>James, your normal skepticism seems to be on leave. Wolfie & the WB
>are masters of PR, and of seducing some of their more sluttish
>critics. You find some of the more compromised NGOs, make a great
>show of "listening" to them, pump out some sensitive-sounding
>reports, and continue financing the imperial march of capital across
>the globe behind all the pleasant smoke.
Well, I certainly agree with that assessment of the WB's motivations.
I didn't make the points I did to apologise for the World Bank. On the contrary, it seems to me that their crocodile tears over poverty provide the perfect cover for advancing the interests of capital.
What I am less clear about is your apparent belief that some of the NGOs are not compromised. I would have said that this entire caste of international aid bureaucrats were a negative phenomenon. In the contest between Kanbur and Wolfensohn, is there really any difference, or just a division of labour.
Supposedly 'pro-poor' arguments have been deployed to frustrate attempts by third world nations to achieve growth. I do not favour the imposition of conditions that are 'pro-poor' any more than I do those that are 'pro-market' - the first and the worst inequality is the one in which Western institutions get to impose conditions on third world nations.
I certainly look forward to the resurrection of LBO to deal with some of these issues. -- James Heartfield
Great Expectations: the creative industries in the New Economy is available from Design Agenda, 4.27 The Beaux Arts Building, 10-18 Manor Gardens, London, N7 6JT Price 7.50 GBP + 1GBP p&p