Of Nicola Di Cesare

Source: Appeal to the People
Based on the thinking of the managers of the International Monetary Fund, never asked by anyone (and that it has nothing to do with Italy except for the fact that our country finances it for 3,21 % of its shares), in order to revive the growth of its GDP, Italy should eliminate the fourteenth salary from all employment contracts, eliminate the thirteenth of pensions, de facto eliminate survivor's pensions and raise the rate to 27% for self-employed workers, reintroduce the IMU on the first home. The first question that a reader of average intellect should ask himself is:: but who are they and why would they want to starve millions of Italians? What they gain from it? Before delving into the merits of these statements and formulating answers to the aforementioned questions, Let's first understand what it is for and who is in command of the IMF. According to the article 1 of the Statute (establishing agreement between states) the IMF was created for: promote international monetary cooperation; facilitate expansion and international trade; promote the monetary stability of currencies and the constancy of exchange rates, avoiding competitive devaluations; provide loans, behind adequate guarantees (political and institutional interference), through the general fund resources to address balance of payments difficulties; reduce the degree of imbalance in the balance of payments of member states by preventing them from resorting to measures to devalue their currency; regulate economic growth in developing countries.
According to the above purposes, it is very clear that it is not a philanthropic organization but a an institution with a strongly political character of liberal and mercantilist inspiration, which fits into a well-oiled system of globalist finanzcapitalist political coercion, aimed at the free movement of goods, liquid capital, businesses and human goods. The Executive Council which takes decisions to provide assistance to members is made up of 5 directors appointed by 5 States that hold the largest share, United States of America, Japan, China, Germany and the United Kingdom (you had doubts ?); in addition to these, all other members count (as indeed at the UN) less than two of trump cups and are nominated by groupings of "minor states", that is, those who contribute little in terms of economic "weight" on which the value of their vote is then graduated according to the "weighted vote system" method.
Where does the IMF draw the resources to carry out its institutional functions? We see: quote, paid by each state at the time of joining the Fund for 75% in national currency and for the 25% in special drawing rights (special drawing rights); loan agreements, that the Fund may conclude with member states to provide financial assistance on the basis of art. 7 of the statute; sale of gold holdings, third holder after the United States and Germany; interest rates on loans, used for operational expenses such as staff salaries.
Now some notes. Among the free and undisputed (by statute) masters of the IMF are there: a country that has militarily occupied Italy since the end of the Second World War, the USA; a country that is Italy's largest manufacturing competitor on international markets, Germany, with a positive trade balance compared to Italy of approximately 10 billion euros/year; a country that has a positive trade balance of approx 18 billion euros/year towards Italy, at dinner, and finally Japan, a country with a fully sovereign currency, whose central bank carries out its function of covering full employment policies and which counts very little politically as it is also militarily occupied.
When considering the questions posed in the second paragraph of this article, let's remember the most illustrious precedent in line with the IMF's wishes, the Trichet-Draghi letter or letter from the ECB to Italy of 5 August 2011, in which it imposed itself on the then Italian government, under the blackmail of the spread operated by international markets on Italian government bonds, the following directives: “Significant measures to increase growth. Increased competition, particularly in services, liquidating public services. Reduction of the tax burden to support the competitiveness of businesses. Removal of workplace protections to achieve an increase in productivity. Savage cuts to public services in order to reduce spending. Reduction of pension expenditure. Salary and staff cuts for public employees. Automatic deficit reduction clause. Automatic debt controls, and on the spending of local authorities. The use of performance indicators in healthcare administration, in justice and education. Abolition of intermediate administrative bodies (es:Province), and exploitation of economies of scale in local public services. Shifting taxation from direct to indirect”.
Considering that all this was slavishly accomplished and that the results they were the ones who coldly and mercilessly told the numbers without hypocrisy: explosion in real unemployment rates, especially among young people; abnormal increase in precarious employment; disastrous increase in the share of the population in absolute and relative poverty; loss of 25% of the country's production capacity; millions of failed businesses; thousands of businesses, the most profitable and prestigious, ended up in foreign hands; decline in GDP never recovered, no awakening of productivity; huge increase in the Debt/GDP ratio; increase in Target balances 2 and continued commercial debt in the Eurozone; fall and failures of the national banking system; strong recovery in the emigration of the best productive forces; wild delocalization of manufacturing and services; collapse of the social elevator; income polarization; increase in the capital share to the detriment of the salary share; public services in annihilation and with no longer available financial or human resources; marked obsolescence of public and private infrastructures.
It can therefore be concluded that the motivation for these further requests formulated by the "economic experts" of the IMF is to be considered as an attempt to complete the good work done during a long season of liberal occupation of Italian politics and by their most recent executors Monti, Read, Renzi and Gentiloni, who will certainly be rewarded with lavish international recognition; this work consisted and essentially consists of sweep Italy away from the context of market competition and more generally from the international political community, draining it from within, on the one hand through the sterilization of its institutional system through the presumed (but false) primacy of the "law" of the European Union and the Euro (see also the monetary stability maintenance function of the IMF) and on the other through the threat of the presumed unsustainability of its public debt, nonsense made true by having stolen from the country and its Central Bank (Bank of Italy) its service function to the substantiation of constitutionally foreseen principles such as support for national economic dynamics.
In light of what has been said, anyone who thinks that the problem is essentially of an economic nature is totally off the mark and all the proposed solutions that go in this direction will do nothing more than "hang the keys where the master wants". The path to the reconstruction of Italy essentially lies in field choices of a political nature that are capable of breaking the current extra-parliamentary and extra-constitutional legal order and that move away from the scheme of "liberalism at all costs" of an endogenous and exogenous nature. In two words, in the political primacy of Italian constitutional sovereignism.