EFA and MDGs post 2015: building creative forces
1. The context that gave rise to EFA and MDGs, in the decade of the 90s, led us to think it was possible to achieve overall results in overcoming poverty and in access of excluded populations to basic services of health, food and education. The “global managers” had confidence in prosperity that came together with a project of capitalism with a human face. The supposed consensus on the strength of the market economy, on its neo-liberal and compassionate version and on the predominance without counterweight of Western democracies gave the basis for the United Nations and multilateral organizations to propose ambitious programs. The world order, as envisaged at the time, would be more peaceful and equitable if the proposed modernizing globalization was accompanied by social programs and “development aid” from rich countries and global funding agencies. The phase of structural adjustment and the subsequent privatization of state social services, as well as the abandonment of the state main role in generating jobs and as guarantor of social and economic rights of the population, were seen as the support for the revitalization of markets and the emergence of innovative economies from the ancient world of underdeveloped countries. Global governance articulated around the power of financial institutions secured not only financing but the hegemony of a way of understanding the economic policies for human development in a univocal way. Under these proposals were raised both EFA and the MDGs’ strategies. The experiences of global summits convened by the United Nations assured, meanwhile, a political and rhetorical consensus of modernizing features that put special emphasis on the social sensitivity of human development, drawing attention to issues that called the world’s attention in a
crosscutting way, like HIV, domestic violence, the food crises, among others. The end of the “cold war” seemed to give way to a war against poverty.