Capital, local development strategies and NGOs: A critical reflection on interrelationsJan LustAbstract: The objective of the capitalist project of development is to facilitate and expand the accumulation of capital. As such, development opposes the fundamental and historical interests of the exploited classes. Local development strategies tend to demobilize the population and to secure the local pillars of the overall capitalist framework. Masked by the concept of empowerment, these strategies intend to divert the attention of the poor from the real political and economic power structures. NGOs that are financed by agencies of international cooperation for development are most suitable transmitters of these strategies. They could be considered as the soft reactionary hands of capital and the local bases of the project of imperialism. The revolutionary forces have to fight these NGOs and to establish at local level the political and social bases to conquer the consciousness of the masses in order to be able to advance towards the social transformation of society.Keywords: capital, development, local development strategies, social transformation, non-governmental organisations (NGOs)Introduction

For around sixty years developmental theorists are discussing the problem of underdevelopment and issues related to it in what is been denominated as the Third World. Different types of development strategies have been elaborated and implemented, conditioned by the international correlation of class forces and specific world political and economic circumstances. However, until today, developmental theoretists have not been able to find and introduce lasting solutions to the problem of underdevelopment.

The strategies that have been implemented to address the question of underdevelopment took, and still take, the bounderies of the capitalist mode of production and distribution as given. As a matter of fact, although the developmental theorists that elaborated their strategies in the decades of the 50s and the 60s of the last century critized the external and internal structures that made progress in the Third World very difficult and developed proposals that pointed to a change of these structures, nevertheless, these propositions were confined within the overall capitalist framework. It could be argued that these theorists were more concerned with expanding the capitalist system and the improvement of its workings, considering that a system based on exploitation and oppression would result in benefits for all, than were preoccupied with the fundamental causes of underdevelopment itself. The problem of underdevelopment and related questions were their points of departure and it was necessary that the Third World was set on a path that might lead to progress.

The period in which the first development strategies started to appear is considered as the golden age of capitalism, which occurred mainly in the advanced countries and was characterized by rapid economic expansion and high employment rates. The developmental theorists were undoubtedly influenced by the possibilities a capitalist road of development was offering and it is therefore of no surprise that their strategies mainly concerned macro issues, such as the economic structure of society and the role of the State in the economy. This all came to an end with the capitalist production crisis of the 70s. The political, economical and social restructuring of capitalist societies that was carried through in the 70s and continued in the decade hereafter, impacted heavily on mainstream development strategies that were elaborated in these years: the examination of the structures of underdevelopment was put aside and a normative analysis took its place. When, at the end of the 80s, the Soviet-Union collapsed and the former real existing socialist countries in Eastern Europe started to reintroduce capitalism, a new era was born. It was considered that no alternative existed to capitalism and instead of trying to restructure its economies the Third World had to open up to international capital. In addition, what nowadays is known as globalization expanded and deepened this process of what could be called neo-colonization.

The development strategies that are currently being elaborated and implemented do not question the causes of underdevelopment, just as the developmental theorists of the 50s and 60s did not either. This is all understandable, as the actual international correlation of class forces favour the dominant classes and these are not interested in solving the roots of underdevelopment. In fact, due to the political weakness of the left, development models and strategies are being elaborated and introduced that could be considered as attacks on the fundamental interests of the dominated classes, defined as a process towards the creation of a society based on socialist principles. It could even be argued that every development strategy that does not break the restrictions of the capitalist mode of production opposes these (historical) interests.In this essay we discuss the relationship between the capitalist project of development, local development strategies and the role of internationally financed non-governmental organisations (NGOs). We intend to show that local development strategies, as part of the overall capitalist project of development, are most appropriate to maintain the basis for the accumulation of capital. Local development initiatives financed by agencies of international cooperation for development and implemented by NGOs might even be considered as reactionary as they chain the population to their communities and seem to intend to divert them from the struggle against the real causes of exploitation, oppression and misery, i.e., capitalism.We do not underestimate the importance of local development strategies for the population as means to reduce poverty and inequality, although these do not point to overcome capitalism. It seems, nevertheless, that these strategies serve more the interests of those agencies that finance these than their object, that is, the population. We consider local development strategies as instruments for social transformation only when these are embedded in a general strategy towards this goal. A social transformation of society implies an irreversible change of the production relations, which can be deconstructed in relations of ownership, functionality and exploitation; who produces what, for whom and how (Carchedi, 1987: 95).This essay is structured in four parts. In the first section we present our point of view regarding the concept of development and describe the capitalist project of development in relation to some key aspects of capitalist society and imperialism in particular. Section two builds on the previous section as we analyze, in general terms, the limitations of local development strategies and their suitability for capital. In section three we discuss the role of NGOs in the promotion of local development strategies and their function for the capitalist project of development in general. In the fourth section we present our conclusions. I. The capitalist project of development and the social transformation of societyAn analysis of local development strategies cannot be disconnected from ones concept of development or how one considers development within capitalism. Indeed, it could be argued that this analysis is predetermined of how one contemplates development. As, in addition, in the last decades a variety of development schools have appeared, from neo-structuralism and sustainable human development to alternative and post-development, we think it essential to explicitly express our point of view.

The project of development that surged at the end of the 40s the Point Four Program launched in 1949 by former President of the United States Harry Truman was meant to keep the recently decolonized countries within the free world of capitalist exploitation and oppression. During the passing of time this project has not changed its essential objective, i.e., to facilitate and expand the accumulation of capital by the corporations from the North.

Development within the context of the dominance of a capitalist mode of production could be considered as a political and ideological construct. It is political as it opposes the liberation of the peoples of the yoke of capitalism and it is ideological as it tries to mask the character of the system. Development strategies intend to make belief that real and structural progress is possible within the implicit restrictions set by capitalism and the political and economic interests of imperialism and the local ruling class. As these strategies surge from the womb of capitalism and are tightly connected with it by an umblical cord, they do not and cannot point to the eradication of the system that precisely made them appear.

The capitalist project of development contradicts a social transformation of society. In order to sustain our argument regarding development as a political and ideological construct, we consider it imperative to relate some key aspects of capitalist society, and imperialism in particular, to the capitalist project of development. Besides, we think it valuable to indicate what in these matters a social transformation of society could imply.Capitalism is a class-based society. In general, we could divide capitalist society in owners of the means of production and owners of labour power (or non-owners of the means of production). The class struggle that is product of the contradictionary interests of these two classes can be considered as the motor of history. A social transformation of society can only be materialized if the owners of the means of production, as a class, are politically and economically eliminated. Development strategies do not point to this objective and as a consequence they, directly and indirectly, serve the interests of the capitalist class.The capitalist mode of production is based on the private ownership of the means of production. On the basis of this ownership, the individual capitalist is able to extract surplus value of the direct producers and to transform it in capital in order to survive in the competitive rat race with other capitalists and to expand its production. This relation of exploitation shows that the exploiters (capitalists) not only need the exploited (producers) for their own survival as capitalists, but also have to maintain (reproduce) this relation to survive as a class. As a matter of fact, as Marx (1973: 543) noted, the conditions of production are also those of reproduction. A social transformation of society should imply the transference of the means of production into the hands of society by a process of nationalization and socialization. Development programs lock out this possibility or rather intend to increase the economical, social and ideological basis of the capitalist mode of production. In this way, development programs contribute to fulfill the objective of capitalism, that is, the accumulation of capital.

The State in capitalist society is not class-neutral. In fact, it is a collective of all institutional organisms that serve the purpose of collective capital; it is an organ of and for class domination and oppression and has the task to maintain the general conditions for the reproduction of the capitalist mode of production. In a lot of occasions, development projects include organisms of the capitalist State as partners and do not consider these as possible class adversaries. By accepting these institutions, development projects implicitly support and maintain the dictatorship of a minority over the majority and everything what this implies. A social transformation of society points to the destruction of the capitalist State and a far-reaching democratization of society.

In the era of neoliberal globalization, it could be argued that the role of the capitalist State is being reduced or minimized by the economic power of transnational corporations. This point of view is wrong, as it not only abstracts from actual capitalist reality but also from the political, economic and military practice of imperialism, embodied by the United States. As is argued by Mrquez Covarrubias (2010: 12), the State is a central agent to expand neoliberalism. Besides, as has been demonstrated by the worldwide financial crisis that started to unfold in 2008, the State intervenes to socialize the debt of privately owned companies; it tries to maintain a certain social equilibrium in order that economic neoliberal development does not generate violent protests and distrust in the political system; and represses strikes and demonstrations.Neoliberal globalization is the worldwide institutionalized form of exploitation and oppression by the capitalist centre. Under the leadership of the United States, the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (WB) serve the interests of transnational corporations. These interests are military defended by the centre under the flag of multilateral institutions, such as the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. In fact, neoliberal globalization could be considered as a deliberate project of world domination by the United States and, as such, a more appropriate definition to describe this phenomenon would be imperialism. Development projects financed by international institutions do not have the objective to overcome the fundamental causes of underdevelopment but to pave the way for capital, to create the conditions needed for economic and social development. (Petras & Veltmeyer, 2011: 105).Finally, and before concentrating us specifically on issues related to local development strategies, we would like to delve a bit into the relations between of what is been called the North and the South, as the countries in the perifphery of the capitalist system are the principal targets of the agencies of international cooperation for development. Although the relations between the centre and the periphery could be defined in political, economical and military terms as of domination and dependence, however, these are not linear or static. As is argued by Petras and Veltmeyer (2011: 105), these relations are dynamic and change over time, in part because the geopolitical and economic concerns of the nation-state subject to imperial power leads to a quest for relative autonomy by state officials and politicians in these countries and protection of the national interest at issue. In addition, although capitalists in the North and the South may have at certain points conflicting economic interests, however markedly diminished by increased penetration of globally functioning corporations in the South, in general, differences in economic interests and short term political objectives are put aside when the system is questioned or is in danger. It is precisely for these reasons that internationally financed development projects, essentialy, intend i) to help maintain political stability that might be disrupted by the revolt of the impoverished and hungry masses; ii) to lock the population into small scale projects as a mean to mystify the structures that lay at the bottom of their particular socio-economic situation; and iii) to develop small local markets as mechanisms for income generation and for spreading of the capitalist ideology. A society on the road of social transformation breaks the chains with the capitalist centre, lifts its population out of misery and makes it object and subject of its own development.II. Local development strategies: their limitations and suitability for capitalThe elaboration and implementation of local development strategies got increasing attention in the context of the Post-Washington Consensus. Neoliberal policies had sorted their desired economic and political effects by opening the economies of the Third World for transnational capital and through disseminating the ideology that society is one big market place. The poor, however, were still poor and it seemed to be necessary to lift them to a certain level of progress in order to avoid possible rebellion that could affect the accumulation of capital. As a matter of fact, the resistance against the neoliberal policies imposed by Washington formed exactly one of the main reasons to rapidly introduce new development strategies. Those strategies that pointed to the participation of the poor in the elaboration and implementation of development projects (empowerment) and that could be converted into local pillars of the overall capitalist framework were considered as the most appropriate ones.

The empowerment of the poor, i.e., giving the poor decision-making capacities regarding issues related to local development projects, is nothing but an ideological construct as the ruling classes are not likely to transfer or share their real power. We do not deny that the poor might play an active role in these projects and even be authorized to make decisions, however, as these projects are confined to small communities and are not a threat to the structures that cause their poverty, their empowerment is illusive. Empowerment replaces that what essentially is a class struggle over State and economic power (Veltmeyer, 2007: 60).The empowerment of the poor as embodied in the concept of social capital and broadly disseminated in the mid 1990s by the multilateral institutions of imperialism, has important implicit side-effects, appropriate for the interests of capital. By giving the poor the administration and responsibility over their own development, distracts their attention to the real political and economic power structures and restricts their activities to the local environment (Veltmeyer, 2011: 188). Empowerment serves the objective to keep the poor far away from social movements that question the exploitative and oppressive structures of society. Veltmeyer (2007: 84) argues this matter in the following way: Local community groups are left to celebrate their empowerment (decision-making capacity vis--vis the distribution of local resources and the allocation of any poverty-alleviation funds), while the powers-that-be retain their existing (and disproportionate) share of national and local resources and the legal entitlement to their property without the pressure for radical change.

It is possible to identify three general reasons why local development strategies could be considered as most suitable for the interests of capital, in addition to the appropriateness of development strategies in general for capital as has been described in the previous section. First, these strategies do not question the system. They are permitted as well as controlled by the State. In fact, as they reproduce the outside social and economic structures and, in a certain way, increase the internal (local) market, they maintain, spread and deepen the capitalist ideology in society. In addition, as Petras (1997) notes, the emphasis on local activity serves the neo-liberal regimes just right, as it allows its foreign and domestic backers to dominate macro-socio-economic policy and to channel most of the States resources on behalf of export capitalists and financial interests.Second, local development strategies do no take the existing class structures within the communities into account. As Veltmeyer (2003: 44) argues, the communities are not only divided in classes, but frequently are inmmersed in class conflicts. Although, as might be expected, this makes the implementation of these strategies rather difficult because no project is able to include or represent the whole population or community (Veltmeyer, 2003: 44), this is not of any concern as local development strategies have the implicit objective to mask and distract the attention from these class structures. Third, strategies that point to local development are conditioned and limited by national and international external structures and interests, many times officially conveyed in bilateral free trade treaties and cooperation agreements signed with the IMF, the WB and the WTO. As these structures are considered as given and not to be changed or challenged, local development strategies contribute to the demovilization of the population against the foreign invasion of their territories. The increasing presence of extractive industries in community areas is a case in point. In this context, local development strategies have the objective to mould the acceptance of the population in the face of the attack on their habitats and livilihoods by introducing projects that might provide alternative sources of income generation.Local development strategies cannot be considered as pathways out of poverty, but instead should be regarded as sophisticated strategies of domination by capital. The agencies that promote these strategies have their offices in the imperialist centres of the North. However, those that frequently implement these strategies have bases in the countries that are object of these strategies. To these agencies we turn in the next section.III. Non-governmental organizations: transmitters of the capitalist project of developmentLocal development strategies are frequently been elaborated and implemented by NGOs. We do not question the often well intentioned objectives of persons working for these organisations, nevertheless, this may not withhold us from critically analyze their political significance for capital. For instance, the presence and support of national and international NGOs for the struggle of the Peruvian indigenous communities against (transnational) capital can be considered as of mayor importance to initiate the fight and to spread national and international awareness regarding the problems these communities are facing. However, the proposals of these Peruvian-based environmentally oriented NGOs are in line with their political function, even though these may sometimes seem very radical. While on the one hand these organizations suggest the application of a tax on super profits, the elimination of tax exonerations for big capital and the implementation of a strategy that prioritizes the use of clean and cheap gas, on the other hand, they do not propose to eliminate the system of concessions, but only to empower local and regional governments to intervene in the negotiations of new ones and to monitor possible social and environmental impacts (Azpur et.al., 2012: 26, 30).

NGOs that are active in the Third World are in many cases financed by international agencies of cooperation for development. These agencies were created to facilitate and expand the accumulation of capital by the corporations from the North. As Veltmeyer (2008: 236) argues the NGOs in this context were recruited not only to mediate between the aid donors and the poor communities but to carry into the localities and communities of the poor the gospel of capitalism and democracy, the virtues of private enterprise and reform. [] The war on poverty, it is argued, is simply a charade to mask the real agenda: to create a world safe for capital-to facilitate the entry of foreign investment and the multinational corporations.The relation of dependence between local NGOs and the international agencies of cooperation for development does not permit these organizations to question the system as otherwise they loose their financial support. This, apart from their overall role as transmitters of the capitalist project of development, is another reason why NGOs are not in the position to maintain relations with social movements that intend to change the power structures within a particular country. In fact, they introduce a class collaborationist rhetoric; they emphasize the projects and not the movements; and they are focused on the finance-technical aspects of the assistance of the projects and not on the structural conditions that shape peoples everyday lives (Petras & Veltmeyer, 2003: 169, 172).

NGOs are not only directly and indirectly functional for capital, but their existence fits neatly within the wave of neoliberal globalization that tormented the so-called developing countries in the 80s and 90s. As they pertain to what is been called civil society, they suited the neoliberal agenda incredibly well. The retreat of the State from its development function in the 80s enabled these organisations to take charge, although in cooperation with the State (Petras, 2011: 94), of some of its key social functions. In addition, by passing these functions to civil society, the ruling classes succeeded to direct the attention of the impoverished masses to themselves instead of to the oppressive structures that, precisely, are the real causes of their misery.The agencies of international cooperation for development, and specifically the NGOs financed by these agencies, could be considered as the soft reactionary hands of capital as their political function is to contribute to avoid every possible road towards a system in which human beings are the driving forces of societal development instead of the interests and necessities of (transnational) capital, and where collective development forms the basis of the social and individual allocation of resources. In reality, these NGOs are created to make the practice of exploitation and oppression lesser cruel and politically acceptable for the population. They tie them to local development alternatives that do not form any threat to the local bourgeoisie and by mystifying and deviating discontent regarding company power structures, these agencies try to avoid class analysis of imperialism and capitalist exploitation (Petras & Veltmeyer, 2003: 166).

IV. ConclusionsLocal development strategies within a capitalist society serve, essentially, the interests of the dominant classes as these strategies do not point to social transformation but rather to increase and deepen the basis for the accumulation of capital. However, in capitalist societies that point, in a certain way, to social transformation such as currently in Venezuela and Bolivia, we consider local development strategies crucial for the continuation, deepening and securing of this process as it might increase its support bases in society. The suitability of local development strategies for capital does not lead us to turn down these strategies as we consider these not only important for the reduction of poverty, but also as these could be used by revolutionary forces to raise the class consciousness of the population when they link the local problematic to the social system; when they are able to connect local with national and international issues and power structures.

Local development strategies have the particularity to be frequently implemented by NGOs that are financed by the international agencies of cooperation for development. These agencies have their strongholds in the imperialist centres of the North and obey to the interests of (transnational) capital. NGOs that are contracted by these agencies could be considered as the local bases of the project of imperialism in addition to their yes-man at the national level.

The struggle for social transformation at the local level should not lead the revolutionary forces to try to convert NGOs that are financed by the aid agencies of imperialism into catalysists of a revolutionary process towards socialism. Initiatives that point to this objective will undoubtly be subject to corruption and cause a weakening of the overall forces for social change. The political and ideological devastating work of these NGOs has to be fought by creating independent local structures for social transformation and to develop and promote concrete revolutionary alternatives.

The history of the class struggle shows that impoverished masses do not necessary opt for a revolutionary path as survival is their main preoccupation. Especially in the case when the revolutionary forces have not been able to establish political and social bases at the local level, the masses are ready objects for the bourgeoisie by making use of the well-known system of clientelismo. A strategy that points to the social transformation of society necessarily has to be based on the social consciousness of the population and their socio-economic situation as it is the only way to connect the project of social transformation to the reality of the masses. However, instead of feeding this consciousness and the bellies of the poor, the revolutionary forces need to elaborate the tactics that enable them to direct their strength to conquer this consciousness as the necessity of change starts with the consciousness that this is possible.Bibliography

Azpur, Javier, Epifanio Baca, Claudia Viale & Carlos Monge (2012), Extractivismo y transiciones hacia el postextractivismo en el Per, in Alejandra Alayza & Eduardo Gudynas (eds.), Transiciones. Postextractivismo y alternativas al extractivismo en el Per, Lima, Centro Peruano de Estudios Sociales.

Carchedi, Guglielmo (1987), Class analysis and social research, Oxford, Basil Blackwell Ltd.

Mrquez Covarrubias, Humberto (2010), Crisis del sistema capitalista mundial: paradojas y respuestas, in Polis, Revista Latinoamericana, vol. 9, no. 27, in http://polis.revues.org/978 (consulted 03/10/2012).Marx, Carlos (1973), El Capital. Tomo 1, Buenos Aires, Editorial Cartago SRL.Petras, James (2011), Globalizacin, imperialism y desarrollo, in Henry Veltmeyer (ed.), Herramientas para el cambio: Manual para los estudios crticos del desarrollo, La Paz, Plural editores.Petras, James (1997), A Marxist critique of Post-Marxism, in http://www.rebelion.org/hemeroteca/petras/english/critique170102.htm (consulted 01/12/12).

Petras, James & Henry Veltmeyer (2011), Rethinking imperialist theory and US imperialism in Latin America, in HAOL, no. 26.

Petras, James & Henry Veltmeyer (2003), La globalizacin desenmascarada. El imperialismo en el siglo XXI, Mxico D.F., Miguel ngel Porra, UAZ.

Veltmeyer, Henry (2011), Capital social y desarrollo local, in Henry Veltmeyer (ed.), Herramientas para el cambio: Manual para los estudios crticos del desarrollo, La Paz, Plural editores.

Veltmeyer, Henry (2008), Civil society and local development, in Interaes (Campo Grande), vol. 9, no. 2, in http://www.scielo.br/pdf/inter/v9n2/a10v9n2.pdf (consulted 02/12/12).

Veltmeyer, Henry (2007), Illusion or Opportunity. Civil society and the quest for social change, Halifax, Fernwood Publishing.Veltmeyer, Henry (2003), La dinamica de la comunidad y las clases sociales, in Henry Veltmeyer & Anthony O Malley (eds.), En contra del neoliberalismo. El desarrollo basado en la comunidad en Amrica Latina, Mxico, Miguel ngel Porrua, UAZ. The intimate relations between the capitalists from the North and the South are clearly manifested by the political practice of the Peruvian bourgeoisie. In the last two decades it was not only capable to implement a large scale privatization process, but it was also the major political force behind the free trade agreements that Peru signed with a variety of countries. Currently, the Peruvian bourgeoisie is the principal defender of the interests of (transnational) extractive capital, having succeeded in avoiding an extra tax on the super profits of the mining corporations.

In this context, the effects of micro credits programs in Peru are interesting to mention. When these programs started to expand in the 1990s, the ideology of capitalism was spread to all corners of society. The unemployed and the poor found a way out of their miserable existence: entrepreneurship. This legacy of the neoliberal reign of former dictator Alberto Fujimori, could be considered as one of the main reasons for the actual social consciousness of the Peruvian population.

The policies of the Peruvian government regarding this matter might serve as an eye-opener. The government has declared the subsoil pertaining to all Peruvians, whereas the soil may be legally owned by individual farmer families or indigenous communities. By doing so, the current regime adheres to the law that seeks to promote investments in the mining sector, enacted in 1991. This law declares the promotion of mining investments in the national interest. The concessions granted to extractive capital have nothing to do with the soil, but are considered as rights on the subsoil resources. It is for this reason that landownership titles enter in conflict with the granted concessions as these superimpose the legal rights of the owners of the land (the soil). In order to be able to transfer this land to (transnational) extractive capital, in the 1990s the State introduced the Law of Mining Servitude. This law foresees in the possibility to expropriate the land that pertains to the farmer families and the communities in the case they have not been able to agree on an indemnification with the corporations that obtained the concession.

In order to be absolutely clear regarding this matter, we would like to emphasize the word frequently. NGOs are not the only agencies that elaborate and implement local development strategies. It goes beyond the purpose of this essay to define the other actors.

In what follows, we refer specifically to those NGOs that are financed by the international agencies of cooperation for development. We are aware of the existence of NGOs that do not specifically fall in the category of transmitters of the capitalist project of development and are not financed by these agencies.

When is referred to building the local structures of social transformation, we do no have the creation of dual power structures in mind but rather political and social bases at the local level.

1