Posted on 01/05/2007 6:11:38 PM PST by A. Pole
Jeffrey Sachs is a complicated guy. His first claim to fame was as the doctor who administered "shock therapy" in Bolivia, Poland, and Russia. Now he's Bono's traveling companion. Bono wrote the intro to Sachs's latest book ("My professor.... In time, his autograph will be worth a lot more than mine"), and Sachs gushes all over Bono in the text ("Bono brilliantly brought the AIDS tragedy to the attention of several key leaders of the religious right...").
[...]
UN's Millennium Development Goals (on which he is an advisor to Secretary General Kofi Annan), which were agreed to by 147 heads of state gathered in New York in September 2000. These include halving the numbers of the extremely poor and halving the numbers of the hungry by 2015; achieving universal literacy and primary education; promoting gender equality and the empowerment of women; reducing child mortality by two-thirds; improving maternal health; combatting HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other horrid diseases; ensuring environmental sustainability; and developing a global partnership for development (which amounts to a nicer neoliberalism)
[...]
Achieving these goals, on Sachs's estimates, would require about $80 billion a year over the next ten years - not much next to current world output of $35 trillion a year. It's equal to about 20 hours of global economic activity. It's not much more, as Sachs shows, than the income of the 400 richest U.S. taxpayers - and that's not counting the rest of the world's rich.
[...]
Sachs's first moment in the spotlight came in the mid-1980s, with the "stabilization" of Bolivia, a policy package he designed that brought the country's inflation rate from 40,000% to near-0%. Sadly, though, it did nothing to relieve Bolivia's poverty - and the current round of almost constant protests, which have driven several presidents from office (and some from the country) suggests that twenty years later, Bolivians still aren't happy with their situation. But the superficial success of what came to be called "shock therapy" - and it must be conceded that almost no one likes hyperinflation - left Sachs well-positioned in the global market for economic expertise when socialism started unraveling at the end of the decade.
Sachs was an advisor to the Yeltsin government in Russia from 1991 to 1994, and also advised Poland, Slovenia, and Estonia as they were beginning their transitions to capitalism. The last three are mixed successes - on the surface, Poland looks like a success to some, but with the transition came higher unemployment, falling real wages, and aimless cycles of political discontent. Russia, though, was a thorough disaster, one of the worst collapses in human history. Living standards fell and the population shrank, an almost unprecedented event in a country not at war.
Bono's new best friend refuses to accept any blame for the disaster, offering the defense that the Russians didn't take his advice, and the West didn't come through with the big aid package he insisted was necessary. Apparently this is an well-practiced strategy. A 1992 Euromoney profile notes: "Sachs is reluctant to acknowledge mistakes, defining them in terms of regret when governments do not take his advice." In that case, he blamed Poland for not privatizing fast enough. Contrasting with Sachs's regrets over advice not taken, several governments he's consulted with have since characterized the material produced by him and his associates as irrelevant, or, as a Slovenian official put it at the time, "simplistic...kindergarten stuff."
Lethal gall
But the outcome illustrates precisely the danger of having the likes of Sachs parachute in bearing the timeless truths of neoclassical economics. Anyone who knew Russia knew that any rapid privatization would immediately lead to the creation of a new corrupt elite through massive theft of state property.
[...]
In Poland, Sachs was firmly on the side of rapid transition to "normal" capitalism. At first he proposed U.S.-style corporate structures, with professional managers answering to many shareholders and a large economic role for stock markets. That didn't fly with the Polish authorities, so Sachs came back with a Germanic idea - large blocks of the shares of privatized companies would be placed in the hands of big banks. (As Ellerman recounts it, "Wherever the parade was going, [Sachs] had to be in front.") In both versions the point was to end any hints of worker or social control and institute a conventional capitalist class hierarchy.
His style was always abrasive and domineering; he rebuked the Slovenian parliament for passing a bill without his approval, and dismissed his critics as "idiots" and "self-management imbeciles." Waiting to meet with senior Soviet officials in 1991, Sachs put his feet up on a table. An aide asked him not to do that. Sachs took his feet down for a moment, and when the aide turned away, put them back up. From several public events and an hour-long interview, I can say he comes across as a very unpleasant fellow - cocky, vain, and free of doubt.
[...]
Sachs admits to no responsibility for the Russian catastrophe. When I interviewed him in November 2002, I asked him to comment on the (incontrovertible) fact that he's viewed by scores of millions of Russians, as one journalist has put it, as either an emissary of Satan or of the CIA. He answered that he found this question "disgusting," "perverse," and like nothing he's ever been asked before. The global elite leads a very insulated life.
[...]
Shock "therapy" bump
The transition from totalitarianism to the rule of law is surely difficult. I think that changing the culture is more important than political reform.
Blah, terrible argument. Estonia is a success. Poland is a resounding success. Sure, unemployement went up, for a year or so, but look where they are now? IF the socialists had their way Poland would look like Belarus. Bolivia went well too, but the leftists undid it. Russia was a disaster, but not because of Sachs. Russia was a disaster because they DID NOT do shock therapy. Shock therapy, by definition, says bit the big bullet now. Russia tried to go slow.
All that being said, since then Sachs has turned into a total leftist asshole.
Exactly the impression I had of him after seeing him in one interview.
Jeffrey Sachs is a parasite. He lives in the First World, and uses its power to advance his own interests. His method is to accuse the First World of being responsible for the Third World's problems, and then electing himself as the Messiah from Oz who will minister to the victimized nations, usually by demanding a massive transfer of wealth.
This serves to elevate his own image, by setting himself up as being morally superior to all the crass, unwashed heathen of the country he grew up in, who he hates.
The definition of the current version of "liberals". That's all the guy is.
"But the outcome illustrates precisely the danger of having the likes of Sachs parachute in bearing the timeless truths of neoclassical economics"
Is that anything like the futility of invading a dictatorship bearing the timeless truths of democratic government? If so, Sachs and Bush have a lot in common.
Rasputin wannabe, lol??
Wonderful tagline. :o)
Ummm, why are we reading an article from a leftist journal that's recommended by Noam Chomsky and Jim Hightower? Are we going to start considering stuff from the Nation and Mother Jones now?
Two words: Echo chamber....
Sometimes Nation has excellent articles (I do not check Mother Jones but thank you for the reminder) and sometimes conservative/right wing magazine publishes junk.
You need to look for information and ideas everywhere. You never know when you find a nugget.
Wonder if this guy is in charge of Bill Clinton's obesity and environment salvation fund?
Please don’t compare us to Estonia, two different worlds. After fall of communism Poland was ruled by post-communist apparatchiks turned out to be Eurowennies. Why turned? Because this was the place where they wanted to secure their future. Of course during all these “controlled privatizations” they grabbed this country nicely. They are not liberals not even ideological leftists but hypocrites, opportunists, common thieves.
Well, I don't disagree, but what would you prefer have happened?... within the realm of the possible, that is.
I would prefer Estonia :) Even if we would say that nothing better could happen, those people don’t deserve for any credit for what they did with this country. This is not any success. Should we be glad to them that we are not like Belarus or North Korea? This is not good argument, same lack of total catastrophe is not a success.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.