Trade, Money, and Finances
People-centered Global Governance: Making It Happen!
Raising International Climate Finance
After Rio+20: What New World Governance Does the World Need?
Civil Society Politics Manifesto
Alterglobalization, a Long-term Process Leading to Alternatives
People’s Food Sovereignty Statement
Education International’s Response to the Global Monitoring Report 2006 on "Literacy for Life"
Nairobi World Parliamentary Forum Resolution
The IMF, the World Bank, and Respect of Human Rights
Setting up an Arbitration Tribunal on Debt: An Alternative Solution?
Campaign for People’s Goals for Sustainable Development
Territories and Globalization: The Stakes of Development
Building Consensus on Food Safety Programs among Consumer and Public Health Organizations
A Bit Rich: Calculating the Real Value to Society of Different Professions
Contesting Global Governance. Multilateral Economic Institutions and Global Social Movements
For a Democratic Cosmopolitarian Movement
Proposals for a New World Governance
Rio+20: Failed Diplomacy, Feeble Democracy
The Armed Forces and World Governance
Inventing a New World Governance Now
The Commons, the State and Transformative Politics
Negative Growth or Sustainable Development?
After Copenhagen, Some Light on the Horizon
Henceforth, the Keys to the Future are Responsibility, Solidarity, and Courage
Now is the time to rediscover John Maynard Keynes’s revolutionary ideas for the organization of international trade and adapt them to re-balance finances in the world’s economies of the twenty-first century.
The economist John Maynard Keynes came to the postwar table with an innovative project for the future of world trade, which he called the International Trade Organization (ITO), supported by an international central bank, the International Clearing Union (ICU). The ICU was meant to issue a world currency for trade, the "bancor." Why the ITO and the ICU never materialized, and what would have changed if they had, is a sobering story from which we have a lot to learn.
It tells us that, in a rational world, it would be possible to build a trading system serving the needs of people in both the North and the South. With an ITO and an ICU, we could have had a world order in which no country could run a huge trade deficit (the US deficit stood at $716 billion in 2005) or the huge trade surplus of contemporary China.
Under such a system, crushing the third-world debt and the devastating structural-adjustment policies applied by the World Bank and the IMF would have been unthinkable, although the system would not have abolished capitalism. If we could resurrect Keynes’s concept, another world really might be possible: he figured out how to make it work more than 60 years ago. His plan would have to be dusted off and fine tuned, but its core remains relevant.