cular ideas enshrined in its ‘neo’development are likely to have been part of the
original. Where the preface does seem to be useful is the relatively rare case of
the rebirth of an idea which has, over time, lost nearly all support and then
comes back into popularity, modified for new circumstances, but not funda-
mentally changed.
Neo-Colonialism
The enormous economic and political influence that rich northern hemi-
sphere countries often have overThird Worldnations is often bitterly
resented in the latter. Neo-colonialism is the argument that the conditions
of poor countries are often no better, and their peoples no freer, than when
they were actually governed by the European colonial powers in the period up
to the mid-20th century. There are several elements to this theory, all of them
involving the impact of strong economies on less developed ones, but outright
attempts at political control are also often suspected.
There are three main forms of trade between a major northern hemisphere
industrial economy and a Third World country. The most important is,
probably, where the Third World country is a primary producer, either of
agricultural products or raw resources from extractive industry. It is argued that
price levels for such products are largely dictated by the rich countries, the
producers being effectively powerless unless they can organize into a semi-
cartel, as with the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries
(OPEC). A second form is where a Third World country is a provider of
cheap labour for the production of components in consumer goods assembled
elsewhere. Often the poorer countries lack the expertise or investment capital
to benefit from the marketing of finished products, but they can produce the
labour for factories owned and built by companies based in richer countries.
Thirdly there is the role of the Third World in providing mass markets for
products experiencing market saturation or interruption in richer countries,
often in cases where the consumer protection standards that would be imposed
in the manufacturing country cannot realistically be imposed by a Third World
government.
The reason why it seems appropriate to add the prefixneotocolonialism
is that, especially in the first and third cases, these were precisely the motives for
the 19th century colonial movements. If the same economic aims can be
achieved without the expense of governing and garrisoning a country, so much
the better. The suspicions of those who seeFirst World/Third World
relations as essentially colonial are intensified when it comes to the question
of direct interference in the politics of the weaker countries. For whatever
reasons, and however justified, there is no doubt that powerful nations, and
especially the USA, have intervened repeatedly, overtly and covertly, particu-
Neo-Colonialism