The legacy of colonialism in the Global South

Introduction

The experience of colonialism left an indelible impact on the countries that were subject to imperial rule. Whilst there are several lines of interpretation regarding the ultimate effect of colonial rule on the countries of the Global South, there is a consensus regarding the fact that the international political system that emerged in the aftermath of decolonisation reflected the superior position of the former imperial powers vis-à-vis the Third World (Bhabha, 2004, p.56). This essay argues that the countries that went through the period of decolonisation were negatively affected by the period of colonial rule. There are three arguments that will be presented in order to back up that thesis: (1) the process of decolonisation entrenched the economic grip of the Western powers over the former colonies; (2) colonialism consolidated the peripheral position of the former colonies in the global economy and (3) the period of colonial rule was responsible for entrenching of intellectual colonisation in the Global South.

The negative impact of colonialism on the nations of the Global South

The countries that underwent the process of decolonisation were influenced in a negative manner by the experience of colonial rule (Gandhi, 1998, p.88). Decolonisation actually allowed the Western powers to consolidate their economic grip on the former colonies (Bhabha, 2004, p.57). According to Kwameh Nkrumah, the first president of independent Ghana, “neocolonialism [represented] the worst form of capitalism. For those who practice it, it [meant] power without responsibility. For those who suffer from it, it means exploitation without redress” (Nkrumah, 1965, p.49). The economic order that emerged in the aftermath of independence perpetuated the demoted position of the countries of the Global South vis-à-vis the colonial powers (Gandhi, 1998, p.95). This is a view that is quite similar to the philosophical stance espoused by the main exponents of dependency theory (Gunder Frank, 1970, p.120). The main referents of dependency theory argue that the countries that are in the periphery of the international economic order are compelled to produce an ever-increasing amount of raw materials and commodities in exchange for an ever-diminishing amount of manufactured goods. This state of affairs perpetuates the state of economic underdevelopment of the countries of the Third World. These nations are not able to embark on a successful programme of industrialisation because of the constraints placed on them by the international organisations that, by and large, respond to the interests of the dominant powers (Rodney, 2011, p.89).

The demoted position of the countries of the Global South in the aftermath of decolonisation responded to the process of intellectual subjugation that originated during the period of colonial rule. The notion of intellectual colonisation is connected to the ontological stratification prompted by the colonial powers. This means that the countries of the Global South are not able to acquire a prominent role in international affairs because this would disrupt the stability of the political order marshalled by the dominant nations. The economic subjugation of the countries of the Third World was facilitated by the rejection of indigenous values on the part of decolonised population (Mbembe, 2000, p.63). By looking to the Western world for models of development, the nations of the Global South perpetuated their peripheral position in the international economy (Gunder Frank, 1970, p.122). The countries of the Global South are compelled to follow the principles imposed on them by the hegemonic powers, which perpetuated their state of domination.  Authors such as Frantz Fanon claimed that violent action on the part of the oppressed nations of the Global South would reverse the state of subordination that emerged in the aftermath of decolonisation (Spivak, 1999, p. 139). This philosophical template led to a significant amount of revolutionary period in the Global South during the 1960s and 1970s, as seen in the advent of the Marxist revolutions that took place in Africa and Latin America. However, the socialist experience in the Global South did not yield the expected results. Furthermore, the configuration of the global economy entails that the nations of the Global South are compelled to sell raw materials and other primary commodities in order to participate in the international system of exchange.

Some authors rebut the idea that colonialism was bad for the Global South. For example, countries like India, Singapore and Hong Kong have been able to benefit from the experience of British colonial rule (Hurd, 2020, p.240). This can be seen in the manner in which they have been able to establish commercial links to the rest of the world thanks to the legal system and the language inherited from the British Empire (Young, 2001, p.87). However, these examples might not be indicative of the negative extent to which colonialism affected the countries that went through a period of colonial rule (Mbembe, 2000, p. 66). Colonialism created significant negative externalities for the nations of the Global South. The legacy of imperial rule entailed that the countries of the Global South would not be able to get rid of their demoted position in the international political system. Most importantly, the vast majority of the nations of the Global South have not been to overcome their state of underdevelopment and subjugation vis-à-vis the hegemonic powers (Hurd, 2020, p.241).

Conclusion

In conclusion, it could be argued that the nations of the Global South were negatively affected by the consequences of colonial rule. The process of decolonisation ended up increasing the level of economic power possessed by the former imperial nations over the countries of the Global South (Spivak, 1999, p.144). The legacy of colonial rule consolidated the peripheral position of the former colonies in the international economic order. It is worth stressing that the legacy of colonial rule also perpetuated the intellectual colonisation in the Global South at the hands of the dominant Western powers (Young, 2001, p.91).  The presence of these factors indicates the negative impact of colonial rule over the countries that were affected by imperialism, even after the completion of the process of decolonisation (Hurd, 2020, p.245).

References

Bhabha, H. (2004) The Location of Culture, Routledge, London

Fanon, F. (1961) The Wretched of the Earth, Grove Press, New York

Gandhi, L. (1998) Postcolonial Theory—A Critical Introduction, Columbia University Press, New York, NY

Gunder Frank, A.  (1970) Latin America—Underdevelopment and Revolution, Monthly Review Press, New York

Hurd, I. (2020) International Organizations—Politics, Law, Practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Mbembe, A. (2000) On the Postcolony, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA

Nkrumah, K. (1965) Neo-Colonialism—The Last Stage of Capitalism, International Publishers, New York, NY

Rodney, W. (2011) How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, Black Classic Press, New York, NY

Spivak, G. (1999) A Critique of Postcolonial Reason—Towards a History of the Vanishing Present, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Young, R.  (2001) Postcolonialism—An Historical Introduction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge