Improving Aid Effectiveness or Transforming the Global Capitalist System

Autor/in	Ginsburg, Mark
Titel	Improving Aid Effectiveness or Transforming the Global Capitalist System
Quelle	In: Current Issues in Comparative Education, 13 (2010) 1, S.37-43 (7 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1523-1615
Schlagwörter	Stellungnahme; Economic Progress; Poverty; Quality of Life; Ideology; Criticism; Politics of Education; Developed Nations; Developing Nations; Political Attitudes; Economic Development; Models; Civil Rights; Global Approach + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Economic growth; Wirtschaftswachstum; Armut; Lebensqualität; Ideologie; Kritik; Educational policy; Bildungspolitik; Developed countries; Industriestaat; Industrieland; Developing country; Developing countries; Entwicklungsland; Political attitude; Politische Einstellung; Wirtschaftsentwicklung; Analogiemodell; Bürgerrechte; Grundrechte; Zivilrecht; Globales Denken
Abstract	In the introduction to his article, "Aid, Development, and Education," Klees (2010) poses the question, has the "hundreds of billions of dollars in international aid... loaned to [or otherwise targeted to "assist"] developing countries through bilateral and multilateral mechanisms... helped?" He then posits the question to be "too complicated to be well specified" for empirical study, in part because "there are a myriad of interactive factors that affect poverty and economic growth besides aid" and "international aid serves many [other] purposes." After reviewing a set of recent books on aid (Dichter, 2003; Easterly, 2008; Moyo, 2009; Riddell, 2007) framed mainly by authors subscribing to a neoliberal capitalist perspective, Klees concludes by stating that "the best anyone can say is that the situation could have been a lot worse than it is now without aid." Ironically, though, this conclusion may apply to: (1) the quality of life for all human beings; and/or (2) the compensatory legitimation of the world economic system and national political economies. This author basically agrees with Klees' analysis of the issues and his critical review of these assessments of aid. However, Ginsburg takes the critique further and promotes a more radical--and, in his view, more humane--agenda for change. To begin with, he problematizes "development" much more than Klees does. Although the question Klees posed is framed around the term "aid," he appropriately includes the term "development" in the title of his article, given that most of the focus is on overseas or foreign development assistance. Klees does reference Frank's (1967) critical analysis of the global economic system, but refrains from naming the system, let alone calling for a transformation of global "capitalist" relations. Instead, his argument could be (mis)interpreted as claiming that "poverty and inequality" result from--and are being reproduced by--neoliberalism. Ginsburg shares Klees' critique of neoliberalism, but emphasizes that it is only one of several ideologies (and associated policies and actions) which, historically, have been marshaled (with some success) to mobilize support for and demobilize opposition to the world capitalist system. Thus, in this author's opinion, one needs to be very careful in using the term "development," given that its meaning has been captured within a capitalist framework. One might want to try to rescue the term by referencing social democratic, socialist, eco-feminist, or sustainable, human rights-based development, but perhaps it is better to focus one's attention and energies on transforming the unjust "capitalist" world system. (Contains 11 endnotes.) (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	Teachers College, Columbia University. International and Transcultural Studies, P.O. Box 211, 525 West 120th Street, New York, NY 10027. e-mail: info@cicejournal.org; Web site: http://www.tc.columbia.edu/cice
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10