Greetings Omar (?),

 

If you don't mind, I wish to join the conversation through your illuminating responses... Mine are interspersed within yours... (I hope you don't find my responses too annoying).

>I wish to add my voice to those of other respondents that your
>question is indeed a pertinent one. However, I must quickly add that it is
>almost impossible to get a simple and direct answer for it.

 

'Add quickly'?  But why should 'development' not be a 'simple issue'?   Is it, as you say:

 

>This is because Development itself is a complex issue and there are as many models for >Development as there are Theories for Development based on which one can analyse and make >academic judgements on a Development  scenario.>>

 

This statement alone suggests that the issue of 'Development' ought to be confined to the realm of academia, which often times has no bearing or direct impact on the 'real' lives of the 'masses' (that word!). A good student of science (ok... add the 'social' appendage if you will)knows that any 'model' is just that! A model! How that model was developed and the variables that were considered relevant (whilst others discarded), are all dependent on the theoretical structure developed aprior. But is such a theory (often times a mere hypothesis) a valid one? As you rightly stated, there are many 'Theories of Development'... Me personally... I trust none of them!

 

>Furthemore, what constitutes poverty is still a controversial topic among
>scholars of Development. In instances where culture is regarded as
>an important element in Development Analysis, it may be misleading to
>regard certain societies as poor when their cultures dictate against "
>material accumulation".

 

Bro. Men, we live in the year 2005 on planet earth.  The brother was asking questions pertaining to Gambia, not 'Ougo Ougo Land on planet X in Alpha Centauri galaxy'! When you cannot make ends meet to feed yourself and your family, and there are no opportunities for you to solve your decrepit situation, then that is POVERTY! One does not need a team of academically able social scientists (why not just 'scientists'?) to tell you that there is no 'DEVELOPMENT' as far as your situation is concern! You are 'POOR' as far as your belly, your hide and your kin are concern!

 

>The forces that drive Modern Capitalist Development,
>manifest elements of individualism and greed, which are detested by all the
>cultures in The Gambia.

 

Bro men... which epoch are you living in? The  greed, the individualism and other traits that are contemporary in your Gambia and among us Gambians, at home and abroad, makes me wonder if the stuff you are so confidently spewing is not from some nostalgic era of some fictitious anthropological work by some Toubabo writer of the 18th century!

 

>The attainment of independence on the other hand, was supposed to
>usher in
>an era of freedom which should in turn, create the opportunity for
>National
>Development. But the structures created by the colonialists
>fundamentally
>serve as the basis for even those created after 1965. Thus the very
>structures we are supposed to depend on to realise our Development
>objectives, undermind our very efforts for Development.

 

No problem there.

 

>This problem has been further aggravated by the fact that we still maintain the same
>external relations with countries and institutions which have masterminded
>our subjugation and explotation from the Slave Trade, through
>Colonisation, De-colonisation and the various Economic and Structural development
>or adjustment programmes, to Capitalist Corporate Expansionism or
>Globalization.

 

Less you think that the latter is a recent innovation. The 'Slave Trade' was part of the  'Capitalist Corporate Expansionism'! So from the 'get go' ... 'e bin dey dey'!

>Secondly, there has not emerged in The Gambia a body of academics/intellectuals and or >politicians, who are commited to effecting a turn around in both the policy and institutional >frameworks for Development in the country

 

'and or'? No, no, no! There is no 'and or' when it comes to 'academics/intellectuals' on the one side, AND 'politics'  on the other! The very definitions of these categories of human endeavor ought to tell you that their is no 'and or'.  Academia ought to be and must remain non-partisan, whereas politicians are by definition, 100% partisan!

 

>The same old jargons like Development Partners and
>Traditional Allies pervade officialdom, yet it is undeniable that
>these are
>those who have become masters at exploiting our resources. Gambian
>intellectuals generally sigh away from revolutionay thinking and
>action,
>thus our nation lacks a relevant indigenuous theoretical basis on
>which a
>sound Development Plan can be placed.

 

I agree with the first part of the paragraph, but the latter... "A relevant indegenuous theoretical basis"? By whom and for whom? Please explicate.

 

>It is no surprise that since our politicians are basically from the
>lower
>reaches of what I wish to call the intellectual ladder, their
>performances
>are even more laughable. They merely indulge in micmicries and
>recyling of
>old stuffs like " Singaporisation" and " Vision 2020". Perhaps "
>Tesito"
>would have been a great thing if it was not characterized by "
>baboon work
>and monkey eat". Unfortunate for The Gambia, politics is seen as
>"not good
>enough for good persons", and as a result our best brains are
>distracted
>away from it

 

hmm.... no comment

>The constitution of The Gambia envisages a multi-party political
>culture,
>which without doubts is bound to reflect the socio-economuc and
>cultural
>diversities in the country . I hope this is not what is being
>misrepresented
>as " lack of unity". Most of The Gambia is still rural
>notwithstanding the
>fact that now almost half of the country's population lives in the
>mostly
>semi-urban Greater Banjul Area. It is therefore not strange that
>most of us
>see  ourselves as Serer, Fulani, Mandinka or wollof before promoting
>our
>Gambian identity.

 

As well as Muslim or Christian. Gourmet, Aku or Seringe. Extremely important that we bring this issue into the mainstream discussion as opposed to sidelining it. Funny, Gambians (in the urban areas still deliberately or out of ignorance, associate 'Aku' with 'Gourmets' thereby minimizing or marginalizing each sectors contributions or potential to contribute meaningfully to our society!)

 

>The day we are effectively abled to reverse this
>reality,
>it would make manifold contribution to National Development, as we
>begin to
>give priority to the things and issues that are of relevance to our
>collectivity as Gambians.The realization of this reversal is of
>paramount
>importance to National Development, and it represents a sacred duty
>for all
>Gambians, especially those who regard themselves as "educated".
>Omar Joof.

Ok. I consider myself educated, so I applaud your clarion call. But on the flip side, what qualifies one to be call "educated"??????????????

 

Latjor