Lawrence Summers: Africa Is "UNDER-Polluted"

Lawrence Summers is on a very short list of possible nominees for Secretary of Treasury. His selection has been complicated, however, by his destructive performance as president of Harvard University, a rocky term he finally sabotaged by revealing his opinion that women lack the mental aptitude to succeed in science.

But there is a lesser known episode in Summers' past that further highlights his reckless tendencies, and foreshadows a politically nettlesome nomination process.

On December 12, 1991, while serving as chief economist for the World Bank, Summers authored a private memo arguing that the bank should actively encourage the dumping of toxic waste in developing countries, particularly "under populated countries in Africa," which Summers described as "UNDER-polluted." Summers added that public outrage over the heightened rates of prostate cancer caused by his proposed dumping would be mitigated by the fact that poor people in developing countries rarely live long enough to develop prostate cancer.

Read the full Summers memo here.

When the Summers memo leaked to the public in February 1992, Brazil's Secretary of the Environment, Jose Lutzenburger, responded with an indignant missive. "Your reasoning is perfectly logical but totally insane," Lutzenburger told Summers. "Your thoughts [provide] a concrete example of the unbelievable alienation, reductionist thinking, social ruthlessness and the arrogant ignorance of many conventional 'economists' concerning the nature of the world we live in... If the World Bank keeps you as vice president it will lose all credibility."

If Obama nominates Summers, he will send a dispiriting message to governments of developing countries -- especially in Africa -- just as they have begun to look at the United States as a beacon of hope.

Back in the U.S., Summers' nomination would prompt a reexamination by the media of the countless controversies he has fomented. Even an episode as tangential as Summers' romantic fling with right-wing hatemonger Laura Ingraham could become a source of political embarrassment for the White House. Summers should be left to write his memoirs, not memos.

Comments

[kapo]

What Summers is saying is precisely what is happening in the world economy now. China grew by doing all the labor intensive, nasty, polluting stuff that rich countries find it easier to avoid. Shanghai might be fancy but I toured a showpiece silk factory there and was surprised by its lack of modernization. What China and many other countries are doing might appear outrageous, but it works. Politicians have to lie to people beacuse most of us would prefer to hear nice things than face reality. It is cold realism however which made America a great nation and it is precisely such realism which is needed to get it out of its current jam. Summers appears to be somewhat tone deaf in the political correctness department, but is that a disqualification in a crisis.

[lantpritchett]

In 1991 Larry signed was a seven page, single spaced, memo written entirely by me. The purpose of that memo was to give comments on a draft of another report. The ironic, and if taken non-ironically unquestionably offensive, text was buried on page 5 of that memo. The passage used irony as a rhetorical device to clarify and sharpen arguments and was not intended to be taken as a free standing "suggestion" or "proposal." The memo was distributed in paper form only to the four people responsible for that report and was never intended for any wider distribution or purpose.

What you have posted a link to is a fraud, there is no such document, what is there has been created through cut and paste. While the words were in the memo, presenting the words in that form may convey the erroneous impression that Larry Summers read that text as a memo in its entirety, endorsed that text as a serious proposal or analysis that represented his views, and on that basis signed it and sent it as a free standing message intended for distribution as a "suggestion" about policy. The impressions created by presenting these words this doctored form and out of context are, on every point, completely and utterly false. I feel your readers should not be encouraged to form views based on doctored documents and without all the facts.

[squarebird]

Oh my. Larry Summers did not say anything remotely resembling "that women lack the mental aptitude to succeed in science." To state that he did is not a spin, it is a direct lie. You, Max Blumenthal, have proven yourself a liar.

Robert in Arlington, Virginia

[jwtkac]

this is absurdity. thankfully, the main thrust of this article has already been thoroughly debunked in the comments; as for the statement on his opinion that "women lack the mental aptitude to succeed in science," he said no such thing. He pointed out the reality that although women make up a larger-than-average percentage of university graduates, their representation at the highest echelons of science is far below average. There actually is scientific evidence to support his extremely general hypothesis, and the knee-jerk reaction from pseudo-intellectuals is no different from the reaction of creationists when presented with evidence of evolution.

[flifishun]

The problem with experts is they know so much about one thing, but have very little understanding of anything else or how it affects people in the real world.

[tyrdofwaitin]

President Obama would do well to keep Summers at arm's length; a better advisor than Treasury Secretary.

[realpolitic]

Lawrence Summers and Laura Ingraham- who would have thought?

[coolbrotha00]

Max, Max, Max. Is this a joke? I'm usually a fan or your work, but this time I must take issue. According to the link you provided, this memo is from "The Whirled Bank Group" not the World Bank. WTF!!! If you're going to report these "stories" you've got to vet your sources. I'm not saying the Mr. Summers is a saint (hardly), but dude the work ahead for this country is too important to play with. Now when you can present evidence that can be truthfully verified, I'm with you. Until then let the POTUS-elect continue to do his thing!

[tbone99]

from the memo;
. In December 1991, he signed off on a policy memo written by an aide who argued that less-developed countries, or LDCs, could benefit from accepting the pollution generated by First World nations. "Just between you and me," the memo read, "shouldn't the World Bank be encouraging more migration of the dirty industries to the LDCs?" Poor countries could earn needed revenue without great cost, because their citizens tended to have a short life span anyway.

Someone leaked the memo to the Economist, which in February 1992 ran an article about it titled "Let Them Eat Pollution." Though the magazine concluded that "on the economics, [Summers's] points are hard to answer," the memo provoked a furor. For years to come, anti-globalization activists, already skeptical of the World Bank, considered it proof of the bank's callous attitude.

[research]

The memo appears to part of a reductio absurdum argument against some Bank liberalization proposals.

The Memo is saying: Your logic for the Bank Liberalization proposals can be used to justify dumping more pollution in Africa.

See links below.

[ManUnitdFan]

I think the obvious lesson from all of this is don't ever be satirical or ironic in anything you write - ever - if you plan on being involved in politics. Nor should you ever write anything that requires context, or make any ad absurdum arguments, or say anything that is politically incorrect, no matter how true it may be.

I say pick someone for Treasury Secretary who may not always say what people want to hear. He's a very gifted economist, and he knows his stuff. I'm not endorsing him for the position necessarily, but I don't think he should be disqualified for any of this either.

[Crabtree]

Mr. Blumenthal, let me ask you a very quick question, here. Do you think that Jonathan Swift was ACTUALLY proposing that the British eat Irish babies, or do you recognize that he was being satirical? Having actually READ the memo (although the memos he was responding to have rather mysteriously not been leaked, leaving us in a bit of a vacuum), it seems pretty clear that he was reducing the arguments they were discussing to an absurd level. This is often necessary to reveal underlying weaknesses in systems and ways of thinking.

[whit4brains]

I really hope this guy isn't chosen for any cabinet position.

[tbone99]

I second that emotion- the guy exemplifies the worst of the white male superiority complex

[larry278]

I can deal with Obama having Gary Hart, John Edwards & Eliot Spitzer playing quiet roles in Washington, DC but Dr Summers is the poster boy for hubris. Besides he's called Larry; that's a fatal flaw. Blackball Larry Summers.
Larry278

[blueskybigstar]

I hope Obama has enough sense to keep this guy in a non-official role.

[MyNameIsJames]

Summer has a lot of strikes against him. Listen, some of these early selections are demonstrating that the Obama camp are moving to establish more of a centrist governing style. Now is the time for Progressives to put together a unified agenda for this administration.

It is going to be a battle in many areas. We will need to apply a lot of pressure in order to get true progressives measures onto the Obama agenda.

[XME]

As an Independant voter who supported Obama, I think that if you expect him to go too far left, you will be very disappointed. If he did, it would be disasterous for his presidency, and would only invite the country to push back towards the right in four years.

Like it or not, most people in America are nearer to the center...though some argue whether it's center-left or center-right. He certainly needs to take on some progressive issues, but he needs to choose them carefully and shoot for those that can be sold to a majority of Americans if he wants to be successful, and if he wants a second term.

Progress doesn't happen overnight, or in four years for that matter. It happens in steps, and I just hope his supporters don't expect him to swing left fast or they're asking him to fail.

[MalleusMaleficarum]

Bravo! For calling attention to the contentious Summers who was forced to resign in disgrace from his post at Harvard. I would like to know what Blumenthal really thinks of Rahm Emanuel. By all reports, Emanuel is a thoroughly unpleasant bully. More a Luca Brazzi than a Tom Hagen. Thus, it s clear that Obama has another person in mind for that -- much more significant -- job probably Axelrod or Plouffe, with Rahm serving as a rottweiler to keep Congress at bay. Summers as Secretary of Treasury would give everybody an easy target. Too contentious by half.

[research]

You may be misunderstanding his statement:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summers_Memo

"http://harvardmagazine.com/2001/05/toxic-memo.html"

"The problem with the arguments against all of these proposals for more pollution in LDCs (intrinsic rights to certain goods, moral reasons, social concerns, lack of adequate markets, etc.) could be turned around and used more or less effectively against every Bank proposal for liberalization."

The memo appears to part of a reductio absurdum argument against some Bank liberalization proposals.

The Memo is saying: Your logic for the Bank Liberalization proposals can be used to justify dumping more pollution in Africa.

The authors, Sommers, insist that was the purpose as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Summers

We voted for Obama.

Now let's trust Obama.

[blueskybigstar]

Let us hope that Barack does not become out of touch. Let us not just trust, but advise. I read the link of the whole speech that somebody provided. I am still troubled by what he said about women after reading it. It made me feel that he still believes in some oldthink. What is your opinion? I believe he apologized, but how good was the apology? I think that he is guilty of and disqualifies himself for appointment just for the reason of ever writing something so dry and taking forever to get to the point in typical faux intellectual speak.

[research]

Really? I just read it.

http://www.president.harvard.edu/speeches/2005/nber.html

He is asking questions.

He explicitly states that he is speculating.

He explicitly says everyone else is also speculating as to why there a "shortage" of women at the tops of science and engineering positions.

He says there may be biological reasons women don't go for these positions at the same rate men do.

Please explain the problem.