Kwa miongo mitatu iliyopita, Ubepari umetawala jukwaa la maendeleo ya kimataifa. Umeimiliki kikamilifu maendeleo ya kiuchumi na kulazimisha fomula yake duniani kote. Mataifa ya simba wa Asia ya China, Korea Kusini, Taiwan, Singapore na Hong Kong yanaonyeshwa mara kwa mara kama mataifa yaliyofanikiwa yaliyokubali uliberali na kuendelea. Shirika la Fedha la Kimataifa (IMF) pamoja na Benki ya Dunia zilitangaza kwamba viwanda na usambazaji wa mawazo ya kiuchumi ya kiliberali vingebadilisha uchumi na jamii za kimapokeo. Athari hizi zingeziweka nchi maskini katika njia ya maendeleo sawa na ile iliyopitiwa na mataifa ya Magharibi yaliyoendelea kiviwanda wakati wa Mapinduzi ya Viwanda.

The last three decades have seen Capitalism dominate the international development scene. It has completely monopolised economic development and enforced its formula upon the world. The Asian tiger economies of China, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong are shown regularly as successful nations who adopted liberalism and progressed. The IMF alongside the World Bank proclaimed industrialisation and the diffusion of liberal economic ideas would transform traditional economies and societies. These influences would place poor countries on a path of development similar to that experienced by Western industrialised nations during the Industrial Revolution.

Leo, umaskini ndio hali ya wengi wa watu wa dunia. Watu bilioni tatu duniani wanaishi kwa chini ya dola mbili kwa siku; watu wengine bilioni 1.3 wanaishi kwa chini ya dola moja kwa siku.

Today poverty is the state for the majority of the world’s people. Three billion people in the world live on fewer than two dollars a day; another 1.3 billion people live on less than one dollar a day.

Watu bilioni 1.3 hawana upatikanaji wa maji safi; bilioni tatu hawana upatikanaji wa huduma za usafi wa mazingira, na bilioni mbili hawana upatikanaji wa umeme. Uliberali kwa kweli umekuwa chanzo cha tofauti za utajiri duniani na umaskini ambao wengi wa watu wa dunia wanakabiliana nao. Uliberali umesababisha ulimwengu wa Magharibi kujinufaisha kwa kutegemea mabaki ya dunia nyingine. Uliberali kwa vyovyote vile haujasaidia kupunguza umaskini, badala yake umechangia kuongezeka kwake, na hivyo kuendelea kutekeleza sera za kiliberali za kiuchumi katika ulimwengu wa tatu kutasababisha maskini kuzidi kuwa maskini.

1.3 billion have no access to clean water; three billion have no access to sanitation and two billion have no access to electricity. Liberalism has actually been the cause of the wealth disparities in the world and the poverty the majority of the world’s people face. Liberalism has resulted in the Western world feeding off the remainder of the world. Liberalism has in no way helped alleviate poverty, it actually contributed to it, and hence any continuation of liberal economic policies in the third world will result in the poor getting even poorer.

Uliberali pia umeleta tofauti kubwa sana za utajiri katika nchi za Magharibi, na hili linaonekana kwa kuangalia Marekani na Uingereza pekee. Uingereza, kwa mfano, ilizalisha utajiri (Pato la Taifa, GDP) wa pauni trilioni 2.2 mwaka 2005, ongezeko kutoka mwaka uliotangulia. Kwa wanauchumi wa kiliberali, hili linamaanisha kwamba watu wana utajiri zaidi, wana fedha zaidi za kutumia, hivyo lazima wawe na furaha. Hata hivyo, tukiangalia ni kiasi gani cha 60

Liberalism has even created huge wealth disparities in the West and this can be seen by looking at just the US and the UK. The UK for example generated wealth (GDP) of £2.2 trillion in 2005, this was an increase from the previous year which for liberal economists means people have more wealth, have more to spend thus they must be happy. However, if we look at how much the 60

milioni ya watu wa Uingereza walipokea sehemu ya utajiri huu uliozalishwa. Takwimu za mwaka 2005 kutoka Ofisi ya Mapato na Forodha ya Her Majesty (HM Revenue and Customs) zinaonyesha kwamba asilimia 10 tajiri zaidi wana zaidi ya asilimia 50 ya utajiri wa taifa, na kwamba asilimia 40 ya wakazi wa Uingereza wanagawana asilimia 5 tu ya utajiri huu. Hali hii imesababisha wengi wa wananchi kukopa ili kugharamia mtindo wao wa maisha, na ndiyo sababu deni la watumiaji nchini Uingereza ni zaidi ya pauni trilioni 1.3, kiasi kikubwa kuliko uchumi wenyewe. Hali ya Marekani ni mbaya zaidi: Marekani inaweza kuzalisha dola trilioni 13 za utajiri kwa mwaka, lakini deni la taifa ni dola trilioni 8.5. Hii inamaanisha raia wa Marekani wanagharamia maisha yao kwa fedha walizokopa badala ya dola trilioni 13 ambazo uchumi umezalisha. Katika ripoti ya Harvard ya mwaka 2005 ilikadiriwa kwamba asilimia 10 ya watu walimiliki asilimia 71 ya utajiri, na asilimia 1 ya juu ilidhibiti asilimia 40. Kwa upande mwingine, asilimia 40 ya chini walimiliki chini ya asilimia 1 ya utajiri wa taifa.

million population of the UK received of this generated wealth, 2005 statistics from HM Revenue and Customs show that the richest 10% have more then 50% of the nation’s wealth and that 40% of the British population shared in only 5% of this wealth. This has resulted in the majority of the population resorting to borrowing to fund their lifestyles and this is why UK consumer debt is more than £1.3 trillion, more than the actual economy. The US situation is even worse; the US may generate $13 trillion a year in wealth but national debt is $8.5 trillion. This means US citizens are funding their lifestyles by borrowed money rather than the $13 trillion the economy generated. In a 2005 Harvard report it was calculated that 10% of the population owned 71% of the wealth, and the top 1% controlled 40%. On the other hand, the bottom 40% owned less than 1% of the nation's wealth.

Hivyo basi, uliberali umeleta tofauti kubwa sana ya utajiri hata katika nchi zilizoendelea ambazo zimeishi chini ya masoko huria kwa zaidi ya karne moja.

Hence liberalism has created an enormous wealth disparity even in the developed world who have lived under free markets for over a century.

Nchi za Magharibi zenyewe zilijiendeleza kwa sera zilizo kinyume kabisa na zile zinazozipigia debe leo. Katika kitabu chake chenye mtazamo mpya, Kicking Away the Ladder (2003), Profesa Ha Joon Chang wa Chuo Kikuu cha Cambridge aliandika maendeleo ya kila nchi iliyoendelea kiviwanda, akionyesha kwamba sera za ulinzi wa biashara za ndani zilikuwa sehemu ya msingi ya mkakati wa maendeleo katika karibu kila kisa. Mchakato wa maendeleo unaojitokeza kutokana na simulizi hii si kuongeza faida linganishi kwa kiwango cha juu, bali ni kuhamisha faida linganishi kuelekea bidhaa zenye thamani kubwa kupitia upotoshaji wa soko uliopangwa kwa makini. Kwa upande wa Uingereza na Marekani, upotoshaji huo wa soko awali ulijitokeza kwa njia ya ukoloni na utumwa. Lakini upotoshaji wa soko unaendelea leo nchini Marekani kupitia ruzuku za kilimo na chuma, achilia mbali matumizi makubwa ya serikali katika teknolojia ya viumbe hai na ulinzi, ambayo kwa kiasi kikubwa hufanya kazi kama ruzuku kwa sekta hizo.

The Western world themselves developed with policies completely opposite to what they are propagating today. In his groundbreaking work, Kicking Away the Ladder (2003), Professor Ha Joon Chang of Cambridge University documented the development of every industrialised country, showing that protectionist policies were a fundamental part of development strategy in almost every case. The process of development that emerges from this story is not maximizing comparative advantage but rather shifting comparative advantage to high value goods through calculated market distortions. In the case of the UK and the United States, those market distortions originally came in the form of colonialism and slavery. But market distortions continue in the US today in the form of agriculture and steel subsidies, not to mention the tremendous government spending on biotechnology and defence, which largely serves as a subsidy for those sectors.

Kwa hiyo, uliberali ni kikwazo cha maendeleo katika nchi za Ulimwengu wa Tatu, si suluhisho. Ndio chanzo cha moja kwa moja cha umaskini wa nchi hizo.

Hence liberalism is the obstacle for development in the third world not the solution. It is the direct cause of poverty for the third world.