The original Holy Inquisition (under the notorious Torequemada in particular perhaps) was the institution of terror used to impose dogma blindly. Its means were foul. Torture, burning at the stake, incarceration under the cruellest of conditions and so on. But this was all for the highest of causes. For your own good. To save your soul. Of course you were not allowed to save your soul in any other way than submitting to torture. Or perhaps being burnt at the stake.

Today we don’t go on for that kind of mumbo jumbo and religious fanaticism any more. Or do we?

The IMF is supposed to be the institution that helps states finding themselves in debt (usually) or in an economic impasse of some kind, out of their mess. However, they have a one size fits all package deal. They have one aim in mind and only one. And it is dogmatic. The real economy is never taken into account. The state in trouble is considered deviant. That is, it is a sinner! And it has to be punished in order to be saved.

The approach is dogmatic and fanatical. It is not religious fanaticism, but free market capitalist dogma. What is always wrong with the state that has come under IMF brutality is too much Welfare, too much by way of social policy, too many labour rights. Because all of these cost money and money has to be saved.

So, you have to slash wages, benefits, close down all state hospitals and schools and in addition raise taxes at the same time to make sure you have well and truly screwed those least able to survive. This “austerity” inevitably leads to a recession, a recession where revenue falls because economic activity has been strangled. And this, in its turn makes deficits and debt indices go from bad to worse.

So what is the answer? The same as Torquemada’s was. The sinner has obviously not repented! He remains as sinful as before! Even worse! We must tighten the screws! Increase the punishment till he/she repents! The sinner must do our bidding or be damned!

Restructuring, flexibility, reform. The catch words. Words you can’t really disagree with. Who would not prefer something flexible to something rigid? Who is against reform? Even restructuring sounds good when you have been bullied into believing that the former structure was bad.

But hey, wait a minute! What does all this high sounding rhetoric really mean? It only applies to the labour market. It only applies to the rights of labour. Abolish all legislation protecting workers rights and make firing on a whim with no compensation, the law. That is a flexible labour market.

The same goes for restructuring and reform. Why, under reform and cutting back is it never the armaments budgets but only welfare that has to be cut? Why under restructuring is how banks and the financial markets work never called into question? 

The answer is quite simple. The IMF is the heavy hand of the free market capitalist dogma in action. Something like what used to go on in the communist states. They knew what was best for you, so you had to do it or else! The IMF is no different.

Not to go any further back, just take a look at what has happened in Greece. Now, the IMF claims that it is all the fault of the Greek government not applying the directives properly. But that cannot explain away why the IMF and troika have persistently got all the forecasts completely wrong. That cannot explain why, having reduced a potentially healthy economy into a pile of rubble, their main concern has been how to slash wages further, abolish all labour rights, while hiking all prices.

To make us competitive, they say. But competitive means nothing other than dirt cheap labour. Why else impose exorbitant taxes on fuel? Transport costs have soared because of this. Has that nothing to do with competition? Not for them no. And that is only one of the many factors affecting competition that the IMF couldn’t give a damn about.

Cheap labour, they say, reduces unemployment. Really? Why is it then that the cheaper labour becomes the greater the level of unemployment (set to reach the horrific figure of 30% in 2013)?

Oh but, they say, we did manage to reduce your primary deficit. Did you indeed? How? By foreign occupation standards taxation and a default on all payments other than to the banks and public employees salaries? Already 8 billion and rising is owed by the state. That doesn’t get counted in the deficit does it? No, but it is there, ready to explode.

So if this is anything but a ruthless, dogmatic punishment for the sinner whose soul will not be saved till he is burnt at the stake, they could have had me fooled.