My skepticism does not arise solely because Sachs’ critique of Trump’s take over of Greenland comes from a favoured son of the Harvard elite. I suspect there is superficiality in his critique of Trump. Smart people can be very stupid. If I am wrong about that, there is little doubt that the liberal critique has been ineffectual in stopping Trump. Saying that he is ‘deranged’ is not enough. There is a twofold contradiction in Sachs critique. Firstly, both he and Trump want to see the abolition of NATO. No doubt for different reasons. Is the liberal critique that damning when Jeffrey Sachs’ advice to Boris Yeltsin led to the rise of oligarchs in Russia. Now the United States is having its own problems with its chief oligarch, Trump.
In the early 90s, Sachs was a special advisor to Boris Yeltsin to reform the Soviet economy and to alleviate poverty. He utilised a theory called ‘The Shock Doctrine‘ by creating oligarchs so that Capital would invest in projects in that country. Did his plan to alleviate poverty work? It did create an even greater disparity between rich and poor in Russia.
How did he get the Yeltsin gig? He advocated the use of market economy in Bolivia and in Poland to alleviate poverty and liberals gave him a good report card because of his opposition to communism.
Sachs was never as critical of NATO expansion during the Clinton administration as he is today.
Prof. Jeffery Sachs on Trump, Greenland, and the world order
Sachs now says that NATO should have been abolished in 1990. So where is the irony? Both Sachs and Trump agree on one thing. The abolition of NATO.
Q. What does it mean?
SZ: That the global economic system of credit is based on the US dollar and when that collapses the people who depend on that are fucked. So the video is to instill fear in the global south?
BRICS adopts yuan │ ▼ Monetary fracture │ ▼ Reduced dollar demand / Fragmented financial system │ ▼ (US takes over Greenland) NATO collapses │ ▼ Loss of U.S. military enforcement of dollar dominance │ ▼ Attempted regime change in Iran by use of CIA & MOSSAD agents │ ▼ US & Israel bomb Teheran . │ ▼ Iran blocks Strait of Hormuz │ ▼ Oil & LNG shock → Commodity price spike │ ▼ Financial panic / margin calls / insurance freeze │ ▼ Dollar loses credibility → Multipolar, fragmented global order.
One thought on “Why should we believe Jeff Sachs?”
Firstly, Jeffrey Sachs on communism: “I would expect that if the full package of measures (“shock therapy”) – not just the price reform, but the budgetary reform, monetary reform and floating of the ruble, all of which are being undertaken right now (1991) – if all of those go into effect as planned and if there’s some Western assistance in a timely way, that within three or four months, we ought to see the end of the intense shortages and the hyperinflation which has been gripping the Russian economy since – as a legacy of the communist period.”
On hardliners
SACHS: And Russia has made clear it will go forward with or without the international financial support. But we know that only with international support from the IMF and the World Bank is success likely in this remarkably arduous process. We really are at a critical juncture, where days and weeks will count.
Why his “shock doctrine” failed in Russia in 1993
SACHS: I saw by the fall this is not going to work. And at that moment I said, OK, I tried and then quit at the end of 1993. That’s my story… And my point was that the mechanisms that had worked in Poland should be deployed in Russia – for example, a ruble stabilization fund. The IMF rejected that. Well, what that means is the U.S. government rejected that. I believed there should be a debt standstill. The U.S. government rejected that. I believed there should be large rapid financing. The U.S. government rejected that. And the big difference between Poland and Russia was that the U.S. government viewed Poland as an ally, and it viewed Russia as an antagonist.
Firstly, Jeffrey Sachs on communism: “I would expect that if the full package of measures (“shock therapy”) – not just the price reform, but the budgetary reform, monetary reform and floating of the ruble, all of which are being undertaken right now (1991) – if all of those go into effect as planned and if there’s some Western assistance in a timely way, that within three or four months, we ought to see the end of the intense shortages and the hyperinflation which has been gripping the Russian economy since – as a legacy of the communist period.”
On hardliners
SACHS: And Russia has made clear it will go forward with or without the international financial support. But we know that only with international support from the IMF and the World Bank is success likely in this remarkably arduous process. We really are at a critical juncture, where days and weeks will count.
Why his “shock doctrine” failed in Russia in 1993
SACHS: I saw by the fall this is not going to work. And at that moment I said, OK, I tried and then quit at the end of 1993. That’s my story… And my point was that the mechanisms that had worked in Poland should be deployed in Russia – for example, a ruble stabilization fund. The IMF rejected that. Well, what that means is the U.S. government rejected that. I believed there should be a debt standstill. The U.S. government rejected that. I believed there should be large rapid financing. The U.S. government rejected that. And the big difference between Poland and Russia was that the U.S. government viewed Poland as an ally, and it viewed Russia as an antagonist.
Listen to the whole segment on NPR’s Planet Money : https://share.google/gOYaGGMhb7Ri3lYx8