>From: malik kah <[log in to unmask]> >Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list <[log in to unmask]> >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Gambia no chance for economic advancement under capitalism >Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 11:27:20 +0000 > >My contention on the debate about Gambia's economic performance is >that, >it should be treated from a broader perspective rather than from a >narrow >approach as some of us are now doingt. It is perfectly right to >disect >Jammeh's micro as well as macro economic policies in other to know >how they >are utilising the taxes they collect from the people annually, I do >not have >any qualms with that, in fact that is perfectly legitimate and >right, but >my problem is when issues are so narrowed that they are treated in >isolation. We must recognised the factual reality that in as much as >we have >a very wasteful leadership whose priorities are not to liberate the >masses >from the druggery of hard work, hunger poverty and backwardness, it >is also >the capitalist mode of relations that is partly to blame for our >economic >predicament. After all our governments are just reduced to debt >collectors, >who compete for compliments from the IMF, WORLD BANK and rest of the >capitalist monetary institutions. And the only way they can have >praises and >to expect more loans is for them to keep sevicing the debts. >Consequent to >servicing such debts is the postponement of our development and the >mortaging of our resources. > >We are essentially Markets in a conciously constructed relationship. >Hence >to devolop it is imperative for us to shed the shackles that still >control >us, I know this may seem radical to the burgoise elites but it is >the most >genuine route to development. Otherwise the cyclical recessions will >always >have an impact upon us, irrespective of who is in power. > >You see the trouble with Africa, as with the rest of the >underdeveloped >world, is that every leader knows that we aretied to the west in an >exploitative relationship, as appendages; that this siphons off >nearly all >our social surplus and that leaves us the poorer for that. In fact >the >estimated capital outflow is to the tune of Billions annually. Yet >nobody is >prepared to doo anything about it. I remeber when the US was >experiencing >recurrent trade deficit against Japan, it was of major concern to >congress >because it meant that Japan was benefiting more from their trade >relations >and this was unacceptable to the eonomic wellbeing of the USA.And >this same >equation has been the case in Africa for decades, but it is not of >any >consequence to many of our so called intellects. Of course, they >complain >very loudly, whenever they have theirr foras, but complaint alone >solves no >problems. Since practically all leaders in these countries are >developing >class intrest in line with those of the exploiters, they are >hesitant to >come to grips with the crux of the problem. We all know it takes two >to >tango, business deals are usually settled by two or more people, >hence they >are responsible for its consequences. While there may have been >excusesfor a >naive but enthusiastic involvement with world capitalism immediately >after >independence, practical experience for almost four decades of post >colonial >exploitation should no longer give any person the excuse for >continuing a >relationship of this kind, which is essentially parasitic. >To extricate ourselves from this relationship requires a >revolutionary >thinking and that is why am trying to impress onto Hamjatta and KB >that they >may disagree with Famara Jatta but the reality remains that a >finance >minister under Darbo will just be as mechanical as him. This could >be >refuted for now but it will not ulter such a fact. After all their >analysis >is just nothing other than platitude. We must aim to change the >status quo >and there is no policy statement from the UDP CUM PPP yet to >indicate such a >radical departure. That was why I premised my discoure on a broader >context >but KB could not comprehend, he infact was wondering if I was >talking about >Gambia, of course economics are so intergrating they must be treated >in a >global context and that essentiall requires us to evaluate the >effects of >capitalism. We must cease to be mechanical and just focus on >narrating >GDPs , TAX etc, we should asses our relations with other countries >and what >impact that is having on our economies and stop waffling, people >know these >things, after all under Jawara it has been like that for decades it >was a >ritual for us to hear about meaningless economic jargons. What we >want now >is concrete economic programmes that would help improve and >alleviate the >conditions of the people, we know under Jammeh as was under Jawara >as will >be under Darbo it is the same system there will be no solutions but >the same >terminologies and economic jargons which only clever people like you >understand. From experience there is never solutions coming only >crticisms > >Whenever asked why there is no progres as is typical of their breed >they >resort to fatalism an necrophilous arguements, amen well, well, >there is >really nothing we can do about the situation. Some argue no one >country can >solve the problem and that unless there is unity in africa or among >the >developing countries, poor countries are really helpless in the face >of such >heavy odds. This is a circular argument: we are backward because we >are not >rich, and we are not rich because we are backward. or again, we >are not >united because we compete, and we compete because we are not united. >Put >this way,nobody will find any solution to the riddle. Reducing the >problem >to a conundrum is a way of avoiding coming to grips with it. But >the real >question is not about unity; the real question is: Do we have to >compete >with the other developing countries in order to survive? and if so, >why? > >The answers to both questions can be found in the structure of our >economies. If we decide for ourselves to remain mere plantations of >the >western capitalists countries, then there is no way out of competing >with >other plantations. But then we should not complain if the >consequence of >this decision is to keep our countries backward and stagnant, to >perpetuate >these plantation economies which benefit only a handful at the top >and leave >the local masses in abject poverty. This is a choice made by >petty-bourgeois leaders in their own interests and against the >interests of >the working people. If the basis of all our economies is peanuts >and >cashew-nuts, how can we avoid competing among ourselves? As we have >noted >above, there is limited capacity for the expansion of demand for >primary >commodities on the world market, and that is precisely why the >coffee >markets is shrinking hence exposing all the cocoa exporting >countries to the >exigencies of the market. > >_________________________________________________________________ >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at >http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the >Gambia-L >Web interface at: >http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html >You may also send subscription requests to >[log in to unmask] >if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to >write your full name and e-mail address. >----------------------------------------------------------------------------