> From: D Shniad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Confusion at the IMF > Here's some more on the contradictory messages coming > from the IMF. The October 4, 1996 issue of Latin > America Data Base (Volume 6, Number 37) > Sid Shniad > Thanks Sid for the information. It is really helpful to know where are the new bits and pieces in recent journal articles and reports that add to this 'contemporary (tragi)comedy'. I find it interesting to see the evolution of the discourse of 'big-brother governments' and 'big-sister institutions', while confimrming possible contradictions with current practices... But frankly, I do not see *any* contradiction with the apparent swing of rethoric in Bretton Woods institutions. Let me put it briefly (and excuse me for the over simplification): - During the 1960s the major effort was to allow for the consolidation of political hegemony of capitalism, as oppossed to various sorts of 'comunisms' that were growing everywhere (Africa, LA, Eastern Europe, and even Western Europe's May 68..) The most acceptable facade then was a' la "Alliance for Progress" capitalism. -During the 1970s, it was appropiate to consolidate the financial hegemony, by spreading dollars and marks (debt) over the globe, pushing for financial intermediation at the time that MNCs were getting a handle over financial-commercial holdings. It was the time in which it was easy to 'borrow the umbrella because the wheather was nice' (Nurske) -During the 1980s, 'it began to rain and those who borrow the umbrella had to return it". SAPs and stabilisation packages were at the root of every economic programme in practically every country. That allowed for testing without any scrupules the most radical versions of NC economics, using the third world as laboratories. So, it was the time to consolidate the 'theory', the 'mainstream'. - Lets keep this in mind for a moment: political, economic, financial, and ideological control has, then, been conquered. Reagan-Tacherism was in the wake of this process, and not in the other way around. It was the silent victory of capital, and not of these two figures, who happen to be at the crest of the wave... One thing is true, international institutions and powerful governments serving the big capital wanted to keep there 'up' and avoid any collapse. The obvious strategy is then to 'accomodate' the discourse every time there is an apparent leak in the well consolidated system... -In the mid-1980s there was already quite some evidence that the SAPs and stabilisation were not succeding as expected. Then, I remember well, there was a lot of literature arguing that the main policy targets were fine, but probably more attention should be given to the 'sequency' of these policies in order to ensure the success... - There was then a 'quiet' interim that came about due to the 'collapse of comunism', which allowed for a more 'careless' application of structural adjustment... The 'shock therapy' had its party !! It was also easy to argue that in those countries in which SAPs have already started many years before and have not succeeded, it was just a question of time, because 'the adjustement has not yet been completed" (an addtional reason for going for a 'shock therapy') - Soon after, a major concern was that- whatever the sequency of policies- SAPs by definition would necessarily create poverty at the start. So, the 'poverty' issue is not of nowadays, it is there at least some five years... But then, the discourse could easily accomodate again, the 'sequency' story was left behind and a new 'safety net' story was adopted: the creation of some sort of safeguard for the poor during the first phase of the adjustment, under the conviction (?) that economic growth will bring about poverty alleviation... - Now, in these days apparently, the discourse again accomodates to counteract an obvious criticism: neither 'safety nets' have worked out well, nor growth was achieved (or if any, growth has not overcome poverty or improved distribution)... So there is a problem... - Aha!! that is it: CORRUPTION! The report of the last annual meeting, and lots of declarations here and there are just imbued with this new 'magic word' which allows for putting the orthodoxy in a safe place... There is no any contradiction, in my view, or at least, not any different than the contradiction of always between the capital and labour, at an international scale... Sorry, it was longer than expected. Salud, Alex Alex Izurieta E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Institute of Social Studies P.O. Box 29776 2502 LT The Hague Tel. 31-70-4260480 Fax. 31-70-4260755
