Summary
Theology has been using scientific
discourses to form categories for analysis and reflection. Similarly,
liberation theology employed dependency theory to scientifically articulate its
pastoral-theological messages. This choice was borne out of experience rather
than epistemological or dogmatic considerations. Such experience led to
discernment and political commitment fueled by dependency theory, which falls
under the umbrella of underdevelopment theory.
Development theory was uniquely a Latin
American creation. It served as a reaction to the failures of the then
prevalent modernization theory and the national development project driven by
import substitution industrialization. But it was also a departure from the
orthodox Marxist analysis of development in low income countries.
The template for development after the
Second World War was the structural functionalist prescription of the West,
such as England and North America. This template implied formulating policies
and creating institutions that embrace free market capitalism, i.e.,
export-oriented, modern, capitalistic and industrial world. Dependency theory
was critical of this approach because it established, among others, a
dependency relationship between the underdeveloped and the developed countries.
The new breed of Marxists opposed the
orthodox Marxist view that capitalism is a logical step towards socialism, and
that it is necessary and feasible for the third world countries. They view
capitalism as inimical to the growth of underdeveloped countries because the
“ruling class” will keep the “ruled class” dependent in order to maintain their
economic status.
Personal Insights
The dependency theory saw the lopsided
balance of trade in favor of the rich countries, as experienced by the Latin
American economies. To address this, import substitution industrialization was
imposed to attain self-sufficiency, reduce the trade deficit, and generate
internal resources for industrialization. The theory, however, failed to
consider the huge investment required, as well as the necessary structural
reforms that are crucial, to make the import substitution industrialization
model to work. Liberation theology initially harnessed the concepts of
dependency theory. But Gustavo Gutiérrez later went beyond the theory and
admitted that socio-economic aspects were not all-inclusive.
The concept of sustainable development, for instance, recognizes the social and economic pillars, but added the ecological pillar as indispensable in creating a sustainable society. This implies that the social and economic imperatives must stay within the limits of the planetary boundaries. This also requires that the principles of equity and viability must be embed into the fabric of society.
References
Bombongan, D.
(2009). Liberation Theology and Dependency Theory: Tracing a Relationship. D
Bombongan. Hapág: A Journal of Interdisciplinary
Theological Research 1 (1), 61-91.
Bornschier, V. and
Chase - Dunn C. (1985), 'Transnational Corporations and Underdevelopment' N.Y.,
N.Y.: Praeger.
Cardoso, F. H. and
Faletto, E. (1979), 'Dependency and development in Latin América'. University
of California Press.
Sunkel O. (1966),
'The Structural Background of Development Problems in Latin America'
Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 97, 1: pp. 22 ff.
