Difference between revisions of "Great Transformation"
(→Context) |
(→What's Next) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
==What's Next== | ==What's Next== | ||
We have seem the Information Age begin with Computers and Information Theory. The next [[Great Transformation]] is likely to be the creation of the rise of [[Artificial Intelligence]] | We have seem the Information Age begin with Computers and Information Theory. The next [[Great Transformation]] is likely to be the creation of the rise of [[Artificial Intelligence]] | ||
| + | ==The Global South== | ||
| + | Daniela Gabor’s Foreign Policy essay, “How Big Finance Ate Foreign Aid”, is a searing indictment of the transformation of development policy under what she calls the Wall Street Consensus. Published on September 8, 2025, the piece argues that foreign aid has been hollowed out—not by neglect, but by deliberate financialization. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Core Argument | ||
| + | Gabor contends that traditional foreign aid—once centered on public investment and humanitarian goals—has been reengineered to serve private capital. Development agencies, especially in the Global North, now prioritize “mobilizing private investment” over direct aid. This shift reframes poverty and infrastructure gaps not as moral imperatives, but as market opportunities. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Mechanisms of Financialization | ||
| + | Derisking: Governments and multilateral institutions offer guarantees, subsidies, and blended finance tools to make Global South projects “investible” for hedge funds and private equity. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs): Aid is funneled into PPPs that often leave host countries with long-term liabilities and little control. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Development Finance Institutions (DFIs): Agencies like the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) now act as brokers for Wall Street, channeling public funds into private ventures. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ^ Consequences for the Global South | ||
| + | Debt and dependency: Countries are saddled with opaque financial instruments and contractual obligations that prioritize investor returns over local needs. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Loss of sovereignty: Policy space shrinks as governments are pressured to conform to investor-friendly frameworks. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Erosion of public goods: Health, education, and climate resilience are subordinated to profitability metrics. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Gabor’s Critique | ||
| + | She doesn’t just lament the shift—she exposes its ideological roots. The Wall Street Consensus, she argues, is a successor to the Washington Consensus, but more insidious: it cloaks itself in the language of “inclusive capitalism” and “sustainable development” while entrenching financial power. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ==Canada== | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 10:42, 8 September 2025
Meme
The origin of the term Great Transformation was Karl Polanyi's book[1] of that title published in 1944 which discussed the transformation that occurred when the Industrialization of the 1800's tried to adapt to the Globalization of the 1900's. Now we are faced with the transformation to a society basically run by Artificial Intelligence with the hope to avoid some cataclysm like the Great Depression.
Context
The Industrialization of the Industrial Revolution lead to the Finanialization
What's Next
We have seem the Information Age begin with Computers and Information Theory. The next Great Transformation is likely to be the creation of the rise of Artificial Intelligence
The Global South
Daniela Gabor’s Foreign Policy essay, “How Big Finance Ate Foreign Aid”, is a searing indictment of the transformation of development policy under what she calls the Wall Street Consensus. Published on September 8, 2025, the piece argues that foreign aid has been hollowed out—not by neglect, but by deliberate financialization.
- Core Argument
Gabor contends that traditional foreign aid—once centered on public investment and humanitarian goals—has been reengineered to serve private capital. Development agencies, especially in the Global North, now prioritize “mobilizing private investment” over direct aid. This shift reframes poverty and infrastructure gaps not as moral imperatives, but as market opportunities.
- Mechanisms of Financialization
Derisking: Governments and multilateral institutions offer guarantees, subsidies, and blended finance tools to make Global South projects “investible” for hedge funds and private equity.
Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs): Aid is funneled into PPPs that often leave host countries with long-term liabilities and little control.
Development Finance Institutions (DFIs): Agencies like the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) now act as brokers for Wall Street, channeling public funds into private ventures.
^ Consequences for the Global South Debt and dependency: Countries are saddled with opaque financial instruments and contractual obligations that prioritize investor returns over local needs.
Loss of sovereignty: Policy space shrinks as governments are pressured to conform to investor-friendly frameworks.
Erosion of public goods: Health, education, and climate resilience are subordinated to profitability metrics.
- Gabor’s Critique
She doesn’t just lament the shift—she exposes its ideological roots. The Wall Street Consensus, she argues, is a successor to the Washington Consensus, but more insidious: it cloaks itself in the language of “inclusive capitalism” and “sustainable development” while entrenching financial power.
Canada
References
- ↑ Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation 1944 Farrar & Rinehart
