Search

This paper offers an alternative explanation of the performance of the steel industry in Trinidad and Tobago (T&T). The steel industry emerged due to social mobilizations demanding changes to the colonial economy by investing natural resources in state‐led industrialization and welfare improvement. This investigation contends that the "resource curse" account that describes so‐called intrinsic social pathologies whereby postcolonial actors interfere with market freedom is misguided. A "resource curse" fundamentally offers a racialized conception of state corruption and incompetence within peripheralized economies. This study challenges this explanation showing how postcolonial arrangements reflect persistent colonial entanglements and contradictions, as resource dependence emerges from a long history of colonial exploitation and racialized subjugation within a global market predicated on a "global color line". The T&T government's industrial effort was circumvented by both domestic and international economic and political pressures revealing a racial hierarchy and power asymmetries. Anti‐competitive sanctions from the (colonial) global economic powers United States and Europe, structural adjustment that maintained this system and improper dealing by foreign players were among these discriminatory practices. Similarly, elite behavior and political decisions reflecting (neo)‐colonial tendencies also undercut the sector's long‐term development. Together, these configurations reveal continuities, changes and contradictions within the island's postcolonial economic structure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Social & Economic Studies is the property of University of the West Indies - Mona and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Social & Economic Studies is the property of University of the West Indies - Mona and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The 2007 General Elections in Trinidad and Tobago have re-affirmed the country's 'one-party dominant system' in which the People's National Movement (PNM) has held power for 41 of the last 52 years, and has been elected to hold five more. Despite significant positive resources for democratic development in Trinidad and Tobago, one-party dominance has weakened Parliament, blurred distinctions between ruling party and government, and created vulnerability and powerlessness for dissenting minorities. These generic hazards have been exacerbated by Trinidad and Tobago's history of Crown Colony government and the 'resource curse'. Since 1986, the PNM's dominance has been fragile, consistently supported by less than a majority of voters. Despite this, the Opposition has remained fragmented for rather petty reasons, as there exist no insurmountable ideological, policy, or ethnic-based differences between them. The major group which refused to join the other forces in 2007 represents a political 'Third Tribe' in Trinidad which constitutes roughly 23% of the country, and has a significant electoral effect in six or seven specific Trinidadian constituencies. In conclusion, it is argued that Trinidad and Tobago requires the political will and maturity to emerge from the dangers of one-party dominance by creating a viable second political force. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]