Only anonymous freaks on the internet says that. World leaders on stages choose their words more carefully: replace "capitalism" with "growth", "trade", "freedom" or similar terms, "save" with something weaker and unmeasurable. The IMF is still going strong after all these years though, it seems, and even when investments are clearly needed call for cuts. From IMF at MDG summit: Poor countries should spend less, not more:

"Countries with IMF programmes implemented more stimulus than others in 2009 but, conversely, are forecast to cut it back more sharply in 2010. This implies that, while the IMF protected social sector spending at the start of the crisis, it is now advising countries to reduce it. [...] IMF loans to crisis-stricken countries across the world still, as in the past, carry fiscal and monetary conditions for fiscal austerity, monetary policy tightening, and a prioritisation on debt repayment and maintaining open capital accounts. This macro-stability focus predominantly serves creditors, investors, and markets, often at the expense of development-oriented macroeconomic policies that allow for consistent and scaled-up public spending, access to credit, and long-term investment in public services and production sectors across agriculture, industry, and services."

Every time you hear someone arguing along the lines that free trade or whatever will solve the issues of poverty, health and pretty much anything think of The Shock Doctrine, the book by Naomi Klein. The neoliberal free trade people have plenty to answer for before they should be making any kind of suggestions on how to steer the world towards better times. Her book was recently supplemented by a documentary. So if you haven't read it at the very least watch the movie. Here is the trailer:

Whenever you see someone criticising the movie or the book on the basis on production, quality of footage, amount of research or similar insubstantial grounds - then don't ever trust that person again.

While I'm at it: Dictatorships will save the world. It all depends on how you look at it, how you manipulate numbers:

Not quite convinced? Read Solving the mystery of the benevolent autocrat.

#4 My YouTube subscriptions are now all about 10/10/10

Choose one. Put it on your Facebook wall.

Actually, there are also a lot of "stand up" stuff and official UN stuff... go check it out if you feel like it... (I won't bother here).

However, a bonus video to cheer you up from liveleak.com about animal rights activism in Mexico:

#3 Faroe Islands: still slaughtering, still getting activist attention

#2 April's Fool?

According to Inhabitat Google has invested more than one million US dollars in this...

#1 No wanking, no MDGs

If you, like me, gives US American politics way more attention than it deserves, you have been giggling about the fact that they actually elected a Tea Party woman whose campaign included anti-masturbation. Priceless.

Of course, there is the nagging feeling that we can't just laugh these idiots off. Sooner or later they will create real problems. And get this straight: Christine "not touching my genitals" O'Donnell is opposed to the UN Millennium Development Goals. At least her website reads (read):

"Despite its seemingly innocuous title, the Global Poverty Act would force America to adopt the U.N.’s “Millennium Development Goals” as official U.S. policy. This means outsourcing to the United Nations all important decisions concerning the use of U.S. foreign aid dollars."

The Human Rights blog gives a brief introduction to just how clueless that is. Read Seeing Past Christine O'Donnell's Masturbation Policies.