James Cypher's Chapter Summary

Another expectation of colonialism according to James Cypher that was discarded after World War II was free trade. Cypher exemplified in the final third of chapter three that colonialism was activated parallel to industrial capitalism (i.e. free trade). While describing Britain, Cypher asserted that mercantilists and merchant capitalists elicited the terms of trade that disallowed slaves and plot farmers from leaving the economic market. India, as mentioned by Cypher in chapter three, was subject to Britain subtracting Indian textile exports. The comparative advantage was intentionally subtracted by Britain and India was only permitted to export raw cotton (Cypher, 85-105). James Cypher also shared an assertion on terms of trade with Beckman

Cypher also addresses this point on pages 112-114 of his text. Both Petrick and Cypher display that underdevelopment of colonies unhinged from colonialism fabricated infrastructure. According to Beckford, a plantation economy is colonialism. Beckford delineates that a plantation economy is fabricated parallel to three resources exhumed from the mother country and hinterland (in the diction of Cypher and Petrick): the development of the colonizing power, the resource for profit, and the abundancies in the hinterland (Beckford, p. 31). Petrick expands upon this point through his assertion that a plantation economy is referencing a “Hinterland of Exploitation,” which was one of the three paths European “Metropoles” could activate in a colony (p. 3-4). The plantation economy is a psychological and economic inferiority to the mother country. Beckford professed excerpts from another author (named Miller) that the planters within the plantation economy and the colony as a whole are unambiguously reliant to the colonizing power through the power’s discarding of supportability in the colony

Social hierarchy is the most clearly delineated reason in both Petrick’s and Beckford’s separate work. Petrick, Beckford, and Cypher all asserted that colonies/plantation economies were fabricated with injections of slavery, European bankers, and investors. The colony/plantation economy would be partitioned and turned away from interaction among the plots. Cypher also exemplified that the colonizing power would adjust the mercantilist rule of European agents to even out social order (less money, longer order). In continuation of this element, Petrick displayed that colonies fabricated with global demographics had to pay for infrastructure after freedom from colonization, which caused underdevelopment. Aside from social hierarchy, Petrick, Beckford, and Cypher also displayed the dependence of colonies in correlation to the Metropole. Cypher, specifically, described that mercantilism built in the colony and industrial capitalism in the colonizing power corroborated each other to make permissible specialization in a primary staple by the “plantation.” In association with this assertion, Petrick also describes that a plantation economy strategized from the motive of exploitation would not have adaptability (i.e. other primary staples) when the Metropole’s goods took on layers of price because of the colonizing