Samhällen i Kris : När Washington Tar Över

Sammanfattning: Dissertation in political science, D-level by Niklas Andersson, Spring Semester 2010. Tutor: Malin Stegmann McCallion “Societies in Crisis – When Washington Take Over” An economic meltdown wreaks havoc on the world and has plunged the Western world into a spiral of economic stimulus in order to keep their way of life intact. At the same time the same institutions that support these countries have had another agenda for more unfortunate and less influential countries where nothing has been free and everything been to a price of self-sacrifice in order to get the consent of the IMF and the World Bank. Everything according to the points stated in the so called Washington Consensus. The purpose of this dissertation is to research what impact the Washington Consensus has on the state in terms of power over the market and sovereignty. This shall be done by examining the points of the Consensus and then delve into the IMF and World Bank’s own program in four countries, Argentina, Russia, Kenya and the Republic of Korea. The findings shall then be compared to the Andersson Contract, a social contract theory summary showcasing the ideal liberal state, to determine if the Consensus gives enough room for the state to act against the market. This shall also be backed up with theories on economics from Adam Smith and Karl Polanyi in order to strengthen the comparison on the economic issues. The research question thus for the dissertation are: Which institutions and features does the Washington Consensus highlight as necessary for a state? Is the state they proposes to weak to uphold society according to the social contracts? According to the research there are parts of the Washington Consensus that fits the social contract and should therefore in theory be able to maintain a level of social dignity and be able to take part in the positive effects of the market. Other parts on the other hand show that some crucial institutions lack certain strength in order to be able to keep the free market in check, but they still exist. Therefore the answer to the question is that it’s ambiguous as all the necessary institutions exist, but some of them need to be strengthened in order to make sure the market remains free as well as the countries should be able to choose their own way to economic welfare.