Global South

Instead of the term connoting an image of the world divided by the equator separating richer countries from their poorer counterparts, the geography of the Global South should be more readily understood in the wider context of globalization or global capitalism.^[4] Conceiving of the Global South in economic terms is not wholly impractical however, though following this logic would reveal that "most people in the so-called Global south actually live in the Northern Hemisphere."^[4]

The geographical boundaries of the Global South continues to be a source of ongoing debate, with many critics and scholars agreeing that the term is not a static concept.^[4] Some like Rodolfo Magallanes have argued against the feasibility of grouping a large number of countries and regions into one category because it tends to obscure the specific and historical developments of individual countries, their relationships with each other, and the power imbalances within these relationships.^[4] Furthermore, "it may obscure wealth differences within countries – and, therefore, similarities between the wealthy in the Global South and Global North, as well as the dire situation the poor may face all around the world."^[4]

The Global South is more than the extension of a metaphor for underdeveloped countries. In general, it refers to these countries' interconnected histories of colonialism, neo-imperialism, and differential economic and social change through which large inequalities in "living standards, life expectancy, and access to resources are maintained."^[5]

As Global South Leaders have become more assertive in world politics, however, "South-South cooperation" has increased to challenge the political and economic dominance of the "North". South-South Cooperation (SSC) is a political and economical term that refers to the long term goal or practice of pursuing world economic changes that mutually benefit all countries in the Global South and lead to greater solidarity among the disadvantaged in the world system.^[8][9] The political use of the term conveys the hope that the countries within the Global South will assist each other in social, political, and economical development, radically altering the world system to reflect their interests and not just the interests of the Global North in the process.

The formation of SSC can be traced to the Asian-African Conference that took place in Bandung, Indonesia in 1955, also known as the Bandung Conference. The conference has been largely regarded as a milestone for SSC cooperation. Indonesia's president at that time, Sukarno, referred to it as "the first intercontinental conference of coloured peoples in the history of mankind."^[10] Despite Sukarno's opening address about the conference, there had been gatherings similar to the Bandung conference in the past. Nevertheless the Bandung Conference was distinctive and facilitated the formation of SSC because it was the first time that the countries in attendance were no longer colonies of distant European powers.^[10] President Sukarno also famously remarked at the conference that "Now we are free, sovereign, and independent. We are again masters in our own house. We do not need to go to other continents to confer."^[10]

The conference was sponsored by India, Pakistan, Ceylon, Burma, and Indonesia and was attended by these 29 independent countries: Afghanistan, Burma, Cambodia, Ceylon, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gold Coast, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Jordan,Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Sudan, Thailand, Turkey, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, State of Vietnam, and the Kingdom of Yemen.^[10] Each country supported the continuation of decolonization efforts happening in both Africa and Asia at the time. Although many countries disagreed on some issues, the Bandung Conference "provided the first major instance of the post-colonial countries' collective resistance to Western Dominance in International relations."^[10]

SSC has become a popular political and economic concept today because of the recent geographical shifts in manufacturing and production from the North to the Global South and the recent key diplomatic achievements of several countries in the Global South in states such as China.^[10] These contemporary economic trends have "enhanced the historical potential of economic growth and industrialization in the Global South," which has allowed for renewed targeted SSC efforts that "loosen the strictures imposed during the colonial era and transcend the boundaries of postwar political and economic geography."^[8]

The labor political movements in the Global South over the last thirty years have been overwhelmingly focused on mobilizing a wide range of "subaltern groups, such as indigenous women, peasants, retrenched workers, and shantytown dwellers."^[11] The political movements were a response to and a rejection of "the extreme forms of dispossession, poverty, and inequality that have flowed from the shift to neoliberalism in the regions since the 1980s."^[11] Neoliberal policies "ended key subsidies, reduced public investments in rural developmental infrastructure, extension services, and agricultural credit, and eliminated protectionist measures that enabled [oftentimes] small and marginal peasants to sustain themselves through petty commodity production."^[11] Poorly equipped to deal with the exposure to neoliberal market forces, people were often forced off their land as a result.^[11]

Since the 1970s, Neoliberalism has had a profound effect on world economies. Neoliberalism first became hegemonic in the North before spreading throughout the Global South. Whereas in the North, Neoliberalism aided in the generation and accumulation of incredible amounts of financial capital and wealth, its subsequent spread throughout the Global South increased levels of inequality and poverty [and] aided in the dispossession of native inhabitants through privatization and through the rise in power of finance capital both nationally and internationally. ^[11]

Scholars like Mark Boden have noted that the "rise of Neoliberalism [in the Global South] at its heart [was] a response by the popular ruling class to contain and ultimately reverse gains [that] the left and popular forces" in the Global South had accumulated during the twentieth century.^[11] Thus Boden notes that the neoliberal project in the Global South was meant "to shift the balance of power decisively in favor of capital."^[11]

Neoliberalism developed as a marginal and somewhat eccentric creed of those who objected to the kinds of state involvement in the economy that had emerged across the North-South axis during much of the mid-twentieth century. which manifested itself as "Keynesian policy-making and welfare states of various kinds in Euro-America and import-substitution and state-led modernisation in the newly independent states" of what was formerly known as the Third World.^[12] In some cases, this aided in the defeat or marginalization of revolutionary and radical nationalist movements that defined the political movements of the Global South during the 20th century. Neoliberalism's success in the Global south instigated the reversal of many key victories and concessions won by labour movements throughout the Global South. This happened primarily through the Structural Adjustment Programmes of The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).^[12] In collaboration with domestic elites of countries belonging to the Global South, these programmes curtailed the burgeoning national development of the Post-War era "by pushing privatization and liberalisation."^[12] Furthermore, "cuts in public spending eroded the limited social protection policies that had been extended to popular classes, which in turn provoked widespread IMF riots throughout Latin America, Africa, and Asia" as a result.^[12]

It has been noted that in order to counter the effects and abuses of hegemony and neoliberalism in the Global South and overcome underdevelopment, political movements have had to construct new forms of a "developmental state to achieve a more just and less painful form of the socio-economic development."^[11]

The financial crises of the past decade in the Global South and beyond has often been linked to the "failure of neoliberal globalisation as a strategy for economic growth."^[13] Furthermore the aggravation of inequalities and poverty in the Global South that resulted from the crises were predicated on the subjugation of labour within the Global South.^[13] Nevertheless because of Neoliberalism's adverse effects on labor organizing, such as de-unionization and increased government hostility towards unionism, labor unionizing has been severely "outmaneuvered" and "overpowered" in the Global South.^[14] Additionally, the growth of workers in 'informal sectors' has further aggravated this issue because "informal workers engage in economic activities outside of formal employment, often avoiding or circumventing state regulations."^[14] Informal sector workers account for a huge percentage of the workforce in the global south.^[14] The growth of informal sectors within the Global South has made union mobilization in the Global South increasingly difficult.^[14]

Nevertheless, the curtailing of labor unions has not completely undermined the ability of workers in the Global South to resist. Global organizations like STREETNET International have emerged to defend the rights of informal workers across Asia, Africa, and Latin America. STREETNET International, like similar organizations, represents thirty national organizations that work to protect the rights of informal street vendors.^[14] These new organizations that have emerged have also tended to include issues that go beyond labor and address land, social, and political rights (and in some cases encompass welfare demands).^[14] Organizing around so many different issues help differentiate contemporary labor movements in the Global South from its previous labor movements and have often been better suited to address "the heterogeneous class and employment relations of the informal sector."^[14]

• North–South divide