Focusing on the period between WW11 and the mid-1990s, this thesis follows two main themes: (a) the national and international progression from ideological models to practical models of development through debate, compromise, and the tactical positioning of intellectuals and advocates, and (b) how the models in question have gained influence in international institutions, particularly the IMF, WB, WTO, and OECD, and how models of development are further expressed, developed, and disseminated from these platforms. The first theme evolves through critical discussion of key works by pivotal scholars who were particularly influential in this period, and the contrasts between central aspects of their distinct ideological models of national and international development. This theme is further developed via a historical narrative of political development in the U.S and to a lesser extent the U.K, which highlights the challenges facing those who seek to implement an ideological blueprint into a practical model of development. This analysis demonstrates the debate, compromise, and the tactical positioning of intellectuals and advocates which almost inevitably creates discrepancies between the ideological and practical models, and between national models based on the same ideology. Three distinct eras of capitalist development are identified and defined by their practical model of development. It is found that each has been intentionally implemented and has clear links to ideological counterparts. Using these distinct eras of capitalist development as guidance, the second major theme is explored through separate narratives of IMF, WB, WTO, and OECD development through the same time period. Findings demonstrate how each institution has been influenced by the U.S and the wider G7 and effectively serves as an extension of their geopolitical and economic interests, and how each has incorporated the three intentionally implemented models into its own workings. This analysis reveals a growing interconnectedness and cooperation between these institutions and shows how they have evolved into a coordinated network of knowledge producing policy advocates and enforcers. Findings also show the process of inducting nations into the policy frameworks developed within these institutions, and the embedding of nations into the global free-market economy that the supranational institutional network is responsible for.