Not to paint Sachs as a perfect saint, but Naomi Klein really oversold his villainry in her book. Sachs was not the architect of shock therapy, which is a neoliberal economics project in direct opposition to Sach’s Keynesian economics school. As capitalist positions go, Keynesianism is comparatively good. He talked about it a little last year on Breaking Points. I tend to think that he was dropped into the former Warsaw Pact states when he was young, idealistic, and largely ignorant of US neocolonialism.

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee -5 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I find it interesting that people here are falling over themselves to defend a capitalist economist. Is supporting Russian nationalism so important that we now defend a participant in the destruction of the Soviet system?

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 12 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

You’re arguing with straw men. I’m not defending capitalism nor the destruction of the Soviet Union. Nobody is confusing Sachs for a comrade. I said, “as capitalist positions go.” There’s a difference between Keynesianism and neocolonial asset stripping of the commons.

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee -3 points 17 hours ago

You’re arguing with straw men. I’m not defending capitalism

I claimed you were defending a capitalist economist, which you are.

My original statement was to take anything he said with a grain of salt and that he pioneered what would one day be labeled as shock therapy.

Which people then claimed he didn't do, based on his own claims.