The Main Features of the Northern-Southern Global Divide
Introduction:
The divide evident between the characterised Global North, consisting of major western capitalist powers such as the United States and majority of Europe, and the Global South, which comprises of Africa, Asia and Latin America, is one which can have its features be assessed by the analysis and understanding of the simplest historical evidence. When one looks at the relationship between these nations, namely the Global North and Global South nations, one can immediately conclude their current features and developments to come from a source known as historical imperialism and colonialism. This has been revealed through the study of World History and international relations throughout time, but what many still fail to acknowledge is that the legacies and impacts of these historical events still pose relevance to the respective countries with overwhelming prevalence, having now just adopted newly inherent features associated with their nations as a result of the foundation laid by historical circumstances and the history of exploitative capitalism.
A relationship of labour-capital conflict amongst the Global North and Global South, stemming from endemic capitalist features of exploitation, has seen the shaping of a global working-class struggle for equal distribution of wealth and capital ownership by citizens in the Global South, subsequently paving the way for Global North capitalism to stake its claim to hegemonic control over these respective nations, namely those of the Global South, in pursuits of global capitalist conquest.
The other most prevalent feature which emerges when assessing modern day Global North and Global South relations is the phenomena of development and underdevelopment. Through an outdated and inherently exploitative capitalist economic system, a persistent and self-sustaining cycle of economic output bred by circumstances born from a historically unequal distribution of wealth and resources, and the concept of “neo-colonialism” and structural dependence on Global North capitalism by nations in the Global South, the relationship between the two remain polarised. These respective countries in the Global South have seen themselves fall into a virtually inescapable cycle of underdevelopment, coming as a costly result of the ever-growing development of the Global North.
The Labour-Capital Conflict and Working-Class Struggle of the Global North and Global South Relation:
“Both Karl Marx (1867) and Karl Bolanyi (1944)… argued that labour is a ‘fictitious commodity’, and that treating human beings as commodities like any other would necessarily lead to deeply felt grievances and resistance” (Silver 2014: 47).
The commodification of labour is not a newfound occurrence or phenomenon. It is one which has established itself at the forefront for the essentials of a “functioning capitalist regime”, and can therefore be dated to the origin of capitalism itself. This commodification of labour is therefore implemented on mass-scales by nations seeking to make use of said “functioning capitalist regime” (nations of the Global North). However, the inherent complications of a commodification of labour are vast and cataclysmic to the nations at the point of production where the labour is being used, namely the nations in the Global South. We can thereby define the Global North to be the Capital component, and the Global South to be the Labour component, when assessing the Labour-Capital conflict which perpetuates unequal distribution of wealth and resources, further exhausting the North-South divide, stemming from a constant historical legacy of exploitative global capitalism.
Unrest within a respective sector of labour is a native feature of capitalism as a system, and is therefore a native feature in the Global North’s implementation of the capitalist system, through which exploitation is established as a necessary prop for profit. This exploitation exhibits externalities endured by communities at the points of labour consumption. The ever-increasing, prevalent change in labour-capital conflict on a global scale, subsequently becomes responsible for the “recurrent making, unmaking and remaking of working classes” (Silver 2014: 48). Therefore, the communities at the respective point of production and use of labour become inherently and explicitly characterised by that which they produce, and the exploitative processes and effects thereof. This is the problem found within the conflict between labour and capital (or South and North); a self-sustaining, cyclical regime of exploitation of labour for the gain of the Global North at the expense of the Global South. Global communities become victims of the various schemes implemented by these capitalist powers in order for them to consistently compete with competitors in their respective field of production, and maximise profits at the expense of the working-class labourers. This is done through the reduction “of labour costs” and strategies implemented to “increase control at the point of production” (Silver 2014: 49).
This process of reduction of labour costs and implementation of controlling strategies are defined by Beverly Silver in his piece titled “Theorising the Working-Class in 21st Century Global Capitalism” (2014), as 4 temporary fixes, namely the Spatial Fix, which involves the process of relocating production to places where the cost of production, and more importantly cost of labour, are lower, the Technological Fix, which involves the mechanisation of certain labour processes, nullifying the need for manual labour, creating unrest as a result of employment redundancy, the Product Fix, which is the process of moving manufacturing from a highly competitive product to one of less competition in order to maximise profits (but less competition leaves more room for structural labour exploitation through physical and compensatory means), and finally the Financial Fix, which moves the production of goods and services into more financially secure avenues such as investments, too nullifying the need for labour. However, these fixes are temporary and are therefore ineffective. They perpetually create a newfound working class in their constant relocation, and subsequently, through the inefficiencies and exploitations bared by the labourers mentioned above (results of the temporary fixes), creates unrest and thus, labour-capital conflict, so to say that labour-capital conflict and class struggle is an inherent feature of the Global North-South relations.
The Problems of Development and Underdevelopment as a feature in Global North-South Relations:
As seen throughout the analysis of any point of significant human achievement, the development experienced and undergone by one group of people always comes at the expense of another. However, when looking at development, it is important to note that, in the words of Walter Rodney (2014), “development cannot be seen purely as an economic affair, but rather as an overall social process which is dependent on the outcome of man’s efforts to deal with his natural environment”. When one adopts this stance, the outlook on just how far-reaching the analysis of development respective to a given place can go becomes astronomical, and therefore holds immense influence within said place (nation). However, as described earlier, not all people can develop mutually, at the same time and pace, and so the process of development in one place exceeding that of another becomes immensely prevalent, and greatly influential when understanding how the nations in the Global South are consistently concluded to be developing at lower rates or “under-developing” in comparison to their Global North counterparts, and what caused this to be the way it is.
Development and under-development are mutually coherent, that is to say, that one cannot exist without the other and thereby one cannot be described without the actuality of the other. Underdevelopment can therefore only be quantified as “a means of comparing levels of development” (Rodney 1972: 15). Therefore, conventionally, one would assess the development rates of a given list of countries, and name that which has the lowest rate of development, namely countries found in the Global South, as the most “under-developed” nation. However, a more important component of understanding the process of under-development which is not taken into account upon conventional study, is that modern underdevelopment “expresses a particular relationship of exploitation: namely the exploitation of one country by another” (Rodney 1972: 16). Therefore, if we take this approach, we can thereby provide a justified conclusion as to why all nations in the Global South are underdeveloped, as they have all found themselves historically and presently exploited by countries in the Global North. For instance, the process of mineral and resource extraction from Africa by European countries. This extraction of resources by European land-owners in mines of Africa can be seen as the most “direct way of sucking the African continent” (Rodney 1972: 27). These resources are gained through exploitation of cheap and locally-sourced labour, and then sent back to the mother countries in Europe where they are manufactured into final products, and sold back to the nations in which they were extracted at exuberant prices established and controlled by these big, capitalist countries, essentially creating a sense of dependency on Europe on behalf of Africans.
This creates an even bigger problem, namely that people in Africa and other parts of the colonised world “have accepted, at least partially, the European version of things” (Rodney 1972: 26). This essentially creates a sensation of prevalent structural dependency through which the exploitation of Global-South economies becomes an integral feature in the development of the nations in the Global North, creating a cycle of never-ending dependency of Africa on global capitalist powers. This dependency and control is reinforced through foreign investment and financial loans provided by Western Nations to Africa and other “developing nations”, maintaining control over them through the power of ever-growing, inescapable interest which engulfs the nation. It is therefore due to this structural and inescapable dependence that the Global South bares in relation to the Global North, that neglects the possibility of self-reliance, and thereby the possibility of sustainable development.
Conclusion:
It can therefore be said that the main features prevalent within Global Northern-Southern relations are those of exploitation and control of labour by the Global North onto the Global South, and how this creates upheavals and struggles amongst the working-class population. This control leads to detrimental effects at the place of production in these countries. Another defining feature of the relationship is how the strict maintaining of control over Globally South countries by the Global North creates an inescapable cycle of dependency preventing self-sustenance and autonomy, and thereby hindering the ability of development in these countries, further perpetuating the development of Western capitalist countries, thereby perennially expanding the Global North-South divide.
Bibliography:
· Rodney, W. ; 1972; How Europe Underdeveloped Africa; London and Tanzanian Publishing House, Dar-Es-Salaam; Bogle-L’Ouverture Publications
file:///C:/Users/Aidan%20Schutte/OneDrive%20-%20Jakes%20Gerwel%20Fellow/Documents/University/Sociology/SOC%20Essay%201/WEEK%206%20RODNEY.pdf
· Silver, B. ; 2014; Theorising the Working Class in Twenty-First-Century Global Capitalism; Palgrave Macmillan
file:///C:/Users/Aidan%20Schutte/OneDrive%20-%20Jakes%20Gerwel%20Fellow/Documents/University/Sociology/SOC%20Essay%201/SILVER%20WEEK%203.pdf
