Dutch,
Greek and Spanish members of the Occupy movement interrupt a lecture by
IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde at the University of Amsterdam.
Christine
Lagarde, the former French Finance Minister and current Managing
Director of the International Monetary Fund, was treated to an
Occupy-style mic-check
at the University of Amsterdam on Tuesday. During a lecture at the
university’s economics department, a group of students rose up to
interrupt (or rather start) the discussion, confronting the Fund’s chief
with a number of inconvenient questions.
Attendees
had been asked to send in questions before the “debate”, but the
protesters were angry that their critical notes appeared to have been
ignored. By standing up and submitting the IMF chief to a mic-check,
they tried to get their concerns across anyway: “why is technocracy
better than democracy?” one activist asked. Another asked Lagarde why
the IMF submits developing countries to Western imperialism, to which the upper-class moderator tellingly responded that “we will not do that question”.
In
a sign of the academic freedom at the University of Amsterdam, and
civil liberties in the Netherlands more generally, the students — who
reportedly included Dutch Occupy protesters, Spanish indignados and Greek activists associated with ReINFORM – were immediately escorted away by security and event organizers. Dutch daily NRC Handelsblad reports that
some of the event organizers seemed to act like a “gang” in their
willingness to use physical force while removing the activists.
And
yet the peaceful way in the protesters allowed security to remove them
from the lecture hall revealed that the only real threat they ever posed
to the Managing Director was an intellectual one; a threat organizers
were apparently not willing to expose their special guest to. This is
not a surprise: the IMF has been at the heart of a major controversy for
its management of European debt crisis from the very start.
In January, Olivier Blanchard, the Fund’s chief economist, co-authored a rare self-critical IMF working paper
in which he confirmed that the Fund has so far been much too optimistic
about the ability of Europe’s heavily indebted periphery to cut its way
out of debt. According to Blanchard, the IMF’s growth models severely
underestimated the “fiscal multipliers” of austerity, leading to major
forecast errors.
Last month, former
IMF chief economist Kenneth Rogoff and his deputy Carmen Reinhart were
publicly humiliated when a 28-year-old graduate student from the
University of Massachusetts showed that their highly influential 2010 paper
— in which the Harvard economists claimed that a debt-to-GDP ratio of
above 90 percent significantly slows down growth — was riddled with
statistical errors. This “dethroning” of Reinhart-Rogoff was taken as
another major rebuttal of the global austerity push.
Yet
the protesters in Amsterdam today pointed us towards a much more
important question than the somewhat arcane debate over whether or not
austerity can induce growth. Ultimately, as the students rightly pointed
out, this is a matter of democracy. Do ordinary citizens still
get to decide over the type of policies that affect their lives? If the
people of Greece, Portugal and Spain truly ruled their own destiny — as
the myth of representative democracy would have us believe — would they
really opt for a life of austerity, unemployment and shattered dreams?
It’s
time the economics profession got over the false internecine debates
between the austerians (representing the right-wing of capital) and the
Keynesians (representing its left-wing); the real questions are
political. How is it that a small clique of unelected transnational
technocrats gets to decide on the policies that condemn millions to a
life of misery? This is the real puzzle we should be addressing — and we
clearly can’t count on the economists to do that for us.
No comments:
Post a Comment