white-washing, prodding and superceding: a peoples' world bank

patrick bond says:

>how (do) you anticipate changing power relations so that you don't just

whitewash the embryonic global state -- e.g. the allegedly post-
WashCon World Bank -- while the best social movements in the
world are doing their damnest to kick the Bank out of their
countries.That's why motivating for a world state sounds a bit
anachronistic, at least from my vantagepoint here in Johannesburg.

well i dont have all this worked out in detail. but for starts i would
say that it makes sense to both kick the bank out of south africa and to
try to reform it. if reform does not work we should found a peoples'
world bank. facilitating cooperation between these different thrusts
could be a job for the world party.

as to white-washing the bank, they dont need me. according to one of the
vice presidents of the bank ( a Dutch economist) we had in a debate here
a couple of weeks ago there are no neoliberal economists at the bank any
longer. they are all social democrats now.
this is the postwashconworld bank that patrick is talking about. . fine.
but what are they going to do to democratize the bank itself, to really
balance out uneven development and make development sustainable?

i dont see any contradiction between movements that want to defend
themselves from undemocratic global institutions like the bank, and
those same movements working toward creating the institutions of
democratic world governance.

some semiperipheral countries have the option of trying to succeed in
the capitalist world-system vs. supporting fundamental transformation of
the system. but few can succeed and this is not at all an option for
peripheral countries.jpzsef borocz has already pointed out that
socialism in one country does not work. it is in the interest of the
majority of the peoples of the world to act to construct the
institutions of global democratic socialism.

chriscd