In international law, odious debt is a legal theory that holds that the national debt incurred by a regime for purposes that do not serve the best interests of the nation, should not be enforceable.To the bankers, sovereign debt has always had a special appeal. It is backed by the taxing power of the state and so need never default.
As US/NATO seeks to transform the world in the name of democracy, the people are resisting the demand that they bear the burden of debt contracted without their consent.
In Egypt, Eric Walberg reports, revolutionaries are calling for cancellation of their countries foreign debts.
... the campaign, which does not call for wholesale cancellation of the debt, but for a line-by-line review of the loan terms and useage to determine: whether the loan was made with the consent of the people of Egypt, whether it serves the interests of the people, and to what extent it was wasted through corruption. ... foreign lending institutions knew full well that Mubarak was a dictator conducting phoney elections and thus not reflecting the will of the people when they showered him with money, and they should face the consequences -- not the Egyptian people.The same logic must be applicable in many countries.
This is taking democracy a step too far. Democracy is more of a feel-good thing. Obviously, no one in charge wants the 99% buggering up their racket.