By the end of the 1980s most African countries were indeed in a bad way. The end of the Cold War gave the West - which had always believed it could tell Africans what to do - the chance to impose its own solutions. The West's new agenda was democracy, respect for human rights and the free market.Really Richard? I find the left’s demonisation of the Washington Consensus a bit annoying and a bit of a distraction. The main reason the evil neoimperialist economists recommended that African governments spent less and sold off assets is because they were broke. It’s really not that controversial, you can’t spend more than you earn forever. That’s life.
Africa's economies were handed over to World Bank and IMF economists. "Structural adjustment" introduced a dose of tough economic medicine that would restore the patient to health. Governments were forced to let the "free market" decide the value of their currencies, cut public spending and sell off their assets.
As a theoretical economic solution it might have looked right, but on the ground in Africa it pushed up prices, impoverishing all but a few, and destroying Africa's professional classes by reducing the value of their salaries. Those in power who had mismanaged things so badly, now sold run-down state assets to themselves at knock-down prices.
I also think the influence of those economists is a bit overdone. There is a great documentary film, “Our friends at the bank” which includes scenes of the Ugandan government politely telling the World Bank to get lost.
All of this is a distraction from the issues where Western policies really are (still!) self-serving and detrimental to the poor – such as farm subsidies and labour market restrictions. How about a bit our own free-market medicine huh?