Browsing by Author "Huotari, Esa Ilmari"

Market relations are never natural, nor are they born without coercion, social tension and violence. This thesis contributes to the critical research on market creation and takes part in the discussion of how our written economic history is based on myths and outright lies. Looking beyond the conventional stories of money’s origins, myth of unilinear development and narratives of universal tendencies to exploit one’s surroundings, this thesis draws from heterodox monetary theory and strong anthropological evidence. It explores the inherently political nature of market creation or “forced markets” through a case study of monetizing colonial Nigeria’s markets. The focus is in asking “why?” rather than merely describing the process. This thesis examines on the other hand the variety of indigenous ways to arrange economies on local level and on the other hand the violent processes through which Western colonial powers sought to monetize these economies and indoctrinate the local populations. In other words, how to make “them” like “us”. In the heart of this thesis are the writings of the High Commissioner of the Northern Nigeria Protectorate (1900-1906) and Governor of unified colonies of Nigeria (1912-1914), Frederick Lugard. From his writings I extract the answer to my question of why these economies had to be monetized, whether it was done to make the colony fiscally profitable or to “civilize” the local population by imposing the Western model of control and habits of work on them. Since the material on hand is waiting to be interpreted through the context of heterodox theories of money and “forced markets”-approach, a hermeneutic positioning in the analysis is an obvious choice. It also complements my constructionist ontology and an interpretivist epistemology. This thesis highlights the role of European intellectual history as a driving force of racist discourses and thus as a justification for the atrocities carried out around the world in the name of progress and civilization. This “European superiority” and “native inferiority” is so deep-rooted in Western mindscape, that although much of this work concentrates mainly on historical matters, the legacy of this intellectual history and its byproducts must be addressed. Are we carrying the tradition of “white man’s burden” in the footsteps of Lugard and others’ like him?