The colonial setup of the IMF and World Bank places immense power at the hands of the G7.
Voting shares are based on economic power – richer countries get more votes and poorer countries’ voices are sidelined. (1/4)
#uniteagainstclimatefailure
Voting shares are based on economic power – richer countries get more votes and poorer countries’ voices are sidelined. (1/4)
#uniteagainstclimatefailure
In the IMF, a British person’s vote is worth 41 times more than a Bangladeshi’s vote and 23 times more than a Nigerian’s vote. Both are former British colonies. (2/4)
Despite constituting 85% of the world’s population, middle- and low-income countries have only ~40% of the vote. Even if the entirety of the global South united against an IMF and World Bank policy, they wouldn’t be able to stop it. (3/4)
Traditionally, the World Bank Group president has always been an American citizen nominated by the United States, the largest shareholder in the World Bank Group. The IMF is always led by a European.
This convention is known as a ‘gentleman’s agreement’. (4/4)
This convention is known as a ‘gentleman’s agreement’. (4/4)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
