The International Monetary Fund is a most controversial organization. Founded after World War II, basically by the Anglosphere, it is supposed to provide financial aid to countries in need. It loans money based on deposits from the institution’s 187 (and counting) member countries. Balance of payment problems and problems of state profligacy can be addressed by an IMF loan. The IMF is often seen as a tandem enterprise with the World Bank, which was created at approximately the same time as the IMF.

It was initially conceived in 1944 and was up and running by 1945. Today, its reach is ubiquitous. Some non-members are North Korea, Andorra, Monaco, Liechtenstein, Nauru, Cook Islands, Niue and Vatican City. A 24-member Executive Board is in charge. The IMF is also expanding. In 2010 the G-20 voted to increase IMF funds to US$500 billion. There was an additional disbursement of US$250 billion to member countries via Special Drawing Rights (SDRs).

Despite the expansion, controversy continues, in large part because of the IMF’s partnership with the World Bank. In April 2007, Ecuador booted its World Bank representative from the country. A few days later, at the end of April ‘07, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez announced that the country would withdraw from the IMF and the World Bank. Chavez said the World Bank/IMF tag team are “the tools of the empire.”

The World Bank and the IMF work hand in hand. The World Bank loans money to corrupt governments that loot or squander the funds and then the IMF comes in and insists on an “austerity program” of higher taxes and lower government spending to ensure the loans are paid back.

While the IMF is willing to provide either loans or an outright funding stream to the country in question, there are inevitably provisions to be followed. The IMF will likely insist on higher taxes, cuts in services and often privatization of industries. The IMF has gotten a bad reputation with developing countries because its solutions often eviscerate the middle class while the privatizations end up involving fire-sales bid out to Anglo-American corporations.

By exporting consumerism abroad, corporatizing impoverished countries and reorganizing them generally along Anglo-American lines, Western money powerhas extended its reach around the world without the overt colonialism that caused so much resentment.

The downside (from most people’s perspective) is that when the Westernization is concluded, when a given economy has “matured,” money power will move on, leaving behind only shambles and social chaos – a carcass nation picked clean of its industrial potential and another treasury filled with worthless scrip.

Central Banks Take Joint Action to Ease Debt Crisis … The Federal Reserve moved Wednesday with other major central banks to buttress the financial system by increasing the availability of dollars outside the United States, reflecting growing concern about the fallout of the European debt crisis. The banks announced that they would slash by roughly half the cost of an existing program under which banks in foreign countries can borrow dollars from their own central banks, which in turn get those dollars from the Fed. The banks also said that loans will be available until February 2013, extending a previous endpoint of August 2012. “The purpose of these actions is to ease strains in financial markets and thereby mitigate the effects of such strains on the supply of credit to households and businesses and so help foster economic activity,” the banks said in a statement. – NY Times

Dominant Social Theme: Thank goodness the cavalry is here.

Free-Market Analysis: This is, of course, the Anglosphere power elite’s fundamental dominant social theme. Our Money Power is good and we use it wisely and well on YOUR behalf. The “system” cannot be allowed to falter or fail. Not an inch of it. Of course, we ask, “Whose system is it, exactly?”

It is not the system of about three billion people who live, around the world, on a dollar a day. It is not the system of homeless people in the West. It is not the system of a hungry child. It is not the system of a Latino day-worker. It is not the system of the beret-clad performance artist in Greenwich Village. It is not even the system of a US Marine fighting in Afghanistan.

It a system that is of peculiar benefit to the elites. They own it. They run it. They utilize its awesome power as necessary. How can one doubt the existence of a power elite when one watches the sort of spectacle described above by the New York Times (see excerpt)? Here’s some more:

It’s surely a dominant social theme – that gold is a fiercesome and deadly commodity. In fact, the powers-that-be HATE gold-as-money and will do anything they can to rid the middle classes of its possession. The idea that anybody can go into his or her backyard and dig up MONEY is a real problem. The bottom line, of course, is that NO ONE should have access to money if it doesn’t come via elite-approved channels.

You can make money in public schools, educating children into oblivion. You can make money on Wall Street, raping widows and orphans. You can make money in government, murdering tens of thousands in undeclared wars, incarcerating millions in quasi-private jails and terrifying hundreds of millions.

You can make money in medicine, jabbing people with deadly vaccines. You can make money in sports, lulling the people to sleep. You can make money growing foodstuffs that will somehow be reconstituted with additives into poisonous concoctions.

Anything that people make money at has to conform to the elite agenda – which is increasingly a one-world genocidal one – because the elites have over the past century organized the world in this fashion. Whether you agree with it or not, if you want to make money you have to agree to “their” agenda.

The Hippies used to call this the “system” back in the 1960s. At the time, it wasn’t clear, but today it is. The system is what the elites have organized to provide a base for world government. It is also known, by us, as regulatory democracy. Or it can be called capitalism. Or democratic socialism. Or fascism.