Neo-Liberalism

Hard_Rom

Northumbrian Skald
Joined
Apr 24, 2014
Posts
13,623
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=376

What is Neoliberalism?

The main points of neo-liberalism include:

1.THE RULE OF THE MARKET. Liberating "free" enterprise or private enterprise from any bonds imposed by the government (the state) no matter how much social damage this causes. Greater openness to international trade and investment, as in NAFTA. Reduce wages by de-unionizing workers and eliminating workers' rights that had been won over many years of struggle. No more price controls. All in all, total freedom of movement for capital, goods and services. To convince us this is good for us, they say "an unregulated market is the best way to increase economic growth, which will ultimately benefit everyone." It's like Reagan's "supply-side" and "trickle-down" economics -- but somehow the wealth didn't trickle down very much.


2.CUTTING PUBLIC EXPENDITURE FOR SOCIAL SERVICES like education and health care. REDUCING THE SAFETY-NET FOR THE POOR, and even maintenance of roads, bridges, water supply -- again in the name of reducing government's role. Of course, they don't oppose government subsidies and tax benefits for business.


3.DEREGULATION. Reduce government regulation of everything that could diminsh profits, including protecting the environmentand safety on the job.


4.PRIVATIZATION. Sell state-owned enterprises, goods and services to private investors. This includes banks, key industries, railroads, toll highways, electricity, schools, hospitals and even fresh water. Although usually done in the name of greater efficiency, which is often needed, privatization has mainly had the effect of concentrating wealth even more in a few hands and making the public pay even more for its needs.


5.ELIMINATING THE CONCEPT OF "THE PUBLIC GOOD" or "COMMUNITY" and replacing it with "individual responsibility." Pressuring the poorest people in a society to find solutions to their lack of health care, education and social security all by themselves -- then blaming them, if they fail, as "lazy."
 
Me too.

Maggie Thatcher and Ronny Reagan are two well known neo-liberals. How much more reactionary conservative could you get than those two?

Liberal in economical matters and liberal in societal matters are obviously two different things.
 
I wasn't in touch with the definition of neo-liberalism and thought it was just what these rich college kids are doing when they scream about how they must be systematically oppressed by society because somebody called them a rude word.

Hoo boy.

Thanks for the update.
 
The neoliberals that took over the economics academies on behalf of the very rich back in the 1970s, set back human development by decades by returning to the dark ages of neoclassical economics that existed before the Great Depression.

They overthrew everything that we'd learned about macroeconomics in the 1930s from Keynes and many other great thinkers and they rubbished the gains that had been made in the post WW2 boom.

And their voodoo lives on. Their lies are believed as gospel by the 'educated'. Basic macroeconomics is rejected and lampooned.

People ardently believe governments have to balance their 'budgets' and 'pay down government debt' or the sky will fall in.

So the rich get ever richer ever more quickly and people keep voting for politicians (of whatever party) that are helping them do it.

And if you point any of this out, you get called a 'conspiracy theorist' or worse.
 
So? What's your point, Hard Rom?

Everybody knows that neo-liberalism equals unfettered/crony capitalism or corporatism and so on.

The problem is: some of it's "liberal" critics are keen to replace it with the other extreme/ end of the spectrum:
a doctrine that, no matter how one names it or dresses it up , equals unfettered socialism. Why are they keen to make the US akin to those ex-Soviet Union countries beats me, when communism as an ideology had already been tested and failed.

What happened to their Elites when Communism fell and was replaced by the so-called "free market" in the ex-Soviet block? They just changed their names. From tovarisch to business moguls. The exact thing will happen in the States, only the other way around,

The real problem is Collectivism, not the artificial political split between the Right and Left.
 
Last edited:
So? What's your point, Hard Rom?

Everybody knows that neo-liberalism equals unfettered/crony capitalism or corporatism and so on.

The problem is: some of it's "liberal" critics are keen to replace it with the other extreme/ end of the spectrum:
a doctrine that, no matter how one names it or dresses it up , equals unfettered socialism. Why are they keen to make the US akin to those ex-Soviet Union countries beats me, when communism as an ideology had already been tested and failed.

What happened to their Elites when Communism fell and was replaced by the so-called "free market" in the ex-Soviet block? They just changed their names. From tovarisch to business moguls. The exact thing will happen in the States, only the other way around,

The real problem is Collectivism, not the artificial political split between the Right and Left.

Neoliberalism is about your economic doctrine. Liberals are closer to you than they are to socialists. Liberals hate socialists.

LIberals are pro-capitalism, like you. Neoliberalism is finance capitalism. Deregulated markets lead to monopolies, cartels and the political sphere taken over by capitalists.

This is the inevitable result of the policies you would enact.
 
I wasn't serious, actually..:)
Especially since politics (espec. the economical aspect) aren't my forte.

Mine was supposed to be a parody of some of our over-the top GB liberals who got on my nerves a bit lately.

In saying that, I read somewhere that regardless of doctrine (R or L) , the one element that allows Elites to thrive and keep the little guy in check is Collectivism. Or, the way LJ_Reloaded puts it "the horseshoe theory".


Neoliberalism is about your economic doctrine. Liberals are closer to you than they are to socialists. Liberals hate socialists.

LIberals are pro-capitalism
, like you. Neoliberalism is finance capitalis.

Thanks. This is one area where I believe that my misunderstanding of Liberalism lies in.

Which reminds me (a bit unrelated, perhaps):
might it be that the american use of the term "socialism" differs from the european one? I saw people fight in the GB over semantics, when they even shared similar views.
 
I wasn't serious, actually..:)
Especially since politics (espec. the economical aspect) aren't my forte.

Mine was supposed to be a parody of some of our over-the top GB liberals who got on my nerves a bit lately.

In saying that, I read somewhere that regardless of doctrine (R or L) , the one element that allows Elites to thrive and keep the little guy in check is Collectivism. Or, the way LJ_Reloaded puts it "the horseshoe theory".




Thanks. This is one area where I believe that my misunderstanding of Liberalism lies in.

Which reminds me (a bit unrelated, perhaps):
might it be that the american use of the term "socialism" differs from the european one? I saw people fight in the GB over semantics, when they even shared similar views.

OK, sorry. It was an excellent WUM in that case. Kudos.

American political terminology is so fucked up that it's almost impossible to have a serious conversation with most people.

The mainstream consists of extreme right wingers (Dems) fighting ultra-extreme right wingers (Repubs) all trying to pretend that it's not fascism that they're selling.

I don't think it's by accident. They've been subjected to the most intense and longest propaganda operation in history.
 
OK, sorry. It was an excellent WUM in that case. Kudos.

American political terminology is so fucked up that it's almost impossible to have a serious conversation with most people.

The mainstream consists of extreme right wingers (Dems) fighting ultra-extreme right wingers (Repubs) all trying to pretend that it's not fascism that they're selling.

I don't think it's by accident. They've been subjected to the most intense and longest propaganda operation in history.

Exactly!!

I had the same feeling, but I wasn't able to conceptualize it or to find the right explanation or words for it.
Which led to my frustration and pointless angry discussions and explanations on my part.

Being able to label it correctly (I think that your explanation is better than LJ's) will certainly make Me feel more emotionally detached.

Thx.
 
Back
Top