reformulated: “do not give us food, give us the means of production”

    • Barx [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      The IMF is an arm of food insecurity imperialism. When countries are forced to take loans, they often have to agree to not suvsidize their own agricultural industries even while the US, already possessing massive industrialized farming capacity, continues to subsidize their own. The effect is that they must now import food or pay substantially more for local food. Due to the rest of the IMF loan terms’ impact on their economies (usually forcing a specific kind of currency devaluation and export economy), theu will have to import food and give up food sovereignty.

      This is very common in African countries, which make up a disproportionate number of those forced to take IMF loans. But it also applies to, for example, Venezuela, and is what Chavez rose to power opposing. Chavez et al tried to build a real economy and food sovereignty off of its inherited oil export economy. The US response was massive sanctions and tons of coups attempts.

      Edit: for reading recs Fanon and Nkrumah are good as a prelude and then something more modern describing neocolonialism for the “main piece”. Maybe “How Europe Underdeveloped Africa” for an early analysis and various specific readings for modern situations. Here’s a MR take on Venezuela: https://monthlyreview.org/2009/07/01/the-venezuelan-effort-to-build-a-new-food-and-agriculture-system/