“Dependency” theorists believe that moving surplus

labor from agriculture to industry where that labor will
earn profits that can be reinvested for further growth
is the key to overall economic growth and
development. Is this statement true or false? Explain why.

To determine whether the statement is true or false, we need to understand the perspective of dependency theorists and their beliefs.

Dependency theorists argue against the idea that moving surplus labor from agriculture to industry is the key to overall economic growth and development. They propose that instead of leading to growth, this process reinforces dependency and inequality between developed and underdeveloped nations.

According to dependency theory, the primary cause of underdevelopment is the historical and ongoing economic relationship between advanced capitalist nations and developing countries. They argue that developed nations have influenced and continue to dominate the economies of underdeveloped countries, leading to a cycle of dependency.

Dependency theorists believe that the transfer of surplus labor from agriculture to industry, as advocated by other development theories, perpetuates this dependency. They argue that industrialization in developing countries does not result in substantial growth or development because it primarily serves the interests of developed nations.

In this perspective, dependency theorists suggest that true economic growth and development can only be achieved by breaking free from the reliance on developed nations and pursuing an alternative path that focuses on domestic production, self-sufficiency, and reducing dependence on external actors.

In conclusion, the statement that "dependency theorists believe that moving surplus labor from agriculture to industry is the key to overall economic growth and development" is false. Dependency theorists have a different viewpoint and argue against this notion, emphasizing the need to address the structural inequalities and dependency perpetuated by the global economic system.