----------
>From: pete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: FW: Re: World Bank: 200 million...
>Date: Fri, Jun 4, 1999, 8:28 PM
>
> "Thomas Lunde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>This is a pretty complete about face from the neo-con - monetarist
>>philosophy that has been dominating us from the 70's on. Has the world bank
>>got religion or has some re-read Kenysian Economic Theory?
>
> Since James Wolfensohn took over, the WB seems to be exchanging black
> hats for white at as rapid a rate as they dare in the face of
> political orthodoxy. With the demise of many neo-con regimes in
> G7 countries in the last couple of years, the pace has quickened.
> It is one of the things that inspires me to optimism these days.
>
> -Pete Vincent
Thomas:
Your paragragph has sat in my E Mail - it seems like forerver. Why? I have
been toying with the significant man theory - though it could be a woman.
How often, for better or worse, is one person able to direct and influence
the lives of millions of people? Think of Pol Pot or Slobovan Milosvic or
Hitler. What would our world history have been like if they had just got
cancer? By the same token, how have the economies of the world been changed
Keynes, Friedman, Adam Smith and a significant book that grabs the times and
changes our course.
What about others that didn't make it over the hump, Louis Reil, Fremont who
could have been President instead of Abraham Lincoln. Or Hiliare Belloc's
book, The Servile State.
On one level, it seems that events progress from some sort of logical
planning and yet, often from a back play of history, it can be seen that a
significant person changed the whole directions of country's and its ideals.
Nelson Mandella is a good example - 27 years in prison and yet somehow,
against all odds he becomes a leader and continues to hold the highest
ideals.
What is my point - I don't know. It's the anomaly of it that intrigues and
frustrates me. The original post led to a comment that the World Bank is
changing, not from internal policy discussions, not from direction from the
United States or United Nations, but because one man occupies the office
that was previously held by someone else. What happens when Alan Greenspan
has a health problem, does the world veer and devolve into economic chaos or
does the next Central Banker create the reality of a Basic Income and change
our world forever. It often seems like whoever is appointed or elected does
not even telegrapgh the changes they instigate and yet, all of sudden their
thoughts operate somehow to make world shaking changes.
If anyone has any books to refer, I would be interested in their titles.
Respectfully,
Thomas Lunde
>
