UNIT V: A WORLD OF REGIONS

Lesson 12: The Global Divides

Learning outcomes:

At the end of this lesson, students must be able to:

1. identify perspectives in global stratification;
2. discuss the concept of global divide; and
3. review some historical antecedents relating to the understanding of the global divide.

INTRODUCTION

Across history, there have been many manifestations of stratification in different societies. Social
stratification is essentially the phenomenon of segregating, grouping, and ranking people based on
differences in class, race, economic status, and other categories. In earlier civilizations, we hear of
nobilities and commoners, the lord and the peasant, and many other social statuses and positions that
embody hierarchy of power in a social system. These hierarchies, especially when pushed toward the
extremes, have often led to inequalities, wherein the group which possesses control over power and
resources are given much privilege at the expense of those who are deprived.

This is problematic because, in principle, humans, with our intrinsic dignity and consequential rights
to live and prosper, should also have equitable access to resources—both material and non-material.
Unfortunately, in the contemporary world, these hierarchies remain to exist, albeit, in different forms.

Perspectives in Global Stratification

There are various theories which attempt to explain the dynamics and impacts of stratification
among people in the world, especially in the context of their power to tap on resources and maximize these
toward development and toward having a better quality of life.

One of the theories attempting to explain pathways of development is modernization theory. In a

nutshell, this theory suggests that all societies undergo a similar process of evolution—from agricultural,
industrial, and urbanized and modern—that is motivated and catalyzed by internal factors. It hints that more
than external influences, internal processes within' states are responsible for social change.

For instance, it opines that a well-functioning bureaucracy that will ensure welfare among citizens
is a necessary infrastructure to achieve development. It also assumes that when these internal sources of
development—e.g., education, market-driven economy, and political infrastructures—are present, any
society will progress (Ynalvez & Shrum, 2015) and poverty will be resolved.

However, it can be observed even today that there are countries very rich in natural resources, but
their people remain to experience extreme poverty. Amidst the affordances in scientific and technological
advancements that are circulated around the globe, we can see that some countries remain disadvantaged
in terms of digital technology transfer that they are still left behind economically.

Based primarily on the works of Raul Prebisch and Hans Singer (thus, Prebish- Singer hypothesis),
the dependency theories suggest that countries are either 'core" (i.e., developed) or "peripheral" (i.e.,
developing) such that resources tend to flow from peripheries to the core.
 A related theory discussed in earlier lessons is that of Wallerstein (1975), speaking about a world
system composed of boundaries, structures, member groups, rules of legitimation, and coherence. This
world system is assumed to "comprises a single capitalist world-economy" (Graf, 1980, p.29) so to speak.

GLOBAL DIVIDE

In the contemporary world, the buzz word used to pertain to these Stratifications among nations is
the term global divide. But, in the modern world, how did we reach this point?

First, Second, and Third Worlds

After World War Il, the United States and the Soviet Union, which were wartime allies, entered a
Cold War—a state of political tension and rivalry, from the mid-1940s to early 1990s. Several contemporary
works have reviewed this event in the light of post-war events. These include the writings of Gaddis (2005),
Zubok (2007), Westad (2017), among others.

In a nutshell, the Cold War came forth due to political doubts among wartime allies. For instance,
the United States has always been wary of the Soviet Union's communist leanings, and it has stated its
position to contain the latter's expansion. The Cold War yielded two chief political factions: the Western
Bloc, comprised by the industrial/capitalist US and the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO), which include United
Kingdom, Canada, France, Italy among others; and the Eastern Bloc (Albania, Poland, Bulgaria, Romania,
Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Afghanistan), led by the communist/sociaiist Russian Soviet Federative
Socialist Republic. The Western Bloc has been referred to as First World countries, while the Eastern Bloc
has been referred to as Second World countries.

In 1952, Alfred Sauvy, in his article Trois Mondes, Une Planéte (Three Worlds, One Planet) at the
L'Observateur, said: "Car enfince Tiers Monde ignoré, exploité, méprisé comme le Tiers Etat, veut, lui
aussi, étre quelque chose" (in the end, The Third World, ignored, exploited, and misunderstood just like the
Third Estates desires to be something). In this article, Sauvy (1952) likened the Third World to the Third
Estates—the French commoners—whose suffering and upheaval led to the French revolution.

In 1974, Teng Hsiao-Ping, vice-premier of the People's Republic of China 1977, spoke to the
United Nations General Assembly. In this talk, Teng (1974) profoundly noted the distinction among Three
Worlds: "The United States and the Soviet Union make up the First World. The developing countries in
Asia, Africa, Latin America and other regions make up the Third World. The developed countries between
the two make up the Second World."

The Brandt Report and Its Criticism

In the 1980s, a comprehensive analysis of global economy was reported by the Independent
Commission on International Development Issues. The commission was led by Willy Brandt, West German
chancellor. This analysis was encapsulated in what is popularly known as the Brandt Report.
Briefly, this report categorized countries in the northern hemisphere as Comparatively smaller in
population and more economically affluent than countries in the southern hemisphere—a categorization
that gave birth to the Brandt line—an imaginary line that divides the world into the developed north and the
developing south.
 The bottom line of this report was the contention on mutuality—that for both the northern and
southern countries to thrive, global economy must be restructured, for instance by transferring resources to
southern economies, thus ending poverty. In the early 2000s, another report, The Brandt Equation, was
prepared by James Bernard Quilligan, describing the new global economy as facing "financial contagion,"
and requiring "major international relief program" (Quilligan, 2010, p. 3).

Daniel Sneider (1980), in a special report in EIR News Service Inc., summarized the contentions of
the Brandt Report (p. 27):
 “one world economic system" that governs even countries' taxation of certain items
 "zero growth and Malthusianism", which suggests that controlling overpopulation will cure
underdevelopment
 "basic needs and appropriate technology", focusing on labor than technology
 "promotion of solar energy"
 "strengthen the IMF/World Bank system"

The Brandt Report had critiques, which was a healthy process for a report that tackled such a
monumental issue as global economic affairs. William D. Graf, a political and foreign affairs expert at that
time, wrote a comprehensive critique in The Socialist Register (1981). First, he pointed out that while the
Brandt commission is seemingly represented by northern and southern countries, it is not represented
according to “classes" within these countries, because most of the representatives are coming from political
elites.

Graf also noted that the Brandt Report's recommendations are not totally new as there are already
proposals in the past with similar recommendations. He likewise opined that the Brandt Report "is
compelled by its raison to exclude historical dimensions from its platform" (p.29), which means that it did
not put emphasis on the antecedents on why in the first place the North and the South arrived to have such
kind of dynamics.

For Graf (1980, p. 28), a proposal for a global economic reform should: (1) look at the "historical
evolution of the world order"; (2) examine "global relations" including "class relations"; (3) "define goals and
objectives"; and (4) "specify strategy and tactic," things that are seemingly absent or not so clearly defined
in the Brandt Report.

SUMMARY

While arguably, we can say that our world today has been far better compared to what it has been
before, as can be seen primarily from longer life span, more access to opportunities, more choices, and
generally lesser poverty, there remains to be disparity across nations and within nations. Our discussion of
global stratification and the existence of the Global North-Global South only surfaces the challenge to us
all, humans, to persevere so we can include as many people in enjoying these affordances and
opportunities.