My main argument is that to build up state capacities for Global South countries, many of them require a socialist social revolution. This does not necessarily imply violence, but a fundamental social transformation is essential. Such a revolution necessitates addressing issues like land ownership, the emancipation of women, and mass education. It demands the mobilization of the masses and the active involvement of the people; otherwise, discussions about capacity building remain theoretical and difficult to realize.
Philosophically, the question arises: revolution or evolution? In terms of international relations, evolution aligns with a realist perspective, while revolution is constructivist. I emphasize this because, when discussing ways of living and values, there are no inherent human values except the basic desires for food and sex. Values and ways of life are constructed, whether in Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, or any other system. What is deemed good or bad, what is to be valued or practiced, are all constructed. If we desire a better society, we must actively construct it ourselves, which is why I believe a social revolution is necessary.
The concept of evolution, particularly Social Darwinism (the survival of the fittest and the law of the jungle), is predicated on the idea of a selfish gene within us, suggesting that we are all inherently selfish. Economic rationalism, therefore, advocates that everyone maximizes their self-interest, which, in turn, justifies colonial plunder, capitalist exploitation, and imperial hegemony. We must critically examine whether this is the path we truly desire for humanity.
In the realm of international relations, many are familiar with the notion that "Europe is a garden, the rest of the world is a jungle." This perspective suggests that to protect the "garden of Europe," one must venture out to fight. This sentiment was evident even a few years ago, notably in Germany. While we acknowledge Germany's history with the Holocaust, it is perplexing that it would go to such lengths to avoid condemning the genocide in Gaza. A foreign minister, purportedly a feminist, has seemingly ignored the femicide in Gaza. This illustrates how the theory of the survival of the fittest and the law of the jungle are applied by these individuals.
Regarding domestic policies, certain unnamed Nobel Prize winners for economics assert that some nations fail while others succeed. They claim that Western nations boast of their success and wealth because they have established "inclusive institutions" such as democracy and human rights. Conversely, they argue that other nations have failed because they have not built such inclusive institutions. It is worth noting that these Nobel Prizes were awarded for work conducted two decades prior, implying a certain foresight on the part of the Nobel Prize committee regarding future developments.
This institutionalist perspective, however, overlooks several crucial factors. Firstly, many African, Latin American, and Asian countries, including China, gained independence, but this independence was often not truly independent due to enduring colonial legacies. These legacies include inherited political, legal, and educational systems, as well as a "leftover elite" comprising corrupt government officials and army officers who tend to support the remnants of the old system. Furthermore, residual values and knowledge, perpetuated by elites in legal aid, the legal system, media, information technology, medicine, and academia (especially economists), often subscribe to these "selfish gene theories."
Considering the success of regions and countries such as Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, and Korea, which have managed to join the "wealthy club," it is important to acknowledge their efforts in management and organization. However, the Cold War factor played a significant role. For instance, the Korean War and the Vietnamese War led to the United States' involvement and a subsequent need for logistical support in Asia, initially from Japan, then Taiwan, and later South Korea. These regions and countries, at least in their early stages, did not possess the "so-called inclusive system" advocated by the West. While they lacked natural resources for colonial powers to plunder, they held immense strategic significance for Western powers, particularly the United States, during the Cold War.
China, in contrast, achieved success despite sanctions and starting from an extremely low point, having endured 40 to 50 years of war with Japan followed by a civil war that left the country in ruins. The standard economic rationalist explanation attributes China's success solely to the open and reform policies of the late 1970s and early 1980s. I disagree with this view. I believe China's development commenced with the very establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949. The 1949 social revolution laid the foundational basis for its later economic takeoff, encompassing mass education, improvements in population health, infrastructure development, and industrialization. By the late 1970s, China had already emerged as the sixth-largest industrial power.
When economists discuss Gross Domestic Product (GDP), they often overlook certain aspects. For instance, how were free housing and free education for the urban population calculated and incorporated into GDP? How was the GDP of rural populations accounted for, especially considering that approximately 10% of rural land was used for private purposes to produce vegetables or economic crops, which often went unrecorded in official statistics?
From a constructivist perspective, we must develop more theory from the Global South. China should support Global South countries not primarily for economic interest or the extraction of natural resources, but by genuinely assisting them in achieving self-reliance. In policy formulation, we should move beyond emphasizing ethnicity, gender, or identity issues, and instead focus on the fundamental ideas of class interest. This, I believe, is what can be done to effectively build state capacity in the Global South.
(Transcribed from recording and edited.)