And the question of Lebanese corruptive and monopoly practices
We’ve started a debate around political economy issues in a previous post. So please stop commenting in the previous post and start commenting here. I just copy-pasted the last entries in the comment section. I will be soon answering and I encourage everyone to contribute by commenting here.
As a summary:
We are assessing of the economic ‘policies’ or broad rationale followed by the various Hariri cabinets since the inception of his first term. through an assessment of:
1- Interest rate politics followed
2- Reconstruction of downtown and some infrastructure
3- General economic (or business) visions
4- Other economic and social practices
Hussein proposes what I would call the “security threat” argument, where Hariri had to hike interest rates because investment climate was bad supposedly due to the war in the south.
I will soon show that this argument is untenable.
Another argument dear to the Harirists are the “service economy” argument. Although Hussein says he is against I want to show how this argument is at the core of Hariri’s policies and political interests and ultimately (and among other things) serves to keep the confessional system well entrenched, and the constituencies pretty much dormant (in terms of social assertiveness) and divided.