means happiness, like thatof the believer who self-imposes the idea that his/her belief meanshappiness and happiness is meant to belief in such and such manner.Inducing a belief/psychological disposition through cultural practicesor political programmes however may mean a temporary sense ofhappiness but surely not development either.

4. Development and goodness: If development does not necessarily mean

growth or happiness, does it mean good? Are the terms development andgood similar resonating equivalent sensibilities? The issue of good needssome clarification. Good is predicated of the status of being moral. What ismoral is good and what is good is moral.4.1. A good life, hence, ought to be defined in terms of being good rather

having good with an abundance of material goods. Whendevelopment is used as good, does it refer to the idea of moralgoodness or material additions/goods? If goodness is moralconnotation then moral connotation cannot refer to material abundanceand material goods or affluence. A rich business entrepreneur may bepredicated of the affluence of material goods but this need not meanthat s/he is morally good. Many times the opposite is true. Materialaffluence is tied with the notion of the ability to success by beingdeceitful (we may call it Business tactics) and thereby immoral without


3/11

3

the sense of consciousness that s/he is not-moral and lives by preyingon the vulnerability of the others in the society. Economicaffluence/goodness does not necessarily mean either moral or socialgoodness.

4.2. Development as good does not necessarily the case of being goodmorally. They are notions apart. In fact, development as modernisationoperates on the (economic cum political) rationality of human control(domination) over nature as to provision abundance of goods, namelythe accumulation of material and technological goods. As previouslypointed out, there is a vast chasm between morally good anddevelopmentally good. One does not imply the other. A person may beeconomically good does in no way means s/he is morally good.Hence the argument is that what is materially and technologicallygood is not necessarily morally good and by extension the action that isdevelopmentally good need not morally and socially good. Theascription that development thinking as good is to covert the idea ofmoral goodness. A nation may be deemed developed in the sense ofhigher level of per capita income, but this does in no way mean thatnation and its people are morally good. Granted that developmentmeans goodness, then the question is to whose goodness and atwhose expense? Does development carry the traces utilitarianhedonism?

5. Development & Progress:The termprogressseems to be more closely connectedwith the idea of development. The factor that is identified as progressive canequivalently be predicated as developing. In my school days after everyexamination a progress report was given accounting my performance-development that implied the idea that I am educationally developing. To alarger extent we may agree to this usage of development as progress andprogress as development. The more one progresses into different educationalstages s/he may be considered educated or developed.

5.1.

But what is the type of education in through which someone isconsidered progressive or developing? Suppose for instance, if aperson is placed in a gurugula system where in perfect utterance ofVedic hymns and verbatim repetition of them by memory isconsidered as best progress, can we say, that the person is developed?Suppose a person is place in Biblical School where in s/he is taught toutter the tactics of repeating biblical texts in the given varying life-contexts, can we say, that the person is educated and thereby he hasprogressed or developed? Education for repeating old is different fromeducation for discovering the new for the progress of mankind. Thelatter is developmental and the former is anti-developmental. Are alltypes of education developmental? Can we not speak of mystifying,banking system of education (Friere) and development education itselfis one such?


4/11

4

6. Thus the term development seems (to me) like a camouflage. The moment I seedevelopment I am under illusion that it is good, the moment I see good, I amunder the illusion that it is happiness. It is like seeing the snake and the ropetype. The moment I see the snake the rope evades andthe moment I see the ropethe snake escapes, escapes only to poisonously bite me to the trap of concomitantsuffering. The disguised perceptions development, though alluring, compelstowards its further exploration.

7. Development and Social Change: Though rather ambiguous, the termdevelopmenthas been the central issue in human history for several decades. Theconcept of development is allied with the idea of social change. But not allsocial change is called development. Movement in the historical backwardnesscannot be considered development. The type of changes towards modernisationis alone called development. Movement towards economic and social modes ofexistence geared through science and technology and rational control ofenvironment in favour of human interests is deemed development.Development is generally perceived as synonymous with economic growth of anation/people measured in collective quantitative categories in terms of a higherannual rate of growth of Gross National Product. The presupposition is that thehigher the levels of economic growth better the status of development.Development means economic growth and economic growth is tied with thenotion of viable social change of the people who benefit development action. Thevariable social change refers to increased quality of life in political, cultural,economic and social factors. Does development bring about social change in thecase traditional structures or use them as viable medium of/for developmentalprocess towards the interest of the powerful?

8. Rationality of Development: The global context of education over the last fourcenturies (European Thought/history) is predominantly identified with this typeeducation as development. Breaking away from the ancient and the medievalpatterns of education, the philosophy of education as development propelled theideas/ideals of human rationality (Science and Technology) as Development.Reason cum Sense Experience as certainty of the foundations of knowledge is theepistemological position that embedded the foundations of development in allthese period/epochs. The priority of human rationality as against illegitimateforms of traditions and illicit rationalities came to be called Knowledge for/asdevelopment.

8.1. Onto theses foundations of human reason/sense experience, thedevelopmental categories (avenues) namely science, social sciences,human control of nature, technology, technology with human face,democratic politics (secularism and modern state), industrialization,transport, journalism, net work of communications, capitalism,transnational capitalism, Market Economy, corporate sectors,globalisation, defence, social relations, legal systems, Human rightsdiscourse, one world human order, and so on are indwelling.


5/11

5

9. Development Dilemmas: Development is a relative concept constituted by

binaries categorically oppositional but inclusive of either Developed vs.

Underdeveloped. Given to the binary positioning between these two, there lies

an operational logic of strategic hierarchy. The pertinent

dilemmas/questions/debate here are as follows:o Is right for the developed countries/man to be developed while the- other

is under developed?

o Is ones development caused by the underdevelopment of the other?

o Does development means under-developed countries are increasingly

subsumed as consumers of technological invasion?

o Is the developed nation any way responsible or feel guilty of their own

development and for others underdevelopment?

o Is it morally correct to designate the other as underdeveloped simply

because the other has insufficient material goods and technological

sophistications?

o What is the relation between the possession of richness and being

humanly rich/good?

o Which are the institutions that developed countries sponsor? If so why?

Which institutions and interests do the developed countries serve? If so,

what is effect of these institutions on the underdeveloped nations?

o Can/must the developed man work/serve the interests of the

underdeveloped if so, to what extent? Even if it demands a sacrifice ofhis/her privileges?

o If Developmental Aids are explored/revealed to be domestications of the

other, should development be deemed development?

o Those development agencies who have not experienced the case of

deprivation, displacement, and death, what is the legitimacy of their

representations? Can we claim the problem of casteism and its

discriminatory practice is eradicated because the untouchable has

developed within modernist models of development?

o

Is development a process of perpetuating underdevelopment andthereby retaining the economic and political power? If so, is development

a concept adhered to the principle/practice of power-relations?

Though disturbing, these questions are important to engage a post-

development/post-modernist debates.

10.Development as Modernisation: Development in its totality is the issue of beingscientific-rational-democratic-trans-national or global (in terms of economic andtechnological advancements and abundance -either by control or manipulation of

Nature and the people of nature who are quite natural). These factorscumulatively refer the thinking called Development. And by definition,


6/11

6

development is the human be-coming techno-logical (tactical, the tactical canimplore upon the political and the economic considerations), a movement awayfrom being natural and the old-cultural form of life towards a sense of being non-natural (namely newly political, economic, and technological and differentlycultural).

10.1.

The catchy and witchy phrase is then Development is Modernisation.Modernization is trans-nationalization and Trans-nationalization isletting us to be technologically communicative to participate in FreeTrade Market as to enjoy its benefits namely progress and happiness.Development thinking is inclusive of the practice of (i) utilization ofnatural resources towards the benefit of market forces, (ii) reorientationof public expenditure by private entrepreneurships and carefullytargeted social expenditure, (iii) tax reformation (in practice, thismeans regression of taxation), trade and financial liberalization, (iv)trade and financial liberalizations, (v) elimination of barriers to directinvestments by foreign agencies, (vi) promoting cut-throat competitivemarket economy by privatization and International MarketRegulations (beyond the national legal sovereignty) and ensuringhuman property rights (in practice human rights here is meant therights of market forces).1These factors are called as economic reformssince 1991 in India. These economic reforms/development thinking isdeemed good towards the progress of the nation and its people.

10.2. The operational logic is: Development implies GlobalMerchantalization through Modernisation and there by humanprogress and happiness is guaranteed.

10.3.

However, the modernisation rationality veils the deceit namely those(nations/People) who possess the power of modernist rationality hasthe right to exist by way of manipulation strategies/ the Descartianpremise, I think therefore I am, is globally actualised in the sense ofthose who think (who possess the power of economic/technologicalreason) self impose the right to exist by way(s) inclusion and exclusionor appropriation or misappropriation.

11.Social Capital or Global solidarity as social inclusion for exclusion: Alliedwith the rationality of human control over nature, namely modernization, is theprinciple of the global need for expansion, a sort of evangelization of the goodnews of development. The evangeliser needs the evangelised for continuousevangelization. i.e., Development as expansion. Perhaps one may call it yet-another-form of (neo) colonial control of the not/yet-developing(underdevelopment) nations. Development thus, conceives the practical principleof getting itself expanded beyond the borders of national and individualintegrity. That is how the very idea of development is programmed to bedeveloped.To be developed is to be expanded. I expand therefore I am.The languageof development for expansion is global solidarity global village one worldhuman order. This means that the modernised economic expansion requires its

1John Harriss, depoliticizing development, (LeftWrod Books, Dehi, 2001)p.78.


7/11

7

corollary namely the liberal practice of infringement into national cum politicalsolidarity of nations in particular. To put it differently, the national democraticborders must voluntarily be loosened to pave way for development expansion.The political slogan for trans-national colonial market expansion is Social Capital.

12.

The term Social Capital here needs some clarification in the recent developmentthinking. Development as social capital is marked by the high sounding termssuch as Getting the Social Relations Right and Development Thinking, Civil society,civic involvement, and building up of transnational corporate and corporate socialresponsibility, communitarianism etc all geared to form a good governmentwhich would in turn facilitate Development as a process of capitalising theresources of other nations. According to social capitalism, a government, whichis formed, supported and governed by civil society, would generate free marketpossibilities. This implies a specific sense of social inclusion, flattening ofmultiplicity through strategic means or ways of calming down or domesticationof or differently voicing the voices of resistance segments or quintessence ofpolitical and cultural pluralities. Social Capital holds the belief that Developmentas modernisation is not pragmatic if it does not expand and include the-other,namely the under-developed nations and people and their resources.

13.Principle of participation: The consequence of development thinking, is thenecessity of locating the social capital of the individual nations / people by waysof promoting people-participation, which in other words, a sense of promotion oflocal-organisational modes (associations or forms of civil society) to guaranteedevelopment-modernisation so that all men are associated and made-to-participate and if need be against ruling states that resist development in orderthat it is developed. The vulnerability of nations is the precondition of thepractice/principle of development.

14.The vulnerability of people instance for, the low-income status, classconsciousness, and of course caste-consciousness may not be seriouslyquestioned by development agencies rather they are maintained in culturalprivate space/realms) so that the already available social capital2 theprivileged class, the professionally educated elites, the already

politically/economically powerful, the NGO sectors, the affluent religious, andthe so-called culturally privileged high caste segments- are used as DevelopmentAgencies as to propagate (evangelise) development programmes and in turn they

2Social Capital is the set of resources that inhere in family relations and community social organisation, and

they are useful for cognitive and social development. It refers to aspects of social structure that constitute a

capital asset for individual. Social capital is defined by its functions such as community organization, informal

socializing, lobbying, engagement in public affairs, community volunteerism, social trust etc . it refer to the

ways and means of creating relationships and ties and associations. Social capital is the resources that are latent

in social networks/relationships. These resources are otherwise identified as trust reciprocity, civil

responsibility, corporate social responsibility etc. Bourdieu . P, (An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology) Coleman

(Social Capital and the Creation of Human Capital), Robert Development Thinking Putnam (MakingDemocracy Work), are some of the chief advocates of social capital as a corollary of Development thinking.

Social capital is the way of governing market.


8/11

8

primarily benefit or enjoy the major share due to their own already availablesocial capital (the cultural conditions to be powerful) of being powerful.

15.

According to social capital theory further holds that the State-led approach to(economic) development does not favour the interests of the developmentagencies (global market-economy) because State politics is essentially predatoryof development process and therefore needs to be guarded or locked inside orkept under peoples watch. The cleavage/dividing line of State vs. Market canbe trespassed or solved by a developmental thinking namely the promotion ofsocial capital. Development thinking argues that State (Nation) is block toeconomic development and hence needs to be strategically carved if need becurved as to encourage peoples participation to guarantee the supply of objectsof development, namely the raw material (work force/ natural resources) fordevelopmental ends. To this, the social (people) needs to be identified and whatis social is the organisational possibilities (forms of civil associations/NGOs) ofthe people in the under-developing countries who would act as agents ofdevelopment of that of IMFs and World Bank Organisations.

16.That the powerless have to be strategically retained powerless in order that thepre-established cultural/social capitalists enjoy the benefits of development. Thisseems to be the reason why in spite of development actions such asindustrialization and economic growth, no basic changes have occurred in classrelationships and caste cultural relations and distribution of wealth and powerand social system remains structurally exploitative in large scale in the face

development process over last several decades. What is required is the voluntarysubmission of the peoples will (participation) as to allow oneself to bedeveloped by developmental capitalists or agencies. The lack of social capitalof the vulnerable poor people becomes the social capital of the already powerfulsections to utilise the vulnerable people to their developmental interests. Theorganisational forms (cultural and political and social) of the powerful are turnedin to assets/resources (social capital) to reap the benefits of material goods,namely of that of development practice. In other words development seems to beworking well in favour of or on the side of the already powerful people ratherthan working on the side of the poor people. The poor are increasingly

subordinated towards the maximum good of the maximised sections. Instead ofdestroying classism and casteism, development process seems to be eitherproducing new forms of class or maintaining class/caste consciousness. The lackof consolidated social organisations set-ups, (social capital) is politically retainedtowards the economic/political interests of the socially capitalised sectors.Development thinking conceives the idea that a free-market (advocacy of thefreedom of Market as against democratic/individual freedom) and market forcesare an end in themselves which might address the issue of poverty to beprogressively taken care of.


9/11

9

17.The rationality is that development as Modernisation is practicable in the form ofneo-liberalism and Neo liberalism is practicable both by State-led cooperationand if the State is proved to be predatory, then simultaneously by promotingsocial capital namely people participation (the social condition for development)so that world markets are left to themselves to undue expansion/exploitation(development) and such economic expansion/development might in the longrun address the problem of poverty and if possible discrimination.

18.Social inclusion/Social Capital on the other hand, demands or suppliers of rawmaterials towards development process and consumers of developmentproducts. In other words, the concept of development is pitched continuously onthe maintenance-practice of underdevelopment in the catchy word called socialcapital. Though seemingly paradoxical, development requiresunderdevelopment and underdevelopment requires development and theprocess is sort of a Hegelian dialectics, and Hegelian Dialectics would literallymean negation of any opposition in the most sophisticated (so called thehistorical-natural way). To put it sharply, the vulnerability of people is anecessary precondition to development and the logic of development thinking isdomination per se.

19.Development and Progress Trap: The issue of development as progress forhappiness, scholars identify, conceives the problem, technically known as theProgress Trap3. A progress trap is the condition human societies experiencewhen, in pursuing progress through human reason and technology, theyinadvertently introduce problems they do not have the resources or political willto solve, for fear of short-term losses in status, stability or quality of life. Thisprevents further progress and sometimes leads to collapse or what is known asprogress trap. The Progress trap implies the idea that large scale humanexploitation of nature and people, depletes the natural resources and depriveshuman accessibility to natural resources and causes ecological crisis andecological crisis in turn affect living conditions of people which in turnspronounces death penalty of human kind at large.

20. Trapped in progress, those in positions of authority are unwilling to makechanges necessary for future survival. To do so they would need to sacrifice theircurrent status and political power at the top of a hierarchy. They may also beunable to raise public support and the necessary economic resources, even if theytry. Since development as modernisation is counter-active to humandevelopment, scholars are of the opinion that development as modernisation isbut a practice of human domination over natural resources and the vulnerable

3The term gained attention following thehistorian andnovelistRonald Wright's 2004 book andMassey

Lecture seriesA Short History of Progress,in which he sketches world history so far as a succession of progress

traps. With the documentary film version of Wright's book "Surviving Progress," backed by Martin Scorsese,

the concept achieved wider recognition. The syndrome appears to have been first described by Prof. Walter Von

Krmer, in his series of 1989 articles[1]

under the titleFortschrittsfalle Medizin (Medical ProgressTraps).Daniel O'Leary's proposal for The Progress Trap and how to avoid itwas accepted by McGill Queen's

University Press in 1992. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_trap)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historianhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novelisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Wrighthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massey_Lecturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massey_Lecturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Short_History_of_Progresshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Short_History_of_Progresshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Short_History_of_Progresshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_trap#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_trap#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_trap#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_traphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_traphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_traphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_traphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_trap#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Short_History_of_Progresshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massey_Lecturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massey_Lecturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massey_Lecturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Wrighthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novelisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historian


10/11

10

people. To start with, one of the suggested alternative to Development asmodernisation and there by domination is to counter-act it in an unconditionallymanner is morally good, socially relational, and economically sustainable.

21.Postmodern/post-development inferences for discussion21.1.

There are those who believe that development as modernisation is theway towards human progress.

21.2.

There are those who hold development is western, and not Indian, andhence tracing the golden- Indian is the way of indigenousdevelopment action.

21.3. There are those who hold that development as modernisation has notfavoured the development of the vulnerable nations and people and infact it has continued to propagate old forms of domination in a newerfashion and hence arises the need to engage a post-developmentdiscourse in favour of the vulnerable people and in so doing seekalternate ways of engaging development.

21.4. There are those who argue that development belong the culture ofscientism, economism and a form totalitarianism, the forms of thedominant medieval colonial traditions in newer-vessels. Hence,proclaim incredulity towards meta-narratives(Lyotard, Derrida).

21.5. There are those who argue that development as modernisation iscontingent to socio-historical constructs of power and domination andhence must be seen from the point of view of power relations(Foucault4). Foucault, a critique of the modernist rationality raises thisissue: Is it not necessary to draw a line between those who believethat we can continue to situate our present discontinuities within thehistorical and transcendental tradition of the nineteenth century and

4 Foucault's critique of modernity and humanism, along with his proclamation of the death of man' and

development of new perspectives on society, knowledge, discourse, and power, has made him a major source of

postmodern thought. Foucault draws upon an anti-Enlightenment tradition that rejects the equation of reason,

emancipation, and progress, arguing that an interface between modern forms of power and knowledge has

served to create new forms of domination. In a series of historical-philosophical studies, he has attempted to

develop and substantiate this theme from various perspectives: psychiatry, medicine, punishment and

criminology, the emergence of the human sciences, the formation of various disciplinary apparatuses, and the

constitution of the subject. Foucault's project has been to write a critique of our historical era' whichproblematizes modern forms of knowledge, rationality, social institutions, and subjectivity that seem to be given

and natural but in fact are contingent socio-historical constructs of power and domination. Nietzsche provided

Foucault, and nearly all French poststructuralists, with the impetus and ideas to transcend Hegelian and Marxist

philosophies. In addition to initiating a postmetaphysical, posthumanist mode of thought, Nietzsche taught

Foucault that one could write a genealogical' history of unconventional topics such as reason, madness, and the

subject which located their emergence within sites of domination. Nietzsche demonstrated that the will to truth

and knowledge is in-dissociable from the will to power, and Foucault developed these claims in his critique ofliberal humanism, the human sciences, and in his later work on ethics. Foucault was also deeply influenced by

Bataille's assault on Enlightenment reason and the reality principle of Western culture. Bataille (1985, 1988,

1989) championed the realm of heterogeneity, the ecstatic and explosive forces of religious fervor, secularity,

and intoxicated experience that subvert and transgress the instrumental rationality and normalcy of bourgeois

culture. Foucault as a profoundly conflicted thinker whose thought is torn between oppositions such as

totalizing/detotalizing impulses and tensions between discursive/extra-discursive theorization,macro/microperspectives, and a dialectic of domination/resistance.


11/11

11

those who are making a great effort to liberate themselves, once andfor all, from this conceptual framework?The postmodern question isWhat is the rationality of development paradigm that enforces thevulnerability5of nations and people?

21.6. In other words development looked from the point of view of thevulnerable is newer form of power domination and therebyexploitation of the weaker sections of people. Since Development asmodernisation relies on the principles of modernist rationality andpeoples vulnerability, the very foundations of development must beseriously eroded and suspended.

21.7. There are those who argue that, one cannot modernise and acclaimdevelopment without losing sight of power- relations. If so,development is meant to share/contest for social power.

21.8. Within Indian Diaspora, the paradigms of alternate ways of perceivingdevelopment include:(i)

Development as modernisation but without losing sight of thepast i.e., development as modernisation cum Indian Tradition,

(ii)

Development as modernisation but for reproduction of the oldpatterns and forms of life

(iii) Development as modernisation which privileges theenlightenment eschatology/Morality

(iv)

Development as Project Engagement as to involve socialcapital of the people which might in turn mystify any viablepolitical protest against the politics of development anddevelopment agencies.

(v)

Given to the fact that there are pre-established power relationsin culture/traditions (casteism), development benefits arereaped by those who are in upper layer of hierarchy and hencesuch cultural practices of hierarchy and discriminations must beannihilated however without losing sight of the benefits ofmodernity.

(vi)

Some others augment for Development as Liberation but what ismeant by liberation is yet another overloaded debate.

------x----------x----------

5Vulnerability is the position and exposure to forces that one finds it hard to control if not resist. Vulnerability

is the inability (of depressed societies like Dalits and the Tribal) to determine the outcome of responses to

pressing economic-political and social forces. Vulnerability provides a frame for viewing underdevelopment

and social deprivations. Social Vulnerability refers to the social and low-income status to meet the demands ofdevelopment goals.

Banglore ISI

Documents

Transcript of Banglore ISI