Substantive #8

**full on idealism ahead**

The first time geographically that the world was engaged with trade on an international scale was around the early 1500s when the Americas were “found” and then the entire world was colonized by the Europeans. One of the main driving forces behind the colonization and exploration was growth—but whose growth? Enloe’s article was right on point when she states that international relations ignores the narratives of those who are not in positions of power because having growth be central to world order creates a dog-eat-dog world in which less developed countries lack a voice in the status quo. I mean, it makes sense; in class we talked about how the current world order was an institutionalization of US hegemonic interests. So, the US has an interest in placing itself and like-minded countries (Western European ones) at the top of the hierarchy. Thus, the predominance of Western ideology in international institutions is inevitable.

The problem is that this predominance of Western ideology constants developing countries—the Global South—to follow the path that Western countries have set out. Okay, how can anyone expect that a country that had been exploited by another to then mimic its oppressors political ideology and then join an international order where it is again at the bottom of a hierarchy and thereby subservient to its oppressor? There are obvious front-runners in today’s world, thus international economic policies should stop focusing on making “the rich richer” and focus on developmental policy like capacity building. However, I do not believe in a mentor-mentee relationship because it portrays the developing countries as helpless. Global South countries have different needs and structures than Western countries, therefore I believe in South-South partnerships. South-South partnerships help maintain sovereignty and independence of a country because both countries are on the same playing field and can engage in trade and cooperation without the fear of being taken advantage of.

I don’t believe that developing countries can have a voice in current institutions, so they should create their own where they can dictate their own goals and in the future be seen as equivalent to the current institutions of power. The African Union and China’s Belt and Road initiative are examples of this. Both are governing partnerships that have legitimacy and influence without Western influence. Thus, they are able to build up legitimacy for the actors within them.

I also believe that South-South relationships are a check on the power of multinational corporations in that they focus decision making power on the government which means that economic imperialism cannot occur. A lot of Global South countries require consolidation and the creation of a national identity, so having a strong and capable national government is key.

Global South countries have gone through a lot to get where they are today, and in order to respect their history, they need to be seen as capable and independent by the international world order. In order to best prove that, they need to succeed by themselves.