The World Bank’s Long War on Peasants
The World Banks Long War on Peasants
Eric Holt-Giménez and Tanya M. Kerssen | 04.20.2015
The corporate revolution will collapse if we refuse to buy what they are sellingtheir ideas, their version of history, their wars, their weapons, their notion of inevitability.
Arundhati Roy, War Talk
Founded at the historical seam between World War II and the birth of the Cold War, the World Banks purposethen as nowis to spread capitalism across the globe. Correspondingly, the Bank has long promoted capitalist agriculturealongside other rural extractive industriesat the expense of peasant, indigenous, and community-based food systems. And while the Banks interest in farming has waxed and waned over its more than six decades, in recent years it has shown a renewed interest in the importance of agriculture. Critics, however, point to the Banks complicity in a new feverish wave of global land grabs. And peasants around the world refuse to buy the World Banks notion of their inevitable demise.
The Green Revolution as Massive Global Land Grab
In its early years (1940s-1960s), while the World Bank financed rural infrastructure like large dams, it mostly ignored agriculture. Not until the 1970s did Bank President Robert McNamara (1968-81) call for investments in agriculture. Following his tenure as Secretary of Defense of the United Statesduring which Vietnamese peasants routed US forces in Southeast Asiahe became keenly aware of agricultures geopolitical importance. Under McNamara the World Bank partnered with the Rockefeller Foundation to massively expand the Green Revolution, which entailed transferring US-style industrial agriculture to the global South through debt-financed programs and infrastructure.
The Green Revolution spread rapidly throughout Asia and Latin America (it was mostly a failure in Africa), with dramatic increases in agricultural production. From 1970 to 1990, the two decades of major Green Revolution expansion, the total food available per person in the world rose by 11 percent. The benefits of this model, however, were poorly distributed and introduced profound social and environmental problemsarguably leading to more hunger, not less. In South America, for instance, per capita food supplies rose almost 8 percent, but the number of hungry people went up by 19 percent in the same period.
High-yielding crop varieties demanded high levels of chemical inputs and required fertile, irrigable land that could be mechanized. As a result, poor farmers were displaced from the best lands as wealthier farmers took advantage of new credit opportunities and input packages and expanded their landholdings. Millions of rural people migrated to the cities in search of work or sought out precarious farming opportunities on poor soils and fragile hillsides, joining the ranks of the poor and hungry.
More:
http://foodfirst.org/the-world-banks-long-war-on-peasants/