Evaluation Of Modernization, Dependency And Feminist Theory

Development is to have taken place when one is able to move from a lower stage to a higher one. Development is gradual therefore it does not take place overnight. For instance, “it is not simply just an increase in Gross Domestic Production (G. D. P). it is rather multidimensional and there are no universally accepted approaches which can work as a liability for development” The drive of this essay is to assess the strengths and weaknesses of modernization, dependency and feminist theory.

First and foremost, when we say modernization, it simply means Africans trying to climb the developmental ladder of their colonial masters. In other words, trying to reach the developmental stage of Europe. The modernization theory creates policies which seek to eliminate poverty and raise the living standard of the poor in the society by imparting knowledge about a more efficient method of production, like the use of mechanized machines on farms to speed up work and increase production there by increasing export and trade and yielding more finances.

One weakness of modernization theory is that it is a one side fit all. Modernization theory does not take into consideration the fact that the conditions in the third world countries might be different or actually differs from that of America and Europe at the time of their development therefore techniques used for the European world will not be suitable for the third world countries. It is a fallacy to think that the same solution can be exercised on two societies who are virtually different in way of living and history. Another weakness is it over simplified view of social change. Change is gradual and difficult-a statement that modernists fail to accept. The human nature is structured in such a way that if the change brought to it doorstep does not comply to the status quo, automatically, its resistance power gets activated. Mostly, the uncertainty of the outcome of change is what calls for its resistance. The New Partnership for Africa’s Development for instance, when drafted and sent to Africa was opposed and condemned by many African leaders.

Well, aside its weaknesses, it does have some strengths

The next theory I am going to talk about is the feminism theory. Advocated by certain personalities such as Jean Baker Miller, who was of the view that “there was nothing wrong with women but the way society viewed them” led to the idea that all genders should be seen equally and have equal opportunities. The feminists saw that the root cause of inequality was the “unconscious indoctrination of the patriarchy” system in the society. The aim of the theory was to eradicate stereotype among genders. One of the strengths of the theory is that it made the role of women and gender relations visible in sociology and society in general. Indeed, women now had the legitimate right to make decisions for themselves free of the opposite genders influence. Taking decisions relating to reproduction, employment, sex, sociological choices and gender roles were now a capacity of a woman. Another strength is that it created awareness of inequality created by gender. Women were giving the opportunity to voice out and air their views on matters of politics, education and seemingly difficult tasks men engaged in. Of course, this theory also comes with its weaknesses. One weakness of the feminist theory is that it ignored wider factors such as class. If indeed it aim was to eradicate inequality, then, the purpose it came to serve was a limitation of it aim, in other words, it has failed in serving it purpose. This is because, feminist failed to see the bigger picture of inequality in our class system while trying to solve the one-sided issue of inequality among gender role. Again, Marxist feminist fail to examine the position of women under state socialism, they also put heavy reliance on economic analysis thereby failing to determine the reason why women are the most victims to sexual abuse, domestic abuse, etcetera and why women in the society are the less educated or occupy the unrespectable positions in companies.

The next theory I will be talking about is the dependency theory. The theory was established in 1950 by Raul Prebisch. The aim of this theory was to attempt the understanding of why some countries appears to be more developed than others. According to them, “richer nations prospered while underdeveloped nations remained poorer”. Do you think that is the case? Because I don’t think so.

To me, richer countries (Africa) are being exploited of their riches to better the poor countries (Europe) who have virtually nothing. After colonization, the tables turned and African countries now appear to be underdeveloped with the Europeans at the developed stage. The theory does well to analyze the relationship between the rich and the poor. However, it over generalizes by assuming that the reason behind underdevelopment in the peripheral countries is the same, neglecting the causal factors such as class status and internal conflicts within the nations. Again, aside explaining the role played by wealthy nations towards the underdevelopment of certain countries, the dependency theory does not explain other factors that led to underdevelopment. However, it performs a great role of analyzing the great boundary, existing between the rich and the poor countries.