Blog Post 10

The key to understanding Inayatullah’s argument in my opinion is what he states in the conclusion.

“I have evaded all the practical issues associated with the implementation of a right to wealth because my aim is merely to place such ideas on the theoretical agenda.”

Although I agree with Inayatullah’s argument about the right to wealth in the current global politico-economic order developed from a colonial past, there are no real solutions to remedying the unequal results experienced by many countries.

The economic failures of many countries in the world are not fair. There is a global economic order in which all participants are not rewarded equally. This stems from the world being divided along the lines of nation-states. Some participate and enjoy high levels of prosperity, but most have to participate and experience poverty. This is not fair.

Inayatullah explains that an evaluation of economic failures should not preclude colonialism. Colonialism effectively created the roles played by most economies and made colonies dependent on the colonizers to guarantee their well-being.

Now, third-world economies are still dependent on a core of former colonizers but have the onus of guaranteeing their own well-being. Neo-Colonialism in a nutshell. Still prevalent but often not considered as mentioned in Inayatullah’s argument.

Most third-world countries are in a dire predicament. With slim chances of economic prosperity, poverty is a way-of-life. Finding practical solutions to third-world problems is a difficult exercise, and even considering the right to wealth does generate a practical response.