On Apr 12, 2007, at 12:23 PM, Wojtek Sokolowski wrote:
> I am surprised that you wrote that, Doug. The Bank no more
> perpetuates the global hierarchy than, say, the markings on the
> speedometer
> gauge control the speed of the car. The hierarchy would be
> maintained even
> if the Bank did not exist. What determines the position in that
> hierarchy
> is the amount of resources a country can produce, and those low on
> the totem
> pole do not - and cannot - produce much, hence they are low on the
> totem
> pole.
>
> China, India, Korea or Thailand are global powers not because the
> Bank sez
> so, but because they can produce and sell a lot. What is more, if
> the Banks
> sez something that India, China, Korea, or Thailand do not like, these
> countries are in a position to tell the Bank to fuck itself, and
> have done
> so in the past.
>
> The only countries that can be bossed around by the Banks are a
> handful of
> the poorest Third World countries that depend on loans and aid to
> shore up
> their economies - but then _anyone_ can boss around such
> countries. As they
> say, beggars cannot be choosers.
The WB, like the IMF, is one of the pillars of the global order. Most of the countries that have done well, in conventional terms, have largely violated its advice (e.g., South Korea and China). Mexico was its star pupil in the early 1990s, and Argentina in the late 1990s. Both crashed. Latin American in general has largely followed WB advice and has nothing or less than nothing to show for it. The countries that violated its advice routinely ignored intellectual property restrictions, repressed finance, regulated foreign commerce, and protected domestic industries. Those that followed its advice didn't.
Doug