Words: 799
By 1945, the Germans and thermostatically killed nearly two out of every three European Jews as part of the “Final Solution,” the Nazi policy to murder the Jews of Europe. Although Jews, whom the Nazis deemed a priority danger to Germany, were the primary victims of Nazi racism, other victims included some 200,000 Room (Gypsies). At least 200,000 mentally or physically disabled patients, mainly Germans, living in institutional settings, were murdered in the so- called Euthanasia Program.
As Nazi tyranny spread across Europe, the Germans and their collaborators persecuted and murdered millions of other people. Between two and three million Soviet prisoners of warfare murdered or died of starvation, disease, neglect, or maltreatment. The Germans targeted the non-Jewish Polish intelligentsia for killing, and deported millions of Polish and Soviet civilians for forced labor in Germany or in occupational, where these individuals worked and often died under deplorable conditions.
Increasingly in the years before the outbreak of war, AS and police officials incarcerated Jews, Room, and other victims of ethnic and racial hatred in these camps. To concentrate and monitor the Jewish population as well as to facilitate later deportation of the Jews, the Germans and their collaborators created ghettos, transit camps, and forced-labor camps for Jews during the war years. The German authorities also established numerous forced-labor camps, both in the so-called Greater German Reich and in German-occupied territory, for non- Jews whose labor the Germans sought to exploit.
Following the invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941 ,Insupportable (mobile killing units) and, later, militaries battalions of Order Police officials, moved behind German lines to carry out mass- murder operations against Jews, Room, and Soviet state and Communist Party officials. German AS and police units, supported by units of the Heartache and the Waffle AS, murdered more than a million Jewish men, women, and children, and undress of thousands of others.
The Washington Consensus has seen limited results as it has been applied in various countries suffering economic crises. Over the years it has been blamed for a number of massive desalination’s, cost notably the Argentinean crisis. John Williamson, the original proponent of the Washington Consensus, at one point noted that in many cases the results of its implementation had been disappointing, noting some flaws and how it might be improved. The ideas in the Washington Consensus were not new or novel at the time Williamson presented them.
Instead, they represented a distillation of the common threads among advice most often given by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the US Treasury, and other lending bodies. The Washington Consensus was originally intended to address the very real robbers occurring in Latin America at the time, and its use later to handle a wide array of other situations has been criticized even by original proponents of the points. The ten points of the Washington Consensus are themselves intentionally somewhat vague, as they were meant to represent a baseline.
They include: keeping competitive exchange rates within the country; liberalizing foreign investment opportunities; propagating enterprises run by the state; giving strong legal guarantees for property rights; letting interest rates be handled by the market and imagining positive and moderate; moving spending away from subsidies and towards direct investment in infrastructure, health care, and education; reforming the tax system to a broader tax base; having a policy of strong fiscal responsibility; liberalizing trade by removing or lessening restrictions on imports and tariffs; and deregulation that lessens competition, except in the cases of consumer safety, environmental health, and financial institutional stability. The name of the Washington Consensus has often been mentioned as being somewhat unfortunate, especially by its creator. Many people feel that it gives the impression the points outlined represent a set of rules imposed on developing nations by the United States. Instead, Williamson always felt that the Washington Consensus represented a consensus precisely because the ideas outlined in it were so universal.
Many proponents of the Washington Consensus do not feel that it represents the hard-line neo-liberal agenda that anti-free-trade activists say it does, instead presenting it as a relatively conservative assessment of what policies can help bring a country to economic stability. Opponents of he Washington Consensus ideas note that it does a great deal to open developing nations to exploitation by already developed nations, sometimes with catastrophic results. A number of countries, particularly in Latin America, have pursued policies in recent years that go directly against the Washington Consensus, sometimes with very positive results. Socialist leaders such as Hugo Shaved, Eve Morale, and Nester Kerchief all actively spoke out against the Washington Consensus, and guided their countries in a very different direction. https://www. Weeklies. Com/what-was-the-Washington-consensus. HTML