Cultural capital is an intellectual concept which stresses the moral impact on material matters and the economic and social return of culture.

The theory of modernization which copies the West as a means of progress has failed, and so has the theory of dependency which is blamed for backwardness. A new theory was needed, hence the development of the concept of cultural capital. There is a lot of talk about the role of Japanese originality in enhancing its technological progress to occupy a high international position. A lot has also been said about the effect of the Chinese work ethics on the progress of the Asian tigers based on the initiatives of the Chinese minorities in East Asia, let alone the role of the Chinese majority in launching the Chinese giant itself. All this reflects an old fact about the moral impact on material matters. A modern formulation affirms this in the "cultural capital" term. But there are those who want to employ this concept, which is correct in essence, to make the backward and the developed as they are:

(Nations live on if morals they cherish, should they not, they will surely perish). The above Arabic verse is perhaps the most widely-quoted in the field of education. Apart from this fact, this verse came to mind immediately as the new expression (cultural capital) caught my interast. 1 thought at first that it was just mere rhetoric in the writings of some famous thinkers like Francis Fukoyama, but when I requested a detailed study of it from a variety of sources, the handiest being the Internet, I found out that the expression is a new term which is meant not only to settle an old dispute in a theoretical and practical issue concerning the development of nations, but also to open a new road to development bypassing the old roads of social and political thinkers and promises the return anew to the old sources, but with modern ends. Because we, as an Arab nation, are experincing a real development dilemma, I deemed it appropriate to present this term and review some of its related studies and discussions as available.

Following theoretical and practical failure The available sources of information indicate that the theories which attempted to interpret the issue of development and backwardness have manifested themselves in the concluding years of the twentieth century in two theories: first, modernization, second, dependency. The former suggests that the only solution to the problem of backwardness of the Third World is emulation of the model of development used in the capitalist West, and in this context, societies are classified into developed industrial, and underdeveloped agricultural. The dependency theory argues that the circumstances of the backwardness of the East are inseparable from the progress of the West, the latter is even the cause of the former.

The East is the victim of unbalanced interaction between a colonial West which exploited the wealth of an oppressed East in a way that led to the progress of the former and the backwardness of the latter. These two theories prvailed as a medium of interpretation of cases of backwardness and development and solutions thereto for two periods after World War II, following which they were theoretically attacked because each contained an abvious weakness. The modernization theory was criticized for being distinctly West oriented, considering everything in the West correct, and everything in the East wrong and false that must be rectified. In this way, it was extermely biased. On the other hand, the dependency theory was criticized for being East oriented, as it attributes the backwardeness of Third World societies to the progress of Western societies, and refrains from attributing what takes place in Eastern societies to mechanisms within these societies themselves. The obvions weaknesses of these two theories may have led to the search for a new theory to interpret development and its mechanisms; hence the formulation of the new concept of the term "cultural capital", which was extensively used in the writings of the controversial American writer Francis Fukoyama. However controversial this thinker may be, we should not ignore him even if we reject his arguments. Even in the case of rejection, we should look behind what we reject and try to find something correct in it amid a multitude of wrong things, for two reasons: First, Fukoyama is not a lightweight thinker; second, the institutional dimension of the American writers which means that what we, sometimes, read as theories is indeed impending scenarios which depend on the balance of power and the will of each party to accept or reject.

And why should we rule out that such a writer will possibly one day reconsider his position in the light of new developments and observations? Shifts and Prejudices The term "cultural capital" his become remarkably widely used in Fukoyama's writings since the publication of his controversial book "The End of History" in 1989 starting from his book published in 1995 under the heading "Confidence: The role of cultue and social virtues in economic prosperity". That was followed by a short article which he wrote in 1999 to the International Monetary Fund about the role of the second generation in the reform of evolving economies. Soon afterwards, he expanded that article in the same year to be a book of over 300 pages entitled "The Great Disruption: Human Nature and the Reconstitution of Social Order". As the title of the book inplies, Fukoyama was talking about "reconstitution" rather than "end of history". However, the roots of thinking about culutral capital appeared much earlier before Fukoyama as represented by the eminent Western sociologist Max Weber in 1930. Moreover, this term became widely used in the Arab writings coinciding with the appearance of the Arab Human Development Report at the turn of the century. The researcher Lawrence Harrison, who was director - general of USAID in developing societies in Latin America, wrote a book entitled "Who Thrives? How Cultural Values Lead to Economic Political Success" in which he defined the following ingredients of cultural capital: 1.

Confidence values among members of society and their impact on facilitating their dealings, according to which societies are classified as flexible and transparent, or malicions and secretive. 2. The love of work or laziness values, according to which societies are classified as work lover (productive) on laziness lover (unproductive). 3. Reward and punishment values and degree of encouragement of creativity and initiative, according to which societies are classified as willing or unwilling to be creative. 4. The values of love of money, saving and profitability, according to which societies are classified as capital magnet or repellent. In this connection, the writer says that most inhabitants of hot regions are less infiuenced by the love of work values and are prone to laziness as a result of people's desire to escape from the burning sun to relax in shaded places. It is a biological process where climate causes blood vessels to dilate and make people liable to fatigue and exhaustion after the slightest effort they make. This develops gradually into dominant culture which prefers working in air-conditioned rooms, e-g., to working outdoors.

Harrison gives the opposite example; the common love of work values among the inhabitants of cold regions. This is explained in biological terms: laziness and inactivity make people feel colder and this drives them to work to feel warm. In this way, biological escape from cold sublimates to become a social value urging people to work and gain benefits. We can here detect an obvious fallacy revealing Harrison's persomal prejudicen: East Africa is a hot, dry region, but work ethics are preserved and they even surpass those in some cold countries. There ethnic prejudices have marred the opinions of many Westerners. It is clear that Harrison failed to get rid of his cultural prejudices against the developing countries. He no doubt was writing about cultural capital, but he did that influenced by the spirit of the West-oriented modernization theory, which reveals his dissatisfaction with conditions in the developing courtries and his fossilized view that these conditions are ever-lasting and are not subject to change, as if he meant stagnant, immobile culture itself, in which there is on-going regeneration.

It is therefore necessary to stand against such thinking that promotes cultural determinism which attempts to deprive the world's poor of the cutural capital which salvages them from backwardness. The dualities of cultural values Research in the issue of cultural capital is not confined to Westerners; the Argentinian writer Mariano Grondona investigated the case of development is his oun country and attributed its lack of success mainly to cultural factors. That came in his unpublished study entitled "The development triangle", in which he compared six different cultural dualities which distinghish between developed and developing countries as follows: - attitude to wealth: is it made or inherited? - attitude to competitiveness: is it inclined to excel or enuy? - attitude to consumption: is it aimed at the coming or current generations? - attitude to work: is it a pleasure or hardship? - attitude to time: is it real or virtual time? - attitude to life: do we make it, or does it make us? As the above view shows, this Argentine writer is not very far from his Northern neighbours as he somewhat supports the idea of cultural determinism. He refers the first and second attitudes in his dualities to the developed, and underdveloped countries, respectively. This views is rejected in the light of models from developing countries, or at least certain sectors thereof. An example of this is India, which occupies a high step on the ladder of world progress in some sectors such as computer software.

Such rigid dualities are always contrary to facts. A spectrum can't be limited to black and white, not to mention the other colours and shades of colour. It seems as if all debate on the process of development leads to mental attitudes where there are only limited options, and so instead of moving forward we find ourselves in a situation where we waste our time and effort in futile argument and byzantine discussion, as if standing motionless from begimming to end. The latter mental attitude was there throughout all ages of human thought, not least Plato's Utopia divided into distinct classes each doing a specific social function, not allowed to shift to a higher or lower class. In this way, Plato arbitrarily dismissed what contemporary sociologists call the possibility of social mobility. In this way, contrary to common belief, Plato originated the tradition of social and cultural stagnation which suggests that cultural and social determinism decides the position, status and powers of each class in society, as if that were in the nature of things. Societies will be good if they defend such determinism; bad if they try to break it down, on the assumption that was a violation of the laws of natural determinism. We may put this idea on the right track to distinguish between societies and peoples and not only classes and individuals, something which was elaborated on by other thinkers after Plato.

Determinism and the need to criticize it Genetic determinism has at last come to represent a modern form of determinism according to which theories may be formulated on the basis of the superiority of certain races according to differnces in genetic factors, as was the case in Hitler's Germany which held that the Aryan race was superior to all other races. According to this view, theories may be formlated about the inferiority of negroes and the coloured on the basis of their distinguishing genetic differences. Both thories could be applied to justify the current exploitation of the developing nations by the developed nations. In his book "Not in our Genes", Stephen Rose summed up the main arguments of the use of the idea of determinism in six series as follows:

1. There are natural differences among all nations and classes.

2. These differences can be measured using development and backwardness indexes.

3. These differences are the product of differences in genetic and cultural factors.

4. Differences in cultural factors continue according to the cultural determinism hypothesis.

5. These genetic and cultural factors cannot be changed; they may be passed to successive generations in each class or nation.

6. The defence of cultural and genetic determinism is more logical than trying to change of break them down.

It is clear that the sequence of the above six arguments is not totally logical. We accept the development and backwardress indexes in the first arguments, but they sound illogical starting from argument 1 which holds that differences continue for good. Arguments 4, 5 and 6 are even hypotheses rather than mesurements, as the book "Not in our Genes" (1984) has highly successfully proved. The fiercest attack on the blind acceptance of the different forms of cultural determinism which supports social and culturd stagnation was made by Karl Popper in his book "Open Society and its Enemies", which was publisfed in the heat of the battle against Fascism and Nazism, and in which he stated the following important opinion: Even if some nations are superior to others in terms of genes and culture, this applies only to what actually is and not to what should be.

According to this view, even if we admit the superiority of one race to another, we should not use that to justify exploitation, but we should diamantle that determinism, even if that entails eliminating what we think is in the nature of existing things.

Our objective is accordingly reaching a new position which is more equal and rational. If things and traits may be inherited, they may also be subject to change. Popper has therefore ushered in a new theoretical age of optimism about radical change and ability to dismantle different forms of determinism. Cultural values and factors are not homogeneous, but some are more sujbect to change and reform, and to stagnation as well, or at least require a longer time for such a change or reform efforts to bear fruit. In a study by researcher Thomas Swale included in his many books about the interaction of culutres and civilizations he suggested that culutral determinism was subject to many changes. Many nations have surmounted their backwardness and achieved obvious development as a result of direct interaction with different civilization. In his latest book "Victories and Cultures" (1998), Swale approved the view of the French reseancher Ferdinand Broduel that the words "developed" and "backward" described different nations in different ages.

The countries which have become developed today were not so in the past, and the countries which are backward today were not so for the duration of all ages; there has always been a massive exchange of positions allover the ages. This undoubtedly proves that development and backwardness are based on measurements and interrelationships of civilization in the age, rather than on the nations they refer to. Swale asserted the positive role of Muslim conquerors who forced Europe out of its worst stages of civilization at all, indicating that occupation could play a positive role in eliminating nations" cultural determinism and ushering in the process of development.

Nevercheless, it may not be claimed that occupation is in general a positive phenomenon entailing development, as there are negative historical experiments where nations with inferior civilization conqucred those with superior civilization, as happened when the Mongols invaded Muslim lands with concurrent massive destruction and collapse of civilization and development. The lesson to learn from reading Swale then is that the study of the interaction and relationships of civilizations is much more important than having hypotheses and prejudices against civilizations as separate issues. In this way, Swale reaches the conclusion that development is a possible process, but it does not take place independently, but through the interaction of civilization with its counterparts in the world, particularly the more advanced ones.

We, the Term and Contrdictions Though a daunting task, I decided to review the concept of cultural capital and its relevant aspects not for cultural coverage alone, but primarily because we, Arabs, have a true opportunity in its ingredients to realize the possible starting point for moving forward or at least surmounting our weakness and regression. We no doubt possess clear positive elements of the cultural capital in terms of our spiritual, value and moral heritage which promote work and perfection and aim to be harmonious with all ingredients of life being duties we have to fulfill honestly. These clear ingredients of any cultural capital have the capacity to drive us forward if we care to realize them. Our care to recover these missing or lost elements will make us see them in the hands of those who perform their duty in life diligently and look at them as if our goods had been reutrned to us.

Malaysia's experiment is an example to follow. I have previously written about this experiment and its leader Mahatir Muhammad, but I now feel that it is worth referring to again as a successful experiment in employing cultural capital for progress and success among the nations of the world. Mahatir began by motivating and urging the Malay Muslim majority to adopt the Chinese minority's work ethics.

He was so succossful in his endeavour that the Muslim majonity actually adopted such values, as if their goods had been reutrned to them. That secured Malaysia creative homogeneity which re-interoduced it to the world as a civilized ountry. This experiment serves as a spontaneous reply to the contradictions which some circless pormote through the cultural capital theory and rebuts the allegations of cultural determinism which some parties promote to frustrate poor peoples seeking progress. Finally, I would like to stress the importance of culture in all its senses as the starting point for economic and social development, thereby turning culture automatically into a tangible value assessed by gold and all precious metals..

Though it remains a moral value, it is a transformational value featuring prominently in all means of production and human creativity.