Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Dragging Secretive Trade Talks Into the Light: Activists Expose Slow-Motion Corporate Coup [View all]bvar22
(39,909 posts)24. THAT is a bit-of-a-leap
The World's economic situation was much different immediately following WW2 than it is now.
The World was being divided up among the "Winners", basically Russia (Communist) vs the West (Capitalism).
The creation of the IMF and the World Bank were simply an extension of the WAR into the World Economic Realm,
another "weapon", AND it was an effective one.
"The World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) were created at the end of World War II by the U.S. and British governments. During the war the business classes of Europe were either supporting the Nazis, getting their banks and factories bombed into oblivion or they fled Europe with all the money they could carry. On the other hand, socialists, communists and anarchists had high credibility because they were the leaders of the Resistance to Nazi occupation. In order to prevent leftists from coming to power in western Europe, it was crucial to U.S. and British elites to get the business classes back into power. This required international institutions that would promote capitalist policies and strengthen the power of the corporate sector.
The World Bank focused on making loans to governments in order to rebuild railroads, highways, bridges, ports and other "infrastructure", i.e., the parts of the economy that are not profitable for private companies to build so they are left to the public sector (the taxpayers). After an initial focus on western Europe the World Bank shifted its lending toward the third world.
<snip>
The unwritten goal of the IMF and World Bank was to integrate the elites of all countries into the capitalist world system of rewards and punishments. The billions of dollars controlled by the IMF and World Bank have helped to create greater allegiance of national elites to the elites of other countries than they have to their own national majorities. When the World Bank and IMF lend money to debtor countries the money comes with strings attached. The policy prescriptions are usually referred to as "structural adjustment" and they require that debtor governments open their economies up to penetration by foreign corporations, allowing them access to the workers and natural resources of the country at bargain basement prices.. Other policies imposed under structural adjustment include: allowing foreign corporations to repatriate profits, balancing the government budget (often by cutting social spending), selling off publicly owned assets ("privatization"
and devaluing the currency."
http://www.globalexchange.org/resources/wbimf/origins
The World Bank focused on making loans to governments in order to rebuild railroads, highways, bridges, ports and other "infrastructure", i.e., the parts of the economy that are not profitable for private companies to build so they are left to the public sector (the taxpayers). After an initial focus on western Europe the World Bank shifted its lending toward the third world.
<snip>
The unwritten goal of the IMF and World Bank was to integrate the elites of all countries into the capitalist world system of rewards and punishments. The billions of dollars controlled by the IMF and World Bank have helped to create greater allegiance of national elites to the elites of other countries than they have to their own national majorities. When the World Bank and IMF lend money to debtor countries the money comes with strings attached. The policy prescriptions are usually referred to as "structural adjustment" and they require that debtor governments open their economies up to penetration by foreign corporations, allowing them access to the workers and natural resources of the country at bargain basement prices.. Other policies imposed under structural adjustment include: allowing foreign corporations to repatriate profits, balancing the government budget (often by cutting social spending), selling off publicly owned assets ("privatization"

http://www.globalexchange.org/resources/wbimf/origins
At the time these organizations were created, they were effective Tools-of-War.
They should have been dismantled in the 60s, or at least restructured to bring them under the control of governments and accountability to The People.
Trying to blame FDR for the out-of-control monsters that these organizations have become is not sound reasoning.
SEE: Historian's fallacy
SEE: Fallacy of the single cause
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
24 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Dragging Secretive Trade Talks Into the Light: Activists Expose Slow-Motion Corporate Coup [View all]
xchrom
Dec 2012
OP
From what I've read TPP is worse than NAFTA(which is horrible). Why give up control over
byeya
Dec 2012
#10
Tell that to FDR who lowered tariffs and set up the low-tariff trading system for
pampango
Dec 2012
#22
K&R for the latest shit sandwich we're all supposed to take a big bite of with a big smile.
Egalitarian Thug
Dec 2012
#16