Reading about the post-development theory in the article Garifuna Foodways Resistance by Hall I was reminded by its critiques that I learned in my class SOCI 301. One of the critiques of post-development was romanticizing these Indigenous groups and trying to preserve their “authenticity”. However, as we have been learning in our class through globalization the concept of authenticity does not exist due to high interconnectedness and mobility.

Hall, while agreeing with Escobar’s post-development values that alternatives to development should be attended to, holds on to some aspects of development at the same time. Just like the folkloric shaman chooses which parts to integrate into his/her practice (healing rituals) and the ones to eliminate (black magic) we can integrate some parts of development within alternatives to development. For example, the article discusses how the machinery grater introduced reduces the time of labor in making areba which is seen as a symbol of “grassroots collaborative work among rural Garifuna women”(Hall 35). This is an evidence of how the Garifuna using their agencies to benefit the offerings of Western Institutions are still able to maintain their solidarity.

While it is significant to preserve the Indigenous Knowledge Systems which is defined by our classmates Emma, Estefania, Nima, and Constantine as the “knowledge acquired prior to the advancement of modern technology”, of the Garifuna there is no harm to integrate some beneficial technological practices of development into IKS to take advantage of these short-term benefits. Also, as Hall describes, the post-development theory aspires to abandon the concept of development altogether, and this disregards the value of the grass-root developments which is inherently directed by the Indigenous groups. The grassroots development aspires to unite the community with an increased agency in order to enhance the wellbeing of the community. However, the post-development only focuses on the Eurocentric aspects of development. As mentioned before, romanticizing these Indigenous groups through the lens of post-development  we could be misled in a way to imagine these groups as silenced victims. However, this is a harmful approach and the agencies of the people should be acknowledged because the Indigenous are adapt groups that can manage and actively influence development with a bottom-top approach.

In SOCI 380, I learned about the Zapatistas and how through their grass-root movement they managed to keep their autonomy from the Mexican Government. As a result, the Zapatista managed their economy based on collective ownership and production just like the Garifuna women producing areba empowering one another by this movement.