This article examines global governance reforms as a site of contestation between three different "truths"/epistemes (the market, human rights principles, and cultural identity) in terms of the competing principles of efficiency, capability, and recognition. Nancy Fraser's conceptions of participation parity and a dialogical approach of recognition to examine diverse global governance reform proposals are used to argue that a neo-liberal developmentalist approach (Washington Consensus at the core and development on the edges) and a human developmentalist approach (human rights on top without challenging a neo-liberal core)--both built upon a paradigm of redistribution--fall short of addressing the crisis of recognition. What is needed is more than a question of more funds, but rather a fundamental recognition and representation of the majority developing world as equal partners in global governance. Education in postdevelopmentalism takes on the broader significance of cultural revival as resistance to market fundamentalism. (Contains 1 figure.)