What do you think?
Rate this book
Underdevelopment Is a State of Mind: The Latin American Case
In this study the author offers a new way of looking at development and underdevelopment, one that explains why some countries and some ethnic groups do better than others. After 20 years of working on Latin America's development problems, the author is convinced that it is the way Latin Americans see the world that principally explains why Latin America is underdeveloped and unstable, with its wealth and land so inequitably distributed. The book challenges a conventional wisdom, subscribed to around the world, that blames the rich countries for the poverty of the poor countries.
1 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1985
12 people are currently reading
355 people want to read
About the author
Lawrence E. Harrison
14 books12 followersLawrence Elliot Harrison (March 11, 1932 - December 9, 2015) was an American scholar known for his work on international development and being former USAID mission director to various Latin American countries. He is the past director of the Cultural Change Institute at the Fletcher School, Tufts University, where he also served as an adjunct lecturer.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
June 20, 2017
"Underdevelopment is a State of Mind" is a plainly written, highly provocative book with a compelling thesis. By the author's own admission, it falls short of being conclusive, and the inadequacy of the evidence means that those who are not predisposed to agree with the main argument - that a sort of cultural deficit is the primary explanation for developmental failures in Latin America - will be unimpressed (a perusal of various book reviews further supports this hypothesis). Harrison paints with a fairly broad brush, and the lack of analysis of Brazil and Chile in particular struck this reader as the book's major weakness.
It is not so broad, however, as - say - the brush of Francis Fukuyama in his later work "Trust", which is so overextended as to be rendered effectively useless. Harrison, by contrast, chooses highly logical pairings for comparison: Haiti and the Dominican Republic, for instance, and Costa Rica and Nicaragua. It then discusses each in sufficient detail as to provide the reader with a reasonable basis to form their own conclusions.
Further, while its thesis is not completely convincing (requiring further analysis to be solidified), there is still enough material here to cast serious doubt on the explanatory powers of dependency theory with regards to the economic situation of Latin America. Consequently, the sudden turn from "interesting analysis" to "missile aimed at dependency theory" in the penultimate chapter did, in fact, succeed in convincing this reader of the basic correctness of this sub-argument. An extended quotation from a 19th century journal was particularly important in this regard.
Harrison writes with sufficient clarity and scope, and is sufficiently honest in his presentation of alternate theories, as to make this a reasonable introduction to theories of economic development. Unlike matters of policy, however, where a talented analyst can demonstrate that "first we did this, and got this result, and then we did that, and got this other result", notions of a link between culture and development are essentially impossible to prove. Culture is simply too all-encompassing a concept to ever be linked to development with total certainty. By keeping the scope narrow, the comparisons sensible, and conducting extremely detailed research, however, Harrison at least succeeds in his primary purpose of making his thesis seem sufficiently probable as to warrant further study.
Writing Quality: 5/5
Thesis and Analysis: 4/5
Overall: 4.5/5
It is not so broad, however, as - say - the brush of Francis Fukuyama in his later work "Trust", which is so overextended as to be rendered effectively useless. Harrison, by contrast, chooses highly logical pairings for comparison: Haiti and the Dominican Republic, for instance, and Costa Rica and Nicaragua. It then discusses each in sufficient detail as to provide the reader with a reasonable basis to form their own conclusions.
Further, while its thesis is not completely convincing (requiring further analysis to be solidified), there is still enough material here to cast serious doubt on the explanatory powers of dependency theory with regards to the economic situation of Latin America. Consequently, the sudden turn from "interesting analysis" to "missile aimed at dependency theory" in the penultimate chapter did, in fact, succeed in convincing this reader of the basic correctness of this sub-argument. An extended quotation from a 19th century journal was particularly important in this regard.
Harrison writes with sufficient clarity and scope, and is sufficiently honest in his presentation of alternate theories, as to make this a reasonable introduction to theories of economic development. Unlike matters of policy, however, where a talented analyst can demonstrate that "first we did this, and got this result, and then we did that, and got this other result", notions of a link between culture and development are essentially impossible to prove. Culture is simply too all-encompassing a concept to ever be linked to development with total certainty. By keeping the scope narrow, the comparisons sensible, and conducting extremely detailed research, however, Harrison at least succeeds in his primary purpose of making his thesis seem sufficiently probable as to warrant further study.
Writing Quality: 5/5
Thesis and Analysis: 4/5
Overall: 4.5/5
October 29, 2017
Read Engerman, Stanley L., and Kenneth L. Sokoloff's "Factor endowments, inequality, and paths of development among new world economics" instead
February 2, 2020
The beliefs by which a society lives by become laws, and those laws can be a good context for prosperity and liberty or a burden to said society.
September 4, 2024
Excellent. Excellent. Excellent. Culture. Culture. Culture. Simple premise, concise, organized, methodical, brilliant. Why can't historians write this well today?
The reason nearly the total of Latin America lost ground with North America, when they were ahead as late as the early 19th century, is . . . culture. The Spanish influence destined much of Central & South America to playing the victim. He pairs countries like Plutarch famously pared great men, and the result is startling to the newcomer, while "I told you so" to the veteran of Latin American politics.
This has direct comparison to new developments in the U.S., even telling tales at the corporate level. Did I say Outstanding?
The reason nearly the total of Latin America lost ground with North America, when they were ahead as late as the early 19th century, is . . . culture. The Spanish influence destined much of Central & South America to playing the victim. He pairs countries like Plutarch famously pared great men, and the result is startling to the newcomer, while "I told you so" to the veteran of Latin American politics.
This has direct comparison to new developments in the U.S., even telling tales at the corporate level. Did I say Outstanding?
June 4, 2013
Vivo en México y este libro me hizo ver que es injusto comparar los avances latinoamericanos con los de países europeos. No comparto del todo la opinión del autor pero en efecto coincido que el ingrediente de conquista nos tiene minimizados como continente ya que tenemos un severo complejo de inferioridad.
January 30, 2017
Excellent Book! One of my favorites.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews