Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

marmar

(77,056 posts)
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 11:43 AM Apr 2016

Neoliberalism Is Destroying Our Lives and Many of Us Don’t Even Know What It Is


http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/neoliberalism_is_destroying_our_lives--and_many_of_us_20160427


via truthdig:


“The ideology that dominates our lives has, for most of us, no name,” writes George Monbiot. “Mention it in conversation and you’ll be rewarded with a shrug. Even if your listeners have heard the term before, they will struggle to define it. Neoliberalism: do you know what it is?”

Its anonymity is both a symptom and cause of its power. It has played a major role in a remarkable variety of crises: the financial meltdown of 2007-8, the offshoring of wealth and power, of which the Panama Papers offer us merely a glimpse, the slow collapse of public health and education, resurgent child poverty, the epidemic of loneliness, the collapse of ecosystems, the rise of Donald Trump. But we respond to these crises as if they emerge in isolation, apparently unaware that they have all been either catalysed or exacerbated by the same coherent philosophy; a philosophy that has—or had—a name. What greater power can there be than to operate namelessly?

So pervasive has neoliberalism become that we seldom even recognise it as an ideology. We appear to accept the proposition that this utopian, millenarian faith describes a neutral force; a kind of biological law, like Darwin’s theory of evolution. But the philosophy arose as a conscious attempt to reshape human life and shift the locus of power.

Neoliberalism sees competition as the defining characteristic of human relations. It redefines citizens as consumers, whose democratic choices are best exercised by buying and selling, a process that rewards merit and punishes inefficiency. It maintains that “the market” delivers benefits that could never be achieved by planning.


Continue reading.





92 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Neoliberalism Is Destroying Our Lives and Many of Us Don’t Even Know What It Is (Original Post) marmar Apr 2016 OP
And Hillary is among the architects of neoliberalism, or at least rode their coat-tails. KPN Apr 2016 #1
The entire presidentisl farce is a DIVERSION from the REAL BATTLE GOING ON OVER FTAS Baobab Apr 2016 #16
Sadly, Exactly correct Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #37
oh yes,this^^^ wendylaroux Apr 2016 #51
Nonsense. Neoliberalism is the ideology, such as Hortensis Apr 2016 #42
I mentioned years ago... IthinkThereforeIAM Apr 2016 #57
Lol. You called it, then and now. Sure, a lot of people Hortensis Apr 2016 #59
Neoconservatism and neoliberalism are two different things... JHB Apr 2016 #61
So if "neoliberalism" represents uneducated opinion KPN Apr 2016 #67
I'm neither your political science or reading instructor. Hortensis Apr 2016 #74
Funny, you posed as such in your previous post. KPN Apr 2016 #79
Throwing the dog a bone... IthinkThereforeIAM Apr 2016 #86
Enlightened my ass. Enraptured with their own brilliance and potential gain KPN Apr 2016 #87
The information is out there... IthinkThereforeIAM Apr 2016 #88
So you obviously don't think Hillary is a conservative when it comes to KPN Apr 2016 #66
Thanks! Good observations. Eom reACTIONary Apr 2016 #89
neoliberalism is what rw talk radio sells for free all day certainot Apr 2016 #63
or at least rode their coat-tails. AlbertCat Apr 2016 #82
And Hillary carries Neoliberalism's banner, and their water. djean111 Apr 2016 #2
doesn't make sense - certainot Apr 2016 #64
Neo liberalism is 1970s GOP. n/t Gore1FL Apr 2016 #3
Neoliberalism... ReRe Apr 2016 #4
A Democrat that believes in war as a means to profit (for a few)? Enthusiast Apr 2016 #22
. . . and the Democratic Party dominated by the DLC and Third Way Jack Rabbit Apr 2016 #6
But in many cases the belief in gay rights and abortion is not a strong one. A Simple Game Apr 2016 #12
Yes, they are republicans without the bigotry. TIME TO PANIC Apr 2016 #15
I would argue that the only reason they are socially liberal is to give us a false sense of hope. cui bono Apr 2016 #40
This is spot on. potone Apr 2016 #53
That's certainly what the young folk believe. And .,.. KPN Apr 2016 #68
Spot-on analysis. So hard to get Democrats to see this, though. canoeist52 Apr 2016 #73
Absolutely! It's mostly theatre, at this point. TIME TO PANIC Apr 2016 #85
Bingo Populist_Prole Apr 2016 #84
Yep. cliffordu Apr 2016 #20
exactly. neoliberalism = rockefeller republican jg10003 Apr 2016 #43
She is, after all, a Goldwater gal..... cliffordu Apr 2016 #9
That is such a weak criticism. world wide wally Apr 2016 #11
or you never evolved AlbertCat Apr 2016 #83
And 1990s-2010s Democrats Svafa Apr 2016 #28
BINGO! KPN Apr 2016 #69
1970's GOP'ish is pretty much where the DLC took the Democratic Party. NorthCarolina Apr 2016 #80
"Many of Us Don’t Even Know What It Is" Phlem Apr 2016 #5
Some Hillary voters know. And they strongly approve. nt stillwaiting Apr 2016 #45
I say they just don't care. Their adulation for authoritarian leadership blinds them rhett o rick Apr 2016 #46
Applause. Simple and straaightforward ... KPN Apr 2016 #70
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Apr 2016 #7
It's what Hillary supports fasttense Apr 2016 #8
Kick and rec. cliffordu Apr 2016 #10
We need a viable alternative to neoliberalism or we're all screwed n/t deutsey Apr 2016 #13
We have that alternative and his name is Bernie. Marie Marie Apr 2016 #31
I take some small consolation in the possibility deutsey Apr 2016 #50
Yep libodem Apr 2016 #14
"Neoliberalism" isn't a reference to progressive New Deal-style liberalism deutsey Apr 2016 #21
Thank you for the info libodem Apr 2016 #24
K & R! TIME TO PANIC Apr 2016 #17
Neoliberalism is Capitalism in its worst form blackspade Apr 2016 #18
Markets are free, people not so much - eom dreamnightwind Apr 2016 #27
But apparently "resources' are free" (to destroy) glinda Apr 2016 #58
I read this this morning and planned to post it here Rebkeh Apr 2016 #19
Kicked and recommended! Enthusiast Apr 2016 #23
Neoliberalism is just watered down Reaganomics. The assholes that love to worship Reagan Rex Apr 2016 #25
K&R ReRe Apr 2016 #26
one of the top five best books ever published, in my opinion. mountain grammy Apr 2016 #30
And it reads fast, too ;-) n/t ReRe Apr 2016 #33
I keep it on my table, always handy.. mountain grammy Apr 2016 #34
Sounds like... ReRe Apr 2016 #35
Yep, just like the bible only true.. mountain grammy Apr 2016 #36
Of course ReRe Apr 2016 #38
It's how the oligarchs run the world.. mountain grammy Apr 2016 #29
It's all a big dog and pony show BigMin28 Apr 2016 #77
If people don't know what it is then their economic opinions have no real value anigbrowl Apr 2016 #32
The responses in this thread illustrate the point of this thread perfectly. beastie boy Apr 2016 #39
Neoliberalism is the current predominating ideology of capitalism. ronnie624 Apr 2016 #44
You described the essence of neoliberalism pretty well, but... beastie boy Apr 2016 #48
VERY good essay. ronnie624 Apr 2016 #41
+1 deutsey Apr 2016 #60
Thanks for the link, marmar... Thespian2 Apr 2016 #47
Neolibs, centrists, pragmatists, moderates are ALL a cancer on the middle class and below.. whereisjustice Apr 2016 #49
Whatever it is we are living thru, it is not a meritocracy. MadLinguist Apr 2016 #52
Neoliberalism.... reACTIONary Apr 2016 #54
Guess you just chose to skip over the OP Wednesdays Apr 2016 #55
No, I looked at the artcle.... reACTIONary Apr 2016 #92
The people who are labeled neoliberal may not like it, ronnie624 Apr 2016 #56
You should take a look at the wiki article..... reACTIONary Apr 2016 #62
A bad Wikipedia article simply reflects the ignorance of the editors of that article, nothing more. drm604 Apr 2016 #65
Its not a bad wiki article.... reACTIONary Apr 2016 #90
It wasn't the case until fairly recently beastie boy Apr 2016 #71
Both Parties Have Moved Steadily Right colsohlibgal Apr 2016 #72
If you follow voting patterns of the last 30 years, It is the blue collar Democrats who beastie boy Apr 2016 #75
Neoliberalism is an example of severe ignorance. davidthegnome Apr 2016 #76
Quite an eye-opening read - thanks. rurallib Apr 2016 #78
BIG K&R! Thanks for this. The rec list is telling...nt riderinthestorm Apr 2016 #81
Bookmarked to read later. demmiblue Apr 2016 #91

Baobab

(4,667 posts)
16. The entire presidentisl farce is a DIVERSION from the REAL BATTLE GOING ON OVER FTAS
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:07 PM
Apr 2016

must read these proposals in the EU- We need these too- Making these changes are MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE ELECTION to our future.


Presidents - national legislatures- are increasingly symbolic- ceremonial vestigial figures- once they sign these deals, have no power to change them.

WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT- Please read, also read the linked paper in the line at the bottom of my post-

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+AMD+A8-2016-0009+002-008+DOC+PDF+V0//EN


http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+AMD+A8-2015-0175+028-042+DOC+PDF+V0//EN

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
42. Nonsense. Neoliberalism is the ideology, such as
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 07:16 PM
Apr 2016

it is, that evolved/is reflected in modern conservatism, as opposed to medieval, old-world conservatism. I say that loosely because, amazingly, until the 1950s or so conservatism was merely a conviction in the belly, without an intellectual basis. To this day, a good definition has never been established; and in today's debased right-wing state, conservatism is defined by most conservatives as a belly-based opposition to liberalism.

(Liberalism, of course, dates back to the Enlightenment, and our Declaration of Independence and Constitution are based on its long established and profoundly developed ideology.)

In any case, the term "neoliberalism" is being used to trick people who haven't familiarized themselves with arcane terms. You can see how a term with "liberal" in it that is about conservatives could be very useful if dusted off and served up to those eager to bite.

IthinkThereforeIAM

(3,075 posts)
57. I mentioned years ago...
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 02:45 AM
Apr 2016

... that when the guard at the White House changes from Dumya to President Obama, there would be a gradual changing of the name from, "neoconservative", to, "neoliberalism". You must admit, the base instincts, as you implied, are a gut revolting uneducated opinion followed by the stink eye.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
59. Lol. You called it, then and now. Sure, a lot of people
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 05:43 AM
Apr 2016

who don't pay much attention to politics are going to be fooled by an obscure old term that seems to indicate some of its meaning, but people who frequent political forums really should look up the terminology that's served up to them.

I actually originally came to DU to get away from Far Righters and their love for any lie that served their purpose at the moment -- and that stink eye that's so intrinsic to the syndrome as well.

JHB

(37,157 posts)
61. Neoconservatism and neoliberalism are two different things...
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 06:45 AM
Apr 2016

...although they are compatible and often go together.

Neoconservatism is mostly about foreign policy: "paleo" conservativism was more isolationist, whereas neoconservatism is more aggressive about intervening elsewhere. It developed in the 70s, incubated by 'hawk' Democrats like Scoop Jackson and Daniel Patrick Moynihan. A large number of them switched over to the Republicans under Reagan.

Neoliberalism is mostly about economics. The "liberalism" in the name is from economic jargon, and means "liberalizing" markets: freeing them from regulations, tariffs, "excessive" taxes, etc. In other words, "deregulation and free trade", the things we've been dealing with since Reagan.

KPN

(15,637 posts)
67. So if "neoliberalism" represents uneducated opinion
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 09:28 AM
Apr 2016

please "educate" us.

I will be waiting for a cogent, informative response.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
74. I'm neither your political science or reading instructor.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 10:23 AM
Apr 2016

I do suggest you work on your reading comprehension before tackling complex sentences.

IthinkThereforeIAM

(3,075 posts)
86. Throwing the dog a bone...
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 08:04 PM
Apr 2016

... "In 1973, Michael Harrington coined the term "neo-conservatism" to describe those liberal intellectuals and political philosophers who were disaffected with the political and cultural attitudes dominating the Democratic Party and were moving toward a new form of conservatism.[11] Intended by Harrington as a pejorative term, it was accepted by Kristol as an apt description of the ideas and policies exemplified by The Public Interest. Unlike liberals, for example, neo-conservatives rejected most of the Great Society programs sponsored by Lyndon Johnson; and unlike traditional conservatives, they supported the more limited welfare state instituted by Franklin Delano Roosevelt."


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Kristol

Whether it is, "neo-conservativism", or "neo-liberalism", would appear to be a matter of convenience. At the basis of it all is, "liberal intellectuals", ie... enlightened.

KPN

(15,637 posts)
87. Enlightened my ass. Enraptured with their own brilliance and potential gain
Fri Apr 29, 2016, 01:15 AM
Apr 2016

is more like it.

Not sure your name is fitting.

KPN

(15,637 posts)
66. So you obviously don't think Hillary is a conservative when it comes to
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 09:24 AM
Apr 2016

the structural economy. No surprise there. The term, neoliberal, is apt for Third Way ideology. Baobab is right -- there is no distinction between the two parties really when it comes to the global economy. Too many people understand that today, ergo, Bernie and -- albeit misguidedly -- Trump. So the parties will evolve, break-down or suppress voters.

Looking ahead, if Hillary wins the GE, where she goes with the TPP will say a lot about which of the futures the Ds move toward. I'm not optimistic about the Party evolving.

 

certainot

(9,090 posts)
63. neoliberalism is what rw talk radio sells for free all day
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 08:21 AM
Apr 2016

because the left ignores it.

everything monbiot uses to describe it is right there on the local rw radio stations everyday while the left sticks their fingers in theirears and walks by

Its anonymity is both a symptom and cause of its power.


hillary is probably the single most talk radio- targeted person over the last 25 years - so she and the rest of the dems have been pushed right - the whole country has - because the left continues the biggest political mistake in history, ignoring neoliberalisms biggest seller:

at a cheap $1000/hr x 15hrs/day x 1200 stations, rw talk radio is worth 4.68 BIL$/ year or 390MIL$ /month FREE for coordinated pro republican wall st think tank propaganda, hate, and swiftboating and selling neoliberalism

and then we let these 90 universities support 268 of the loudest of those stations!

but at least you got you shot in at hillary.
 

AlbertCat

(17,505 posts)
82. or at least rode their coat-tails.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 11:33 AM
Apr 2016

That's more like it since her "greatest achievements"...1st Lady and SoS.... were handed to her because of her husband's name.

We keep getting told how amazing she is, but with a foil like Sanders, it's clearly just not there. Mediocre at best.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
2. And Hillary carries Neoliberalism's banner, and their water.
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 11:50 AM
Apr 2016

Not going to vote for that, unify behind that, support that.

That's the writing on MY wall.

 

certainot

(9,090 posts)
64. doesn't make sense -
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 08:33 AM
Apr 2016

neoliberalism is what rw talk radio sells for free all day because the left ignores it .

Its anonymity is both a symptom and cause of its power.


hillary is probably the single most talk radio- targeted person over the last 25 years - so she and the rest of the dems have been pushed right - the whole country has - because the left continues the biggest political mistake in history, ignoring neoliberalisms biggest seller:

at a cheap $1000/hr x 15hrs/day x 1200 stations, rw talk radio is worth 4.68 BIL$/ year or 390MIL$ /month FREE for coordinated pro republican wall st think tank propaganda, hate, and swiftboating and selling neoliberalism

everything monbiot uses to describe it is right there on the local rw radio stations everyday while the left sticks their fingers in theirears and walks by

and then we even let these 90 universities support 268 of the loudest of those stations!

and then complain about hillary. the republicans are the problem, not hillary. hillary may be the nominee of a party that's not the republican party and is 20 pts to the right because the left and dems ignore neoliberalism's best weapon.

that's some lazy ass stuff from the left

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
4. Neoliberalism...
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 12:31 PM
Apr 2016

... Milton Friedman's "Chicago Boys" come home to roost in the good ole US of A.

Jack Rabbit

(45,984 posts)
6. . . . and the Democratic Party dominated by the DLC and Third Way
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 12:47 PM
Apr 2016

You're not getting off that easily, fella. A New Democrat is a Republican who believes in gay rights and abortion.

A Simple Game

(9,214 posts)
12. But in many cases the belief in gay rights and abortion is not a strong one.
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 01:42 PM
Apr 2016

Case in point, Hillary's willingness to erode the right to abortions and being at the back of the gay rights parade.

TIME TO PANIC

(1,894 posts)
15. Yes, they are republicans without the bigotry.
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:05 PM
Apr 2016

The only reason they are socially liberal is because they think it's chic and politically expedient. They don't give a fuck about equality, obviously.

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
40. I would argue that the only reason they are socially liberal is to give us a false sense of hope.
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 06:44 PM
Apr 2016

To make us believe we actually have a choice when in reality both choices lead to the same economic entrapment under which even people with social justice will suffer needlessly.

And it gives them a way to pit the people against each other. They argue only about social justice, emotional issues, and let the people divide over it and really, we are all voting against our self interests by voting for either party at this point.

Our system is broken. Badly broken. And neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party are going to fix it. This is exactly how they want it.

.

potone

(1,701 posts)
53. This is spot on.
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 10:34 PM
Apr 2016

I think that both parties are going to decline in importance, and new parties will form as a result of frustration with the existing duopoly. It could prove very interesting, but I fear may be too little, too late as far global warming is concerned.

KPN

(15,637 posts)
68. That's certainly what the young folk believe. And .,..
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 09:40 AM
Apr 2016

they've gone a long way toward convincing me of that.

That's why I'm Bernie or Bust ... and bust if we must.

world wide wally

(21,739 posts)
11. That is such a weak criticism.
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 01:37 PM
Apr 2016

We're you political philosophies ingrained in you when you were 13 years old?
You are either incredibly gifted or you never evolved

 

NorthCarolina

(11,197 posts)
80. 1970's GOP'ish is pretty much where the DLC took the Democratic Party.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 11:11 AM
Apr 2016

Now they prefer to be called neoliberals, or New Dems, or Third-Way, or whatever, but the message, and politics, remains the same; 1970's GOP.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
5. "Many of Us Don’t Even Know What It Is"
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 12:40 PM
Apr 2016

That's an understatement but I completely agree.

Many also think it's make believe and not real. Ugh.

Basically Bernie Voters know this. Hillary voters, not a fucking clue.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
46. I say they just don't care. Their adulation for authoritarian leadership blinds them
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 08:57 PM
Apr 2016

to the suffering around us. Their rationalization is their happiness.

 

fasttense

(17,301 posts)
8. It's what Hillary supports
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 12:53 PM
Apr 2016

You wont see it on the Democratic platform (not that the Dems ever follow their platform, checkout Obama's) but it's how Hillary rolls.

Marie Marie

(9,999 posts)
31. We have that alternative and his name is Bernie.
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 03:54 PM
Apr 2016

But from the looks of things, yeah, we are screwed.

deutsey

(20,166 posts)
50. I take some small consolation in the possibility
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 09:55 PM
Apr 2016

that Bernie has been the catalyst for significant change. He apparently has been a yuuuge influence on the younger generation, planting a seed that could eventually mark a real sea change to the left in America over the next decade.

The question is: will that be too late?

libodem

(19,288 posts)
14. Yep
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 01:56 PM
Apr 2016

I refused to acknowledge it as a 'thing' because of the tit for tat gamesmanship of the Pukes. Since we called them NeoCons, I figured they were just blaming us for their failures again.

But I'll gronk it sooner or later.


Oh, Goddess, not us too.

deutsey

(20,166 posts)
21. "Neoliberalism" isn't a reference to progressive New Deal-style liberalism
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:22 PM
Apr 2016

if I understand it correctly. It's referring to the classical sense of liberalism as in unregulated "free" markets.

As the article says, Milton Friedman (about as far from New Deal liberalism as you can get) called himself a "neoliberal".

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
25. Neoliberalism is just watered down Reaganomics. The assholes that love to worship Reagan
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 02:48 PM
Apr 2016

love neoliberalism. Then again they never complained too loud over decades of Pissed On Economics, their wallets got fat and their will got weak.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
26. K&R
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 03:01 PM
Apr 2016

This is so true. It's destroying our lives and most of us don't even know what it is! There was even a poster in this thread that seemed to be very confused. If anyone is lost about what the term means, please go the library and get this book:
Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, by Naomi Klein.

BigMin28

(1,174 posts)
77. It's all a big dog and pony show
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 10:44 AM
Apr 2016

To make us believe we have a choice or say in the matter. In reality we are screwed.

 

anigbrowl

(13,889 posts)
32. If people don't know what it is then their economic opinions have no real value
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 04:02 PM
Apr 2016

I've been a classical liberal (a term I prefer to neoliberal) for years. I encountered the ideas, found them persuasive, and then got interested in economics and bought a bunch of books in order to educate myself on the topic. I don't think competition is the answer to every problem, but having grown up in a quasi-socialist country with a lot of central planning (and a parent who was a top level bureaucrat) I'm not too impressed with planned economies either.

It's easy to point out things you don't like about an economic system but critics of liberalism rarely offer any evidence to show that their proposals will lead to better outcomes. Mostly they just talk about the better outcomes they'd like to see and assume that defining the goal is equivalent ot having a good plan to achieve it. Well I'm for world peace and free everything, so vote for me.

beastie boy

(9,237 posts)
39. The responses in this thread illustrate the point of this thread perfectly.
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 05:29 PM
Apr 2016

Half of the responders have no clue what neoliberalism is.

If you think neoliberalism is synonymous with Third Wave, you are ignorant.

If you think neoliberalism and capitalism are synonymous, you are not paying attention.

If you think a 70 year old woman is the architect of a 200 year old economic theory, you are insane.

If you think Hillary carries Neoliberalism's water, you are a demagogue.

If you think any significant number of Democrats are neoliberal, you are blind.

And finally, if you think you can come up with an alternative to neoliberalism without understanding what it is, you are delusional.

...BTW, kudos to the poster who at least is aware that neoliberalism has nothing to do with FDR's liberalism (AKA social liberalism), and only has remote historical ties to it.

ronnie624

(5,764 posts)
44. Neoliberalism is the current predominating ideology of capitalism.
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 08:11 PM
Apr 2016

It advocates deregulation, privatization, free markets and disempowering government. It's purpose is to make the accumulation of capital easier. It isn't exactly the same as capitalism, but the two go hand in hand. Neoliberalism would not exist as a functioning ideology, without capitalism.

beastie boy

(9,237 posts)
48. You described the essence of neoliberalism pretty well, but...
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 09:45 PM
Apr 2016

if you compare it to the current practice of capitalism, you will see little neoliberalism reflected in it. In many respects, corporate capitalism flies in the face of neoliberalism: it strives to dominate markets (including labor markets), stifle competition, compel Big Government to represent and legislate its interests on a large scale, control supply and demand, etc. In fact, one may argue that the practice of capitalism is the opposite of the theory of neoliberalism, Yes, neoliberalism is being used as an ideology to cover up and deflect from the excesses of capitalism, bit this is merely a smokescreen, and with a little analysis, an increasingly obvious one.

ronnie624

(5,764 posts)
41. VERY good essay.
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 07:08 PM
Apr 2016

The last two paragraphs were spot on, and I was pleased to see no suggestion to 'reform' the capitalist system, as it simply is not possible.

Thespian2

(2,741 posts)
47. Thanks for the link, marmar...
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 09:25 PM
Apr 2016

Before posting comments, people should read the entire article by George Monbiot...he is a gifted writer for The Guardian UK...

whereisjustice

(2,941 posts)
49. Neolibs, centrists, pragmatists, moderates are ALL a cancer on the middle class and below..
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 09:46 PM
Apr 2016

just bullshit words to say "Economic Conservative and War Hawk but generally ok with a few civil liberties like amnesty for torture and wall street crime"

MadLinguist

(788 posts)
52. Whatever it is we are living thru, it is not a meritocracy.
Wed Apr 27, 2016, 10:07 PM
Apr 2016

Last edited Fri Apr 29, 2016, 01:18 AM - Edit history (1)

It may be that neoliberalism is, as you say "a process that rewards merit and punishes inefficiency", but if so, that is most assuredly NOT what is governing the time we are living in. Merit is regularly excoriated and inefficiency is actually rewarded, so long as it keeps the supply lines in place

reACTIONary

(5,768 posts)
92. No, I looked at the artcle....
Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:52 AM
Apr 2016

.... the author characterizes "the system" in an exagerated, lopsided, idelogically tenditious manner, and uses a multi-sylabic smear-term to give his rant an intellectual veneer.

ronnie624

(5,764 posts)
56. The people who are labeled neoliberal may not like it,
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 01:40 AM
Apr 2016

but that does not make the term illegitimate or meaningless. Million of people all over the world know what it is. Articles, essays, and books are written about it all the time, by some of the brightest thinkers out there.

Adherents to 'free market' ideology know instinctively, that it cannot hold up to logical and moral scrutiny.

reACTIONary

(5,768 posts)
62. You should take a look at the wiki article.....
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 07:18 AM
Apr 2016

.... on neoliberalism . .... it's a mess. Basically because the term has no concrete or substantial meaning. It's just used as a general smear against those on the left against those who are more central.

drm604

(16,230 posts)
65. A bad Wikipedia article simply reflects the ignorance of the editors of that article, nothing more.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 09:23 AM
Apr 2016

Even if you want to refuse to call it "neoliberalism", the ideas of free market absolutism and the accompanying idea that popular government should be minimized are destructive.

Some may try to sidetrack the conversation by arguing about semantics and the definition of terms, but regardless of what you want to call it, the underlying ideas and problems remain.

reACTIONary

(5,768 posts)
90. Its not a bad wiki article....
Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:54 AM
Apr 2016

.... it's a bad, ill defined concept that is basically a smear term. The wiki article is a good survey, considering the subject.

beastie boy

(9,237 posts)
71. It wasn't the case until fairly recently
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 09:52 AM
Apr 2016

But the demagogue media personalities began to slap the term on everyone and anyone they disliked for any reason, and that's when the term lost its meaning.

Very similar to how the right wing media delegitimizes meaningful definitions by misapplying them.

colsohlibgal

(5,275 posts)
72. Both Parties Have Moved Steadily Right
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 10:17 AM
Apr 2016

Nelson Rockefeller would be seen as a pretty liberal democrat today.

The Republicans have moved hard right but so have the democrats on non social issues.

It is all about the meritocracy for the dems, they made a decision starting with Bill Clinton to worry about the well heeled top 10% professional democrats and deftly reduce their association with blue collar democrats.

The hope lies with the younger crowd, many have figured out the smoke screen.

beastie boy

(9,237 posts)
75. If you follow voting patterns of the last 30 years, It is the blue collar Democrats who
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 10:29 AM
Apr 2016

made the most radical move to the right. The Democratic party followed them, with limited success.

davidthegnome

(2,983 posts)
76. Neoliberalism is an example of severe ignorance.
Thu Apr 28, 2016, 10:42 AM
Apr 2016

I can't think of anything I despise more than money - yes, it's useful, yes, it helps us survive with the constructs of society... but it is not indicative of the value of a human being, of human life - we are so much greater than that. The notion that a so called "free market" is somehow noble or grand is ridiculous. It is a belief, a practice, an ideology of idolatry that is rooted in a lack of empathy, compassion, human understanding or anything that resembles nobility.

The notion that competition is a defining characteristic of human relations is a huge part of the problem. Consider typical employment as regards purely financial concerns - the employer struggles to get the most productivity out of the worker while rewarding them as little as possible (ultimately increasing their financial capacity). This is made clear by the deep economic inequality of our time, by the difference between CEO and worker pay, by people working 80-100 hours a week just to pay the bills.

Where does this leave us? Well, with a crumbling infrastructure because those who can pay for it don't want to. With a lack of access to healthcare, food, the basic necessities of survival and prosperous life - because those who can pay for it don't want to. Why should they? They have private jets, mansions, people to cook and clean for them, access to almost anything they want. They can stash their money offshore to avoid paying taxes, pay minimum wage to any employee and claim nobility because they are "job creators". The notion that competition is a defining characteristic of human interaction has rewarded them immensely. They have crushed opposition, risen above the odds, won the race. They have more toys than they know what to do with, enough money to provide a lifetime supply of toilet paper.

The ultimate result of this kind of ideology is a barren wasteland. You can only take just so much, drain just so much... care just so little, before there are deep consequences. We are beginning to see just how deep - with climate change being the greatest example of this. We could end it, change it, repair the environment... with a few simple steps (simple if you consider that, if we don't, we're all screwed) like eliminating our fossil fuel subsidies. This has not happened, despite the growing consensus and fear that humanity may be facing an extinction level event. Some people... "got theirs" and have no interest in "using theirs" for the betterment of humanity or the world. Perhaps they figure, "Someone else will take care of the problems".

It's not just about who is rich and who is poor. It is about the simplest of things, things we ought to learn as small children. The value of sharing, of caring, of helping our neighbors, our friends, our families. The value, not of competition and wealth as the end result, but of cooperation, of mutual kindness, empathy and compassion... the end result being a better world, greater happiness, a more enlightened human race. Less suffering, less pain. This is noble. This is wisdom. This is beauty. Neoliberalism is none of these things - rather, I would suggest that it is the opposite.

We (human beings) are more than flesh and bone. We are beings capable of astoundingly deep thought, compassion... courage - and kindness. Our value, I would suggest... lies within that, not within our financial wealth, how well we compete, how well we crush the opposition. We gain far more when we work together, when we combine our strength to serve each other... than when we defeat the competition.

Common sense... unfortunately, is not so common. It should be a matter of simple common sense to understand these simple concepts. That we are all made better by kindness, by working together, by giving a damn. That we are all made worse by greed, selfishness, cruelty and ignorance.

Just my ten cents, forgive the rambling - I'm running on caffeine and adrenaline at the moment.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Neoliberalism Is Destroyi...