The Washington Consensus was the notorious neoliberal prescription delivered to many developing countries by both the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank from the late 1980s onwards.
My glossary entry on this subject is well worth noting. It explains how these two Bretton Woods agencies were captured by neoliberal economics to spread its evil around the world, and what it meant.
It would be good to think that the Consensus is dead. It is not. The FT carries this headline this morning:
The message is loud, and it is clear. It is that Burnham must follow the neoliberal rules, whatever the cost, in the way that the Consensus was always indifferent to the suffering it caused.
The trouble is, we will get fascism if Burnham does that. Neoliberalism is, and perhaps always was, the mechanism for delivering that. Hayek always claimed to have been traumatised by fascist rule, but he created the monster that might ensure its return.
Burnham has one chance in government. And he either breaks the neoliberal rules, or he fails. That is the choice he has to make.
He can be the instrument for perpetuating the politics that is increasingly alienating many people from what we call democracy, or he can help deliver something far better by tearing up the rule book the IMF demands he comply with.
I fear the worst.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Although I generally subscribe to an ultimately optimistic out look – but I ain’t no Candide! – there can be no doubt that Labour is in the last chance saloon, and if Andy Burnham follows the dark side and sticks to the neoliberal path, then he is and we are, as a civilized country, sunk.
It reflects badly on the progressive elements in the country that so far they cannot organize a viable progressive alliance as an alternative to the encroachment of the far right, with the courage that this blog has, to show that there are real, practical alternatives to the nonsense the traditional parties have served up for the past forty five years or so, and argue fearlessly for them. That is the start of the real change our political class ought to be thinking about. Time is running out.
Would I be wrong to think that this neoliberal rule is a simple lever to control the proportions of wealth flowing to the wealthy versus the public? Irrespective of the harm to public good. Hence why strick adherence is sought.
You might think that…
And I might agree with you…
THe IMF might deny it
Neo-liberalism is simply reactionary – two world wars mobilized the State like never before and raised its activities and stake in the economy of the countries involved. What we have seen ever since is an increasing effort to put the state back in a box and be a servant to capital (the state became a tool of social advancement/progressiveness in pursuit of peace not just because of the fear of communism but also fascism). Capital is at war with democracy and its a dirty war, with capital not being squeamish about Fascism at all and the only ‘compromise’ is that capital must be able to make money out of something for it to be allowed to exist (hence privatisation).
This – like all wars – means that the truth is the first casualty – the truth about money, sovereignty, democracy (the right to change bad/unfair rule) etc.
So, to me we are all captives of a longer history today. But what has been emerging for some time now – and we can see it in lands that have already been foresaken in Africa, South America and The Levant – is the reaction to things like exploitation and hopelessness, and the most common one will be violence, and new philosophies supporting that.
We talk of football coming home to these lands, but what has actually come home is relentless imperialism – THAT is what has come home. The rich will eat the rest of us – we’re all fair game to them – just to stay rich. But make no mistake – we are in for rough ride now and I think all we can do is bear witness to an evil logic that has been among us for some time.
Much to agree with
Might it be that the I. M. F is an important agent of the unstated but real American empire?
Might it be that Mr Trump has made it obvious that a prime purpose of the American “empire” is to exploit its members?
Might the contrast with China be relevant?
“China raises wages by an average of 5% a year – 7% for the lowest paid workers. That’s how they eliminated poverty. So every 15 years a Chinese worker expects their pay to double/ We’ve had 30 years of wage stagnation in the West.” [From the attached article from Michael Hudson’s blog]
https://michael-hudson.com/2026/07/gold-returns-as-trust-in-us-debt-fades/
I suspect that the IMF, World Bank, NATO and the American military are simply tools and extensions of American foreign policy aimed at perpetuating the hegemony.
I also fear the worst. <p>
And the IMF seems to be getting worse -. You say the neoliberal consensus is indifferent to the suffering it causes, but IMF laying down the law to Burnham that he has to cut spending – is just ridiculous – given that the same strategy over the last 14 years – has produced the present mess of record ‘debt’ and ‘record taxes<p>
You would have thought IMF might pause to think<p>
Burnham did say that 30 years of neoliberalism has wrecked the economy – but then instantly retreated after a ‘market ‘ warning.<p>
And then of course there are the Labour Together ‘donors’ who are pulling his strings.<p>
Fear the worst
Bunrt-ham – totally owned by “the system”. He would not be in the position he is, if he thought differently from “the system”. Corbyn thought differently – we know what happened (anti-sem was just the excuse). Burnt-ham another in a long line of PM placemen, going all the way back to Thatcher. If he was clever (he ain’t) there are wiggle arounds and presentational methods which could enhance gov spending (& allow back-door nationalisation) – it won’t happen – he’s too thick & surrounded by those who know which side their bread is buttered. Speaking of which, wonder what comfy position the imbecile Reeves will slip into.
Open question: when will “the strong man” emerge – the person that will mobilise the masses, and lead them to the (erm) “promised land” (of course no such thing will happen). The scene is set for somebody to emerge with a narrative that resonates, of course, what they say & what they mean will be two quite different things.
I also fear the worst. And there’s a reason why the majority of Labour MPs, the vast majority being Starmerites, are supporting Burnham, the twice failed leadership candidate, and it isn’t so he can implement change.
You wrote, in a comment a couple of days ago, ‘the Labour Party has been bought.’ I had looked at ‘The Fraud’ by Paul Holden (sub title Kier Starmer, Morgan McSweeney and the crisis or British democracy) which asserts that funds from Israel sources were invested in Labour.
That led me to declassifieduk.org which has a list headed ‘Funding of UK MPs by the Israel Lobby’. It’s not just the labour Party that has been bought.
The site lists money received from Israel sources by 135 Conservative MPs, 44 Labour MPs, 3 Lib Dem, 3 Democratic Unionist, 2 Independent and one Reform MPs.
Since all of these have demonstrated divided loyalties (at best) why should the be allowed to stand for the UK Parliament ever again?
The one advantage and hope the real left has (basically 75% of the Greens) is that the fascist figureheads are either busted (Farage), out of touch or obvious thugs (Tommy 2 names). Currently, British senses of absurd and fair play are keeping them in the derision category, where they belong. My concern is Musk/Thiel /Ellison and their money drowning us in racist misinformation.
Andy, nice to hear you say today ” four decades of neoliberalism has not been kind to our people and the places that built our culture”. Perhaps you might have been inclusive and included everyone.
You state the issue, but what are you actually going to do about it?
Especially as the Bank of England and the Treasury are determined to pursue austerity and interest rate rises, we can’t afford it etc, classis neoliberal policies.
Looking forward to hearing how you are going to break out the neoliberal stranglehold?
Agreed
I read about a monkey’s, banana and ladder experiment that ultimately I think never really existed but a simple search on those 3 words will detail it. At the end no monkey ends up reaching for the banana because they have all been conditioned to attack any other monkey reaching for it long after the punishment stopped. They are essentially trapped inside a bubble that they themselves create with entrenched beliefs and thought patterns which stops any of them getting a nice reward.
I fear this is what the neo-liberal agenda has produced, generations who think this and subscribe to this philosophy and are either too afraid or too unwilling to think outside the box while their masters at the top feed false aspirations to them alongside lies and misinformation.
Just this morning I had an Australian argue that it’s an opinion that someone paying proportionally more tax than someone earning substantially more (£30K vs £30M) is an opinion of unfairness as opposed to an abject fact.
Another claiming nobody should be exempt from tax and it should be a flat rate at 30% from the moment you earn anything and the top rate 45% with CGT being massively less because he sees it as “risky”.
I think the path is already set, I don’t think there’s a way off this path of destruction unless something truly miraculous happens. Andy Burnham won’t manage to do anything unless he makes people feel better off and as you say he can’t do that sticking to neo-liberalist ideas. If he tries to go against it the monkeys, I mean the media, will attack him and it’ll be the far right.
I hear such argumemts far too often
Perhaps – wishful thinking – he will re-open the levenson 2 inquiry so we get a decent and honest media… perhaps.
The speech on the steps of number 10 on Monday:
Citizens,
I have some important things to tell you about how the country will be financed now that I’m PM.
I’ve learned that we actually create our own money, so we don’t need to borrow any more in the future. All the previous debt is owned by you and other citizens and, of course, we honour all such debt and guarantee that it is repayable on demand. It always is and always was.
Obviously, we will pay some interest on all of the debt, but it will in future be decided by the gov, not the Bof E or the ‘markets’. You see, the gov is not a household borrowing via loans and credit cards because we create all the money by law.
Obviously, we cannot create unlimited amounts of money because it would cause inflation. So, we create just enough to pay for all of the things that are possible to do with the resources available to the country. This includes all planned gov spending on welfare and all other departments. There will be no more austerity. Instead, we will make sure all available resources will be utilised and paid for.
Finally, I have to tell you that we do not collect taxes to enable any spending. We do it to avoid inflation. For too long the public have been told the opposite.
Someone in some country somewhere has got to take that giant step. At the age of 74 I doubt in my lifetime but, then again, with the relentless speed of the coming collapse, who knows
Prof this is a fair analysis.
AB is a neoliberal captive, increasingly I find this a more useful frame – that politicians are controlled, it’s interesting, no one in his position has said neoliberalism, and described it. Why would he bother?
let’s assume that he might try to action his talking, what would help him him break out of the neoliberal capture? Solidarity with others ?
Solidarity? That’s a bit woke, isn’t it? 🙂