Suchergebnisse

Substantively, the broad disagreements between the NWG and W. Arthur Lewis reflected technical rather than fundamental differences, as the main disagreements were internal to neoclassical economic theory. Lewis was aware that imperialism (1870-1945) retarded and/or constrained the space for capital accumulation in the colonies and that it produced and/or intensified economic inequality and limited social transformation in most colonies; however, this was not an original insight. Lewis said, the "backwardness of the less developed countries of 1870 could be changed only by people prepared to alter certain customs, laws, and institutions, and to shift the balance of political and economic power away from the old landowning and aristocratic classes." He stressed that "the imperial powers . allied themselves with the existing power blocs. They were especially hostile to educated young people whom, by means of a color bar, they usually kept out of positions where administrative experience might be gained, whether in the public service or in private business…. One result of this was to divert into a long and bitter anti-colonial struggles much brilliant talent which could have been used creatively in development sectors" (Lewis 1978: 214, quoted in Frieden 2006:91; see Girvan 2005; Boulding 1951: 216).

The New World Group (NWG)2 comprised mainly male academics, writers, professionals and other intellectuals. Norman Girvan described NWG as a "loosely knit group of Caribbean intellectuals whose aim is to develop an indigenous view of the region" (Girvan 1971: 27). NWG did not converge around a coherent body of philosophical ideas and theories of historical change: ideologically and politically, the range of outlook ran from conservative and radical black nationalist ideas to social democratic and neo-Marxist tendencies. NWG, whose impact extended beyond the University of the West Indies (UWI) academic community, emerged in a cultural environment where political parties and other political and social movements and progressive organizations lacked deeply rooted traditions in revolutionary theory and practice. The BWI working class was rather small, at best semi-industrial and heavily mired in religious obscurantism and naturalistic materialism at best. The progressive social and political movements led by the middle strata intelligentsia and rank and file workers stressed mainly anti-colonial and anti-imperialist reformism that was not anti-British in sentiment or orientation. NWG did not become an integral part of the struggles of the working classes in any systematic way, though its ideas might have had impacts that helped to condition social and popular movements around the struggle of the working classes.