IMF Lectures the British Public and Undermines its Democracy

From de Veer Magazine
Jump to: navigation, search
Courtesy: Paresh Nath

By Ann-Marie de Veer
Saturday 16 April 2016

On the 23 June 2016 the British people will head to the polls to vote for, or against, remaining a part of the European Union (EU), aka. the Say Yes 2 Europe or Vote Leave referendum. While the merits of both campaigns bear close scrutiny and the general public have been charged with the responsibility of making a reasoned and rational evaluation of the issues involved, there are those who seek to undermine the democratic will of the people.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) was originally a creation of Bretton Woods Conference held in July 1944. The conference, a meeting that not only encapsulated but epitomised the US Empire's motto, To the Victor Belong the Spoils, is responsible for the establishment of one of the the most egregious, irresponsible and undemocratic institutions in the modern world.

While the IMF could arguably be said to have had a positive effect on the economies of some Western nations in the aftermath of World War II, it has since proven to be nothing less than an institution which actively engages in maintaining, and further entrenching, global economic apartheid. When the post WWII era of financial hardship finally came to an end in the West during the late 1970's it quickly became apparent that the organisation's policies were, and to continue to be, the fiscal enslavement of the developing world and all who challenge its authority. As a review of its policies in the early 1980's clearly attests:

1. The economic exploitation and disenfranchisement of less developed countries.
2. The assumption that all economic crises are attributable to domestic factors.
3. The use of anti-developmental and deflationary measures to maintain a rigid balance of payments schedule.
4. The uncompromising imposition of untested and/or unproven economic theories.

A more recent example of the IMF's incompetence and intransigence can be found in the financial crisis in Argentina which finally erupted with devastating effect in early December 2001. The IMF, in the years leading up to the nations default in paying its creditors, had mercilessly imposed a vast array of untested and unproven economic policies aimed solely at balancing the nations budget while all the fiscal markers and common sense indicated a more nuanced restructuring of its debt. The fact that most of the nations financial liabilities during this period were incurred as a result of non-domestic events mattered little: the IMF, a dictatorial and despotic arbiter of fiscal incompetence, insisted that Argentina must repay its debts as scheduled, at the expense of the nations education, healthcare and social service systems. Full-scale riots quickly ensued, followed by multiple deaths and the incumbent government was brought to its knees. The IMF were subsequently shown the door and asked to leave.

Fast forward to 2008.

Seven years after the IMF were found to be wanting in South America they reappeared in Iceland eager to capitalise on the demise of the nations banking system caused by the US inspired Global Financial Crisis (GFC). Of course, it is no secret that the Icelandic banks had grown their international operations at a rate far beyond the nations capacity to serve the debt they had incurred, i.e. the Icelandic banks had expanded their liabilities to more than 7 times the nation's GDP (GDP Debt Ratio > 700%), and its subsequent crash was an inevitable consequence of the GFC. Unlike the West, most of Iceland's bankers ended up in jail. Nonetheless, the IMF, as the nation's economic system neared total collapse, offered a bailout fund that was not only conditional upon the involvement of Iceland's primary creditors, i.e. Britain and the Netherlands, but also the implementation of draconian austerity measures not unlike the policies they had imposed on Argentina. Eventually a debt restructuring package was negotiated with Britain, the Netherlands and the EU but excluded many of the conditions imposed by the IMF. Once again, the IMF were shown the door and asked to leave.

Thus, it is in this context that we need to review the recent involvement of the IMF in the UK, who are warning of the dangers of a successful Vote Leave campaign from the EU. The facts are the IMF are meddling in the affairs of yet another sovereign state and seeking to undermine the democratic will of its people, as is the mainstream media who are willing to give them a platform to voice their fear mongering message.

The British people will not be lectured by an organisation who have a proven track record of intransigence and incompetence in the financial governance of nation states ... no one is listening any more.

The IMF may now quietly leave the UK, and don't forget to close the door on your way out.

Democracy is not having the unelected foist their nefarious plans upon the electorate.
Ann-Marie de Veer