黑料社区

The recent by a Senior World Bank Official, against the Centre for Global Development (CGD) has been rightly publicised on social media, for failing to engage with critique and misconstruing it as ideology. The encounter was based on a discussion with a CGD economist, where an excerpt of a of World Bank鈥檚 much debated Ease of Doing Business Index was presented. The well researched and evidence-based critique prompted an unwarranted response by the World Bank employee, where the CGD economists were labelled as 鈥榬eformed Marxists鈥� and the critique labelled as originating from Das-Capital.

This stance by an employee of the world鈥檚 leading International Financial Institution (IFI) is indicative of many things: First that the Bank itself accepts an ideology which is unwilling to accept any other views beyond its own agenda. Second that it is somehow now acceptable for a World Bank employee speaking in a public setting to use Marx as a pejorative when the World Bank鈥檚 own research is being critiqued. That the Doing Business Indicator has recently been challenged for bolstering the political agenda of governments under India鈥檚 Modi and Pi帽era鈥檚 Chile, with severe methodological limitations, is a key concern.聽 Third, that the response to criticism is not limited to labelling the critics as 鈥楳arxists鈥� but also came with the advice of 鈥榞o make your own index!鈥�. This recommendation by the World Bank official was based on the critique鈥檚 emphasis on the broader aspects of the Ease of Doing Business Index. the assertion that the index measures only business and that it has nothing to do with the broader socio-economic aspects of growth, the official infact echoed the underlying basis of this ideological stance: the social and economic are two different spheres.

Moreover, something not discussed as widely on social media was the claim by the World Bank official that raising taxes in countries like Mozambique and Pakistan is not guaranteed to lead to reinvestment, since聽 the room for corruption in these countries is high. In fact, according to the World Bank official, corruption is so high in those countries that he believes 鈥渢hey鈥檙e going to steal this money鈥� (see quote).聽

鈥�..聽Mozambique, in Pakistan, in the vast variety of countries around the world, is it true that if they manage to raise more taxes, they would actually without any corruption and with great efficiency invest? No! They鈥檙e going to steal this money.

While the possibility of corruption is indeed high in developing countries, it begs the question of聽 how the nature of corruption differentiates 鈥渢hem鈥� from 鈥渦s鈥�. Presumably, the latter do not steal money but reinvest it in business with varying degrees of efficiency. It is telling that the narrative of stolen money is still lop-sided towards developing countries, even though we聽 continue to see different facets of corruption in developed countries. Leaving aside the unaddressed critiques of the methodological presumptions of the Ease of Doing Business Index, this particular exchange also highlights that some World Bank officials’ lack of comprehension of the rapidly changing world and volatile political climate. The era of 鈥榚mbedded liberalism鈥� which informed and centralised the leading IFIs position in the past is over. Using Marx as a pejorative, in a world which is increasingly decimated by neoliberalism is not simply obsolete; it is veering on ignorance. For it is one thing to argue against Marxist scholarship based on evidence and research but quite another to dismiss any critique as Marxist.聽 Such a stance is unfortunately reminiscent of the drive of the past.

To those working on development economics, the irony is not lost. The current stance of this World Bank official undermines the CGD – a non-profit think tank, based on broad spectrum of fairly liberal tradition, with one of its founders actually being an ex-employee of World Bank.聽

This dangerous introversion which continues to give precedence to free market ideology seems to be a major challenge to the legitimacy of the World Bank. As the engaged audience on social media has pointed out, Marx was an avid reader of Adam Smith and built theoretical and empirical models to extend and transcend Smith鈥檚 work. However, the World Bank official does not appear to be willing to give Marx or the CGD-the level of respect and engagement that Marx granted Smith.聽

UPDATE : Since the publication of this post, it was brought to the author’s attention that it is particularly strange that the World Bank official could only think of developing country examples of corrupt practices, given that he himself earlier this year.聽

is this blog’s account for contributors who want to remain anonymous for any reason.