Modernisation

Dependency Theory and Colonial Heritage. Many have tried to draw upon the legacy of the colonial system to explain the reasons for underdevelopment in many areas of the world. Most areas that suffer from poverty today are former colonies the developed nations, for the most part, are former metropoles. The colonizers exploited their underlings in colonies, turning them into suppliers of cheap raw materials and restricting the infrastructure construction, leaving former colonies with only basic facilities. In many cases, when the colonizers departed, the nations were left with artificial boundaries that separated them from each other without regard for their historical development. This fuelled subsequent separatism and military conflicts, hampering economic progress. Thus, if one looks at straight-line boundaries in Africa which we are now learning in DS 202, it becomes obvious that those were artificially created. The colonizers, in particular the British Empire, were suppressing the industrial development in their colonies because they viewed them as sources of cheap imports and at the same time large markets for their industrial goods. An example of north-eastern Brazil that often surfaces in literature on underdevelopment, (Taylor 2001) claims that north eastern Brazil in the 19th century would have appeared to be an ideal place for a textile industry with its high quality cotton and existing demand for sugar bags cloth and slave clothing. However, to develop the textile industry, it would take years during which the industry should have been shielded from foreign competition with import tariffs and quotas. This was surely not something Britain would allow in its colony. As a result, the fledgling Brazilian textile enterprises proved unable to withstand the competition with Britain's textile industry. Britain, like almost any metropole, was interested in selling to the colony, not developing industry inside it. As of 1822, when Brazil received independence,