The wealthy nations could not have industrialized under the policies they impose on Africa
Evidence
The EPA is biased against development by design. CONCORD concluded that the EU negotiated the EPA to benefit Europe, and West African nations would be pressured to make heavy cuts to public spending, which currently supports ‘the building of schools and hospitals, support for family farming, and other public services’. What institutions like the European Commission, the IMF or the World Bank never admit is that the advanced nations of the world today could never have become wealthy following the strategies that they now force on to the poor nations through these arrangements. Protection from external competition, use of regulation, and continued fiscal support to develop infrastructure, education and health services is essential for the development process. This is the very antithesis of the EPA approach. — Fanny Pigeaud_ Ndongo Samba Sylla, Africa’s Last Colonial Currency, 36
Categorization
- XREF: Echoes the ‘kicking away the ladder’ argument of Ha-Joon Chang; relevant to the reader’s interest in how colonial/extractive pacts systematically disadvantage the periphery. — connects to: Underdeveloped nations exist to channel surplus toward wealthy metropolises.; The colonial pact forbade African industrialisation and monopolised colonial trade — Fanny Pigeaud_ Ndongo Samba Sylla, Africa’s Last Colonial Currency, 62; Rich nations achieved growth through protectionism they now deny the South — Clara E. Mattei, Escape from Capitalism, 296
- SEED: An essay contrasting the protectionist-industrialization histories of advanced economies with the liberalization forced on African states.