The World Bank Book Review

INSTRUCTIONS:

Read the article provided, see attached.

This is a book review must involve the study and practice of business ethics and business writing.

This review should be equally divided into 3 parts: finish each part in 6 sentences or so. mark the number before start to write each part in sequence.

1. Quotes(and cite the page for)a passage from the article provided, alone with your comments. 

2. Should do as #1. as well for an ethics issue reported currently in a media source.

3. Discuss what you do for this course, including observation on your writing, other readings do for the course(business writing), and ideas raised in class. 

When finished, write down time spent on each of those three part. 

Writing will be evaluated using the following criteria:

Sentences:follows conventions of written english. sentences able to stand alone.

Clarity:clear, scannable, organized with title, headings, and paragraphs.

Substance: takes on challenging ideas, not superficial. 

Evidence: presents sound evidence. cites sources. no patch writing or plagiarism. 

CONTENT:

Book Review: Systems of Survival 1 "The World Bank, inspite of its name, is a thoroughly political outfit, not a commercial enterprise" (Jacobs, 1992, p. 132). The World Bank, created in 1944 during the Bretton Woods Conference as a way of helping the reconstruction efforts of many countries devastated by the second world war. Just like any other bank, it required collateral for the loans. Unlike most banks, however, the collateral was not material, but rather the entire economy of the country. Its very Articles of Agreement states that all of the Bank`s decision must be committed to the promotion of foreign investment and international trade. Signatories to the Bank must institute reforms both in their economy and political life in order to assure repayment of loans. The belief was that democracy and capitalism was the way to go. While these all sounds great, the problem was that the creation of the World Bank itself did not adhere to democratic processes. The US and UK dominated conversations, and so were able to push forth their agenda inspite of alternative economies being proposed by less developed nations. Afterall, the biggest lenders to the World Bank are US and UK - they were superpowers and must be followed. Needless to say, countries like Russia, China and Cuba, all socialists, had to space in the negotiations. Burdened by its own losses from the war, Russia soon fell, leaving China and Cuba to fend for themselves.