Introduction
Amin Samir is a leading African economist and one of the developers of the theories of dependent development and peripheral capitalism. According to Amin, it is essential to move in several directions simultaneously. This should include the protection of social values, the pursuit of genuine democracy, and the promotion of national independence. Consequently, these are the conditions for the transition from global capitalism to a more equitable world.
To confirm these theories, scientists analyze the development and dependence that have evolved throughout history. The experience of the African and Latin American regions is relevant to the analysis of the evolutionary stages of states. Hence, it is essential to consider the basic ideas advanced by Samir Amin about Latin America and African development and dependence.
Development and Dependence of Africa
It is significant to highlight that Samir Amin studied the development and dependence of Africa, providing foundational ideas in this context. Thus, the author has identified the primary periods in Africa’s development and their peculiarities. The first stage is the pre-mercantilist period, conventionally designated as spanning from the creation of most states to the 17th century (Amin, 1972, p. 503). It was then that relations between Africa and other Old World states began to emerge; these relations were characterized by the fact that the black race was recognized as inferior to the white race.
Furthermore, it was when a stable policy was established in the world, according to which Africa, as a whole, did not appear to be worse off than the rest of the Old World (Amin, 1972). This is because Africa’s development was not uniform; consequently, there were states with varying levels of social and material wealth, such as those that produced gold and those located in infertile areas.
Meanwhile, these states were ruled by monopoly groups that traded enslaved people. This situation arose because of the unfavorable climate and the inability to conduct agriculture on their territory. Consequently, at the first level of African statehood, the states had their own sovereignty but utilized their citizens for trade and hard labor (Amin, 1972). Therefore, this trade encouraged social differentiation and transformed Africa into a satellite of Europe, where gold and slaves were exported in large quantities.
The next period that Samir Amin identified is the mercantilist one, which began in the 17th century and continued until 1800 (Amin, 1972, p. 507). The development of African states and economies during this stage was centered on two aspects: the slave trade and the acquisition of peripheral status. Furthermore, the existence of numerous separate tribes at that time was associated with internal societal fragmentation.
Accordingly, the money that traders charged for enslaved people contributed to the civil war between the leading tribes of the Brak, Tyeddo, and Kangam, which only promoted the pumping of resources from the continent and the export of slaves. However, the influence of foreigners was beneficial, and by 1870, the money tax, which was enabled by the growth of market surpluses, was replaced by a natural tax (Amin, 1972, p. 510).
The countries of the area were unified, Islamized, and Arabized. Thus, this is evidence of an attempt to create a system under which a functioning state could be created. Moreover, the development of the African region continued, and the author Samir Amin identified the Malidist revolt from 1881 to 1898 (Amin, 1972, p. 512). This period was marked by widespread uprisings and the oppression of people seeking independence for their states.
During that period, military leaders attempted to unify the tribes and restrict the practice of slavery. Nevertheless, the Malidist State later collected taxes from other tribes and organized slavery among them. In addition, around this time, the first ties with India were established, and Sultan Bad relocated the capital to the borders with India, where goods were exchanged for enslaved people (Amin, 1972). Therefore, integration into the world trade system started, and African states received goods and handicrafts and supplied enslaved people in even larger quantities than in previous periods.
Integration into the complete capitalist system is the next period that Samir Amin identifies. This was when the continent was divided, which facilitated the movement of cheap labor and the export of goods. Colonizers such as France, Portugal, and the United Kingdom conducted a policy of depleting Africa’s resources (Amin, 1972). Furthermore, they did not grant the local population any rights but treated them as slaves.
As a result, part of the African population worked for the colonizers on the farms and plantations, while the others extracted valuable materials for them in Africa. Hence, Africa was a source of labor reserves, and states did not have independence. Accordingly, Samir Amin argues that there are no traditional societies in modern Africa, only dependent peripheral societies (Amin, 1972). This is explained by their historical dependence and virtually absent development.
Comparison with Opinions on the Dependency of Latin America
It is significant to emphasize that Samir Amin describes the development and dependence of Latin America in this context. Thus, the American continent was an active part of global capitalism, and Latin America was the periphery of European Atlantic centers (Amin, 2014). Accordingly, this is a common feature of the situation of Africa and Latin America, and they acted as extensions for European states.
Moreover, Africans were shipped to European countries as slaves, and the indigenous inhabitants of Latin America were oppressed by the British, Australians, and New Zealanders. The Spanish enslaved the indigenous people and significantly reduced the region’s demographics (Amin, 2014). More recently, the Portuguese and French exploited the slave labor and resources of Latin America.
This is similar to the dependency that existed on the African continent, where the same European powers dominated. In Africa, they extracted and devastated the natural resources, while in Latin America, they exploited the land and created agricultural production of sugar and cotton using slave labor (Amin, 2014). Consequently, the peoples of Africa and Latin America were dependent on European powers and served as a source of slaves, products, and raw materials.
Meanwhile, Samir Amin indicates that in Latin America, political and social processes have been shaping for several centuries. Similarly, in Africa, Samir Amin emphasizes the importance of the 19th century for development (Amin, 2014). This is because, in both regions, slavery was at its highest point, and the populations that were brutally enslaved were preparing to reclaim their rights in the form of uprisings against exploitative regimes.
Moreover, in the 20th century, parallels can be drawn between Africa and Latin America, where resource-rich states had poor populations due to their peripheral status and loss of control over resources (Amin, 2014, p. 25). However, there is a notable contrast between the ongoing struggles in Latin America and Africa. Since the request for democracy in Latin America has been stronger and more successful than in Africa, it has led to presidential elections and the establishment of democratic values.
Accordingly, Samir Amin argues that at the new stage of history, Latin American states are developing into democratic ones and are more successful in the economic and social spheres than their American counterparts. A new generation of leaders has emerged in both regions, but in African states, they support the policy of isolation and attempt to imitate their predecessors.
In contrast, in Latin America, namely Brazil and Argentina, politicians stimulate economic development and try to pursue a course of neoliberalism (Amin, 2014). These successes are combined with Latin America’s efforts to liberate itself from U.S. political domination, which indicates that Latin America has more potential for development than Africa.
Conclusion
In summary, the development and dependence of Africa and Latin America are comparable throughout history. The African continent was dominated by European powers that exploited natural resources to develop their economies and the slave labor of the African population. The same occurred in Latin America, where agricultural plantations were established and indigenous populations worked in poor conditions.
Thus, in the historical context, the African and Latin American regions have had similar characteristics of development and dependence. However, after the uprisings in both regions, Latin America gradually aims to escape its peripheral status. It is committed to being open to the world and adhering to democratic principles. Instead, the influence of dependence on African peoples was more significant, and they remain within the sphere of influence of more developed countries, which does not contribute to their economic progress.
References
Amin, S. (1972). Underdevelopment and dependence in Black Africa — origins and contemporary forms. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 10(04), 503-524.
Amin, S. (2014). Latin America confronts the challenge of globalization. Monthly Review: An Independent Socialist Magazine, 66(7), 20-29.