Is the economic success or failure of a state a fair outcome?

In examining the justice of a state’s economic success or failure, the microcosm of personal economic success or failure is an important starting point. While there is always the possibility of climbing the social ladder with some hard work and intelligence, the average citizen’s economic fate is determined by their family and environment. Human agency is often no match for lack of resources and forms of oppression. In many ways, the individuals that manage to stumble upon wealth or work their way up the labor chain are very much the exception, not the rule. And yet we often point at these exceptions and exclaim, “See! They did it, you should too.” The next step in that logic is then “If you are still poor, then you must have done something wrong.”

When applying this pathology to world politics, the individual “social ladder” becomes the process of international economic development. When we see emerging economic actors like India, we often point to their success and use them as shining examples of eventual economic justice for the developing world. In the article, “Inayatullah's argument about states having a right to wealth is predicated on the claim that states are unequally prepared for global economic competition.” The unequal preparation comes from two major factors that coincide with an individual’s lack of resources and contact with oppression. Considering the importance of natural resources and exports, a nation’s economic status is largely dependant on their ability to create industries like tourism if they lack natural industries. Because lack of natural resources is geographical, this nation’s economic status is in no way fair. More relevant to justice, however, is the link between colonialism and poverty. After all, economic stratification, illiteracy rates, and lack of industry can all be connected to the effects of European agents who colonized and exploited resources in a certain region. During the first Industrial Revolution, the major European actors actively suppressed industrialization in other parts of the world in fear of more competition. These colonized nations’ economic statuses are in no way fair.

Given that human agency, such as the exploitation of other’s resources, plays a large role in determining future economic success; recognition of the Western world’s responsibility to the developing world is key. However, recognition must be followed by action. Micro-financing and granting debt-relief are both important actions that need to be given more consideration for the creation of more economically just international system. As the Western world becomes more educated about the consequences of our actions in the past, we can become more conscious of the actions that need to be taken to ensure economic justice in the future.