"The World Bank: A Critical Primer" by Eric Toussaint

Published by Between The Lines.

"The World Bank: A Critical Primer" is critical, yes, primer, maybe. The book reports atrocities the bank has committed since its founding and attempts to prove through these that the bank itself has a policy of committing atrocities and therefore must be abolished. If we ignore the the fact that generalizing from specific examples is a no-no, it's pretty convincing. Toussaint reports instance after instance of how the World Bank has, under the guise of being an institution dedicated to helping underdeveloped countries, used its influence (i.e., its money) to instate policies in countries to make them suitable environments in which U.S. corporations can turn large profits, to the detriment of the countries' citizens. Toussaint includes statistics showing the hefty profits of the bank, while the countries to which it lends struggle to pay back ever-increasing loans, the majority of which seem to end up in the pockets of politicians. The book seems to divided somewhat chronologically, with chapters on specific examples of bad banking, specific presidents and economists at the bank, some generalizing argumentative chapters, and some tracking the bank's activities over large spans of time (oh yes, there are graphs).

The book is well-researched and well-referenced and, while critical throughout, does not generally extend its criticism beyond the scope of what's been shown to be true through example. For instance, if reporting an instance where the bank has granted a loan on the condition that essential services are privatized (causing costs to citizens to skyrocket), Toussaint may criticize the bank for prioritizing the benefits of corporations over citizens. In the chapter on the bank's treatment of human rights, for example, Toussaint argues that the bank tends toward the policy of upholding negative rights only (though I don't think he uses that term), meaning that the rights of the citizens are such that the only responsibility of others to uphold those rights is not to interfere with their property (i.e., the kind of rights advantageous to corporations), while the bank has no regard for a positive right, which would include the rights to water, food, shelter, etc. (i.e., the kind of rights that allow for happy, alive citizens).

It seemed a little odd to attribute human characteristics to the bank itself, e.g., the bank acts in this way, the bank shows this preference, the bank likes to eat kittens, etc., and my initial tendency would be to find that individual who was responsible. But it seems the individuals responsible are anyone with any policy-making power at the bank, and it's much easier to simply refer to "The Bank" rather than "that bunch of jerks".

While the point of the book is clear throughout (kill the bank), the text is difficult to read in parts if the reader, like myself, has no prior knowledge of economic terms (besides the very common ones) and if, like myself, cannot immediately commit to memory the meanings of the scores of acronyms strewn throughout the book.

This book, while not perfect, has made a valiant attempt to back up its criticisms with thorough research, and has, in my opinion, succeeded in proving that there is something wrong with the system.