Why the externalist-internalist distinction over the African development discourse is a dead end

Abstract

In recent times, scholarship has reduced the paradigm for why Africa remains largely underdeveloped to two: the externalist and the internalist views. The former is conceived to comprise scholars who tender that the reason Africa is underdeveloped and remains thus is due to the exploitative presence of Western capitalism and, in recent times, China. Walter Rodney has, however, been placed here as a key figure. The internalist, on the other hand, argues that the reason for Africa's underdevelopment may be traced to the presence of bad leadership and mismanagement on the part of Africans themselves. 'Muyiwa Falaiye and George Ayittey are more pronounced representatives. In this research, I counter the locus that Rodney is an externalist. I disclose how criticizing him from this externalist reading amounts to a Strawman. I extract and build on the eclectic basis of his assessment of African development as a justification for why the externalist-internalist debate leads nowhere.