Anthony D'Costa wrote: > I personally don't have to deal with IMF and WB folks though I do have > friends and colleagues who work there and they far from libertarian in their > outlook. Besides, I think it is easier to argue with IMF and WB ideas since > they don't invoke Ayn Rand and privatization of the post office...
I'd say that centralized institutions that take advantage of a country's indebtedness or cash-flow problems to impose their neoliberal policies aren't libertarian in practice. The IMF and the Bank are more like state institutions, arms of a possibly-emerging world government. But their pushing for free trade, etc.(the Washington Consensus) is backed by "libertarian" rhetoric, i.e., a stated belief in the essential goodness of markets. While opposing the corruption of officials (except for those who work for the IMF or WB, natch) is a good thing, their alternative is the market (and implicitly capitalism) and not democracy (except in the degraded sense of the word often used in the US). could you explain how "greater transparency" leads to "robbery of national resources"? It's an interesting idea. -- Jim Devine / If you're going to support the lesser of two evils, at the very least you should know the nature of that evil. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
