OECD warns prolonged war risks deepening global stagflation via energy shocks and supply chain fragmentation, exposing structural vulnerabilities in neoliberal growth models
Original framing: “OECD says protracted war could drag on global growth, push up inflation - Reuters” — Reuters (via Google News)
Women in Global South supply chains (e.g., garment workers in Bangladesh) face 40% wage cuts during inflationary periods, yet their labor underpins OECD economies. Refugees and internally displaced persons (e.g., 6.8 million Ukrainians) are framed as 'costs' rather than displaced workers who could rebuild resilient local economies. Debt bondage in African nations (e.g., Zambia’s copper sector) illustrates how IMF structural adjustment programs exacerbate inflation by prioritizing debt servicing over public goods.
The OECD’s stagflation warning is a symptom of a deeper crisis: a global economy addicted to perpetual growth, militarized resource control, and financial extraction, which treats war as an external shock rather than a predictable outcome of these systems.
Indigenous land-back movements and African *buen vivir* models reveal that resilience lies not in GDP growth but in relational economies that prioritize ecological limits and communal well-being—paradigms the OECD’s technocrats dismiss as 'unrealistic.' Historical patterns (e.g., 1970s oil shocks, Bretton Woods collapse) show that the current trajectory leads to cascading collapses unless debt jubilees, energy democracy, and localized supply chains are implemented. The trickster’s insight is that the OECD’s 'solutions' are the problem: austerity and market fixes will deepen stagflation, while systemic alternatives (e.g., demilitarization, Indigenous governance) offer pathways to stability. The synthesis demands a paradigm shift—from growth fetishism to ecological and social reproduction—where war’s economic toll is not an accident but a failure of imagination.