Re: EH.R the washington consensus

yiYes there was such a consensus. in the 80s it was more de facto. it was
not formalized till later at the washington meeting. but it startedd to be
questioned, especially in latin america, well before the asian fiancial
crisis.  and of course they neither were designed nor never did 'stimulate
economic growth' in the target countries, although the sacrifice of
their people did maintain growth in the Unitred States and support
Washington's military keynesian monetary/fiscal policies which would
have been unatenable withouth xternal support, including that from 
the 'structural adjustment' economies. What economists thought had
little or no bearing on economic policy, which responded to
economic reality and instead led economic 'thought'. No greater error did
Keyens make than to claim that  policy makers act out the ideas of long
dead economists they dont even know about. Just look at Keynes and his
ideas: Keynesian policy in the US, Germany, Soviet Union,Latin
America etc.  PRECEDED the  1936 publication of th General Theory
-- and after Nixon declared that we are all Keynesians now, it took only a
couple of years ofa new /different  world economic crisis to
convert policy makers and economists to supply sideism and the monetarism
that Uncle Milton had been preaching to  deaf [all Keynesian!] ears since
i sat in his  class in 1950. Reaganomics - started by Jimmy Carter[and Stu
Eiszenstad now of Swiss Bank fame] in 1977 and his Fed appointee Paul 
Volcker in 1979 - was both the immediate cause and forerunner of the
Washington Consesus [it was Volker's switch to a high interest rate
monetary policy when he hastily left the BElgrade IMF meeeting in October
1979 that  caused the Debt Crisis in  the first place! -- and then paved
the way for the Washington Consensus.


26 Mar 1999, SUSAN A. AARONSON wrote:

> Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 12:19:13 EST
> From: "SUSAN A. AARONSON" <saaronso@osf1.gmu.edu>
> Reply-To: eh.res@eh.net
> To: eh.res@eh.net
> Subject: EH.R the washington consensus
> 
> ================= EH.RES POSTING =================
> I am writing a book on the Washington consensus the set of views (first
> outlined by economist John Williamson) on policies to stimulate economic
> growth (macroeconomic discipline microeconomic liberalization and outward
> orientation (freer trade/investment).  They began as descriptive, but
> became prescriptive policies from the IBRD and the IMF.  Do people think
> there was such a consensus in the 1980s and 1990s before the Asian
> financial crisis, which has revealed its seams.  Do you think economists
> ignored the import of economic institutions and norms in their policy
> prescriptions for development in the 1980s and 1990s (these policies were
> also used by countries as diverse as Australia U>S>, Korea, Brazil, Chile
> etc... )?Susan Aaronson George Mason. 
> 
> 
> ============ FOOTER TO EH.RES POSTING ============
> For information, send the message "info EH.RES" to lists@eh.net
> 
> 


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                   ANDRE GUNDER FRANK
250 Kensington Ave - Apt 608     Tel: 1-514-933 2539    
Westmount/Montreal PQ/QC         Fax: 1-514-933 6445 or 1478
Canada H3Z 2G8              e-mail:agfrank@chass.utoronto.ca 

My Home Page is at:       http://www.whc.neu.edu/gunder.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~