Reification and Alternatives to Development by Michael D. Bueckert A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Economy Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario © 2013, Michael D. Bueckert Abstract This thesis evaluates the post-development concept of “alternatives to development” from the perspectives of critical political economy and Western Marxism. Post-development theorists have long critiqued how development depoliticizes social life and suppresses alternative political imaginations. In formulating alternatives to this mode of social change, they emphasize place-based politics of cultural difference, premised on notions of coloniality, economic difference and autonomy. As I demonstrate, these theoretical positions are limiting, for they unnecessarily close off post-development theory from potential strategies and allies. Alternatively, I argue that the Marxist concept of reification provides an alternative analytical framework which transcends these limitations. By highlighting the role of capitalist class relations in shaping subjectivity and limiting political imagination, the concept of reification thereby illuminates the conditions which make thinking and acting “otherwise” materially possible, while expanding the scope for social action beyond the margins of the capitalist world system. ii Acknowledgements This project likely would not have come to fruition if it had not been for the incredible support of my thesis committee, which trusted me enough to take a chance on this rather unusual research topic. I am deeply grateful to Justin Paulson for providing me with invaluable guidance and encouragement throughout this process, and Rebecca Schein for her insightful comments and suggestions to develop my arguments further. Thanks also to Lisa Mills for agreeing to participate as internal examiner. The Institute of Political Economy has been a truly inviting and intellectually- enriching environment for a young radical such as myself, in no small part because of the fantastic faculty associated with it. I thank successive program directors Janet Siltanen and Laura Macdonald for their support in navigating my colleagues and I through complicated processes of research design and funding applications. I also thank Peter Andrée for helpful comments on my research proposal, and Cristina Rojas for her encouragement to explore my research questions. And of course, I can't overstate the importance of Donna Coghill in fostering a sense of community in the program, and getting my colleagues and I through the program without serious mental or bodily harm. During seminars and over pints, I have benefitted from engaged conversations with all of my colleagues, but I want to single out in particular Christina, Darrin, Steve, Jay, Erin and Dave. It has been immensely rewarding to be around great scholars and friends who are passionately motivated for social justice. I want to thank my family for being so supportive of my scholarly pursuits, even when it takes me so far from my prairie home. Special thanks to Joel and Kenton; our conversations have challenged me to better articulate and refine my ideas. iii Additional thanks to Arturo Escobar for graciously agreeing to meet with me. Our conversation was short, but it helped to clarify some of the positions I outline and evaluate in this work. Finally, this project was possible thanks to funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). iv Table of Contents Abstract..............................................................................................................................ii Acknowledgements...........................................................................................................iii Table of Contents...............................................................................................................v List of Figures...................................................................................................................vi Introduction........................................................................................................................1 I: The Research Problem.......................................................................................................1 II: The Research Plan.............................................................................................................4 III: Notes on Methodology......................................................................................................6 Chapter One: Development............................................................................................17 I: Theories of Development.................................................................................................22 II: Beyond Development: Post-Development Theory..........................................................30 III: Beyond Development: Dynamics of Global Capitalism................................................37 IV: The Idea of Development and Its Limits........................................................................47 Chapter Two: Modernity and Emancipatory Knowledges..........................................51 I: Reification and Negative Thinking................................................................................51 II: Modernity/Coloniality and Thinking Otherwise............................................................64 III: From “Thinking” to “Acting” Otherwise.......................................................................76 Chapter Three: Economic Difference, Autonomy and the Pluriverse........................79 I: Economic Difference........................................................................................................80 II: Locating Alternatives to Development............................................................................90 III: Localizing Politics, Globalizing Struggles?.................................................................. 99 IV: Alternatives to Development: A Summary...................................................................107 Chapter Four: Uneven Reification: A Critique of Alternatives to Development.....110 I: The Limits of Economic Difference................................................................................110 II: Class Struggle and Counter-Hegemonic Movements....................................................130 III: Resistance, Solidarity and Development Without Reification: A Research Agenda....135 Work Cited.....................................................................................................................147 v List of Figures Figure 1: Diverse Economy Framework.........................................................................87 vi Since the established universe of discourse is that of an unfree world, dialectical thought is necessarily destructive, and whatever liberation it may bring is a liberation in thought, in theory. However, the divorce of thought from action, of theory from practice, is itself part of the unfree world. No thought and no theory can undo it; but theory may help to prepare the ground for their possible reunion, and the ability of thought to develop a logic and language of contradiction is a prerequisite for this task. - Herbert Marcuse (1960, p. xii) vii Introduction I: The Research Problem Over the past 20 years, some of the most controversial and radical critiques of development have come from a school of thought known as post-development theory. This diverse group of scholars, influenced generally by post-structural and post-colonial thought, attempted to make sense of the failure of the development project to deliver on its promises; despite decades of adopting modern economic and political reforms, underdeveloped countries remained in a state of subordination to the advanced capitalist countries, with little hope for the future. Rather than calling for reform or for better policies, post-development scholars located the failure of development with the idea itself. These scholars argued that the concepts upon which the discourse of development rests—poverty, progress, science, standard of living, etc—were Eurocentric notions of social reality which did not reflect the experiences of the Third World. As an organizing principle of human life, development portrayed the Other as ignorant and impoverished, justifying intervention; in forcing underdeveloped countries to restructure their societies in the image of the First World, the development project tended to suppress or destroy other human experiences and knowledges. Central to this process is the way that development depoliticizes social life, turning the social into a technical problem to be rationally administrated by experts. For these reasons, post-development theorists called for a rejection of the very idea of development, and began to look for possible alternatives to development. The concept of alternatives to development has undergone theoretical sophistication over the years, particularly under the direction of Arturo Escobar, 1 incorporating post-colonial critiques of modernity/coloniality and post-structural critiques of capitalism yet retaining most of its original features. Against the cultural homogeneity of development and modernity, alternatives to development have been understood in terms of plurality and difference; they represent non-modern epistemologies, non- capitalist economic