Neoliberalism

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks
User avatar
Bride Of Sea Of Tunes
Posts: 17194
Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 14:10
Location: The Nether World

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Bride Of Sea Of Tunes » 07 Jul 2017, 15:43

Here's more about that drugs crisis in the USA:

https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/up ... deaton.pdf

(I hope the link works also for non-university computer accounts.)
The invisible and the non-existing very much look alike.

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 22259
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 07 Jul 2017, 16:21

Neither of the Clinton's can accurately be called a neoliberal. You can point to areas of neoliberalism, but neither subscribed to the kind of untethered free-market philosophy that would earn them that moniker.

I get the political efficacy of using the word as a slur against moderate democrats. But the net result of that kind of progressive fundamentalism won't actually bring about any progressive change. It will simply continue the trend that elected Trump, ceding rural districts to the GOP while concentrating more Dems into cosmopolitan enclaves.

Using the term neoliberalism on the basis of a kind of ideological "one drop" rule is not only stupid...it's deeply counterproductive.
Marginal BCB contributor since 2006

Image

User avatar
Bride Of Sea Of Tunes
Posts: 17194
Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 14:10
Location: The Nether World

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Bride Of Sea Of Tunes » 07 Jul 2017, 16:43

Davey the Fat Boy wrote:Neither of the Clinton's can accurately be called a neoliberal. You can point to areas of neoliberalism, but neither subscribed to the kind of untethered free-market philosophy that would earn them that moniker.

I get the political efficacy of using the word as a slur against moderate democrats. But the net result of that kind of progressive fundamentalism won't actually bring about any progressive change. It will simply continue the trend that elected Trump, ceding rural districts to the GOP while concentrating more Dems into cosmopolitan enclaves.

Using the term neoliberalism on the basis of a kind of ideological "one drop" rule is not only stupid...it's deeply counterproductive.


I just wanted to reply to Jimbo's question; I am certain that I know far less than US citizens about the Clintons. That's what I meant by my few words of caution at the end.

I think that neoliberalism does have historical roots (Hayek, von Mises, Friedman, Ayn Rand, to Alan Greenspan and the people portrayed in Charles Ferguson's The Inside Job.)

Personally I do think that Clinton's repeal of the Glass-Steagal Act was an essential step to the big depression of 2008, one that still continues, and IMHO is kept alive, to 'justify' austerity measures and oppress unions and labourers.

http://content.time.com/time/specials/p ... 22,00.html

One problem is that it's not a certain set of guidelines, presented as a programme; and taught at Universities. I had to be analyzed a posteriori by historians, economists, others. It's like Hegel's dictum: "The owl of Minerva spreads its wings only with the falling of the dusk."

After all the damage, the analysis was made; but it's not true that the word neoliberalism was invented only to accuse politicians one doesn't particularly like.

(Sorry that I don't have the time to really elaborate. Here are reading tips, brief articles:

Edward Fullbrook: Economics and Neoliberalism (very easy to google as a PDF document)

https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/p ... rowski.pdf

I also have wonderful and unsettling analyses by theologians - they note how neoliberalism has all the hallmarks of idolatry, like any occult sect has. The sect has to prove nothing, and it's always right, even in the face of disastrous consequences for its members.

Dutch rightwing politicians like to quip, after failures of their politics, that everyone can see: 'but it didn't go right because there wasn't enough freedom of the markets' (whilst accusing left wing parties that had nothing to do whatsoever with those failures).

Thus: a sect. Like Scientology, or Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh.

Needless to say that our own neoliberal party, the VVD, is the absolute leader when it comes to cases of fraud, perjury, cronyism, and other crimes.

It's also worthwhile to visit the site of economist Michael Hudson once in a while; he writes eminently sensible stuff on bad economics and debt.

(Please observe that I, as a European, absolutely don't blame the USA itself for that crisis. In our continent, every developed nation had its own players in goverment, who privatized and deregulated, long after all the damage to the public good and all the human suffering had become all too clearly visible.

I don't like to use the word 'hate'. But I'd like all of them to be taken into account for their wrongdoings, some day.
The invisible and the non-existing very much look alike.

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 22259
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 07 Jul 2017, 19:25

Bride Of Sea Of Tunes wrote:After all the damage, the analysis was made; but it's not true that the word neoliberalism was invented only to accuse politicians one doesn't particularly like.


Not the point I'm making AT ALL.

I'm saying that the modern misuse of the word has manifested as a deliberate weaponizing of the word by progressives against other Democrats.The word absolutely has a meaning. It just isn't being held to.

I'd argue that even you are using it in a sloppy manner when you apply it to the Clintons. You may have a point in blaming the crash partially on Bill Clinton (though it's debatable - as is the entire set of progressive assertions around Glass-Steagal). But again...even having supported or spearheaded policies that had a neoliberal effect does not actually make a pol a neoliberal.

You have to look at the totality of their political philosophy. There is no way to look at either Clintons and see a true neoliberal there.
Last edited by Davey the Fat Boy on 07 Jul 2017, 19:59, edited 1 time in total.
Marginal BCB contributor since 2006

Image

User avatar
Bride Of Sea Of Tunes
Posts: 17194
Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 14:10
Location: The Nether World

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Bride Of Sea Of Tunes » 07 Jul 2017, 19:33

Davey the Fat Boy wrote:
Bride Of Sea Of Tunes wrote:After all the damage, the analysis was made; but it's not true that the word neoliberalism was invented only to accuse politicians one doesn't particularly like.


Not the point I'm making AT ALL.

I'm saying that the modern misuse of the word has manifested as a deliberate weaponizing of the word by progressives against other Democrats.The word absolutely has a meaning. It just isn't being held to.

I'd argue that even you are using it in a sloppy manner when you apply it to the Clintons. You may have a point in blaming the crash partially on Bill Clinton (though it's debatable - as is the entire set of progressive assertions around Glass-Steagal). But again...even having supported or spearheaded policies that had a neoliberal effect does not actually make a pol a neoliberal.

You have to look at the totality of their political philosophy. There is no way to look at either Clinton's and see a true neoliberal there.


OK, point taken.

Thanks for your comment, Davey.

And I'll give it serious thought.

Edit: and there's the issue of good intentions having unforeseen consequences, needless to say.
The invisible and the non-existing very much look alike.

User avatar
Deebank
Resonator
Posts: 22328
Joined: 10 Oct 2003, 13:47
Location: In a beautiful place out in the country

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Deebank » 07 Jul 2017, 20:54

It's like the way the term Bairite was bandied around to shut down anyone who disagreed with Corbyn in the Labour Party... until recently anyway.

It devalues the term if it has no basis in reality and becomes a catch all insult.
Paid anghofio fod dy galon yn y chwyldro

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 13540
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Jimbo » 07 Jul 2017, 22:22

I had heard a good argument that Glass-Steigel had nothing to do with the banking crisis, that it was another Clinton/Bush neoliberal-influenced policy that enabled first time home buyers to more easily get loans. It was a part of the "ownership society" thing W had extolled. I kind of liked the idea. Give a little guy a chance. It was, I heard, the mortgage companies - and some borrowers - who abused this neo-liberal policy.
I love you.

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 9662
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Sneelock » 07 Jul 2017, 22:30

it's a perfectly good word. people know what you mean when you say it. they may not LIKE it but, that's sort of the POINT, isn't it?
who appointed Paul Volcker to the Fed? Jimmy Carter! I can't call Jimmy Carter "neoliberal"?
the HELL I can't.

you call 'em like you see 'em & I'll do the same.
"I'm eating Dipsy-Doodle corn chips!"

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 25721
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby toomanyhatz » 07 Jul 2017, 22:40

Jimbo wrote:I had heard a good argument that Glass-Steigel had nothing to do with the banking crisis, that it was another Clinton/Bush neoliberal-influenced policy that enabled first time home buyers to more easily get loans. It was a part of the "ownership society" thing W had extolled. I kind of liked the idea. Give a little guy a chance. It was, I heard, the mortgage companies - and some borrowers - who abused this neo-liberal policy.


It's not quite that simple, though of course nothing ever is.

Portions of Glass-Steagal were appealed by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act of 1999, which was enacted by Congress, not Clinton. Clinton had to rubber-stamp it, of course, which he did. But the writers of the bill were all Republicans. Clinton, in my opinion, should have foreseen (and maybe he did) the problems it would cause, and how it would encourage people to take out loans they couldn't pay off, and how it would encourage predatory lending practices. But to say he repealed it would be untrue.
The Great Defector wrote:I still stand by if other people are doing as opposition or its just an everyday day thing, doesn't mean you have to or should do. Work away like, I'm just get your problem.


1959 1963 1965 1981 1988 2017?

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 13540
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Jimbo » 07 Jul 2017, 22:56

Classic Rock Sneelock wrote:who appointed Paul Volcker to the Fed? Jimmy Carter! I can't call Jimmy Carter "neoliberal"?
the HELL I can't.


There was something anarchistic-ally good about deregulation as Carter had laid it out at the time. For me it was, hey, a hundred bucks to fly to Europe? I'm in.
I love you.

User avatar
The Great Defector
Posts: 15611
Joined: 07 Jan 2012, 18:16

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby The Great Defector » 07 Jul 2017, 22:58

Can someone tell me what Paleoliberalism is first?
Loki wrote:You Brit boys are so contentious!

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 9662
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Sneelock » 07 Jul 2017, 22:59

toomanyhatz wrote:
Jimbo wrote:I had heard a good argument that Glass-Steigel had nothing to do with the banking crisis, that it was another Clinton/Bush neoliberal-influenced policy that enabled first time home buyers to more easily get loans. It was a part of the "ownership society" thing W had extolled. I kind of liked the idea. Give a little guy a chance. It was, I heard, the mortgage companies - and some borrowers - who abused this neo-liberal policy.


It's not quite that simple, though of course nothing ever is.

Portions of Glass-Steagal were appealed by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act of 1999, which was enacted by Congress, not Clinton. Clinton had to rubber-stamp it, of course, which he did. But the writers of the bill were all Republicans. Clinton, in my opinion, should have foreseen (and maybe he did) the problems it would cause, and how it would encourage people to take out loans they couldn't pay off, and how it would encourage predatory lending practices. But to say he repealed it would be untrue.

yes. but is it untrue to say that long term deregulation before and lack of meaningful oversight after Glass-Steagall earn him the sobriquet "neoliberal"?

Davey thinks so. I don't.
"I'm eating Dipsy-Doodle corn chips!"

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 9662
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Sneelock » 07 Jul 2017, 23:11

The Great Defector wrote:Can someone tell me what Paleoliberalism is first?

they eat meat, low hanging fruit and neoliberals ;)
my understanding is that they consider themselves Old Skool. unwilling to chip away at key Liberal issues like worker's rights, women's rights etc..
"I'm eating Dipsy-Doodle corn chips!"

User avatar
The Great Defector
Posts: 15611
Joined: 07 Jan 2012, 18:16

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby The Great Defector » 07 Jul 2017, 23:13

Classic Rock Sneelock wrote:
The Great Defector wrote:Can someone tell me what Paleoliberalism is first?

they eat meat, low hanging fruit and neoliberals ;)


I had to google the opposite of neo if I'm being honest and that's what I found on a very quick look. :D
Loki wrote:You Brit boys are so contentious!

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 22259
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 08 Jul 2017, 01:04

Classic Rock Sneelock wrote:it's a perfectly good word. people know what you mean when you say it. they may not LIKE it but, that's sort of the POINT, isn't it?
who appointed Paul Volcker to the Fed? Jimmy Carter! I can't call Jimmy Carter "neoliberal"?
the HELL I can't.

you call 'em like you see 'em & I'll do the same.


People also know what you mean when you say irregardless. Some will simply judge you a moron for using it. Same here.
Marginal BCB contributor since 2006

Image

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 22259
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 08 Jul 2017, 01:09

toomanyhatz wrote:
Jimbo wrote:I had heard a good argument that Glass-Steigel had nothing to do with the banking crisis, that it was another Clinton/Bush neoliberal-influenced policy that enabled first time home buyers to more easily get loans. It was a part of the "ownership society" thing W had extolled. I kind of liked the idea. Give a little guy a chance. It was, I heard, the mortgage companies - and some borrowers - who abused this neo-liberal policy.


It's not quite that simple, though of course nothing ever is.

Portions of Glass-Steagal were appealed by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act of 1999, which was enacted by Congress, not Clinton. Clinton had to rubber-stamp it, of course, which he did. But the writers of the bill were all Republicans. Clinton, in my opinion, should have foreseen (and maybe he did) the problems it would cause, and how it would encourage people to take out loans they couldn't pay off, and how it would encourage predatory lending practices. But to say he repealed it would be untrue.


Side note: Young Bernie Sanders voted for Gramm-Leach-Bliley. Does that make him a neoliberal?
Marginal BCB contributor since 2006

Image

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 25721
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby toomanyhatz » 08 Jul 2017, 01:10

Classic Rock Sneelock wrote:
toomanyhatz wrote:
Jimbo wrote:I had heard a good argument that Glass-Steigel had nothing to do with the banking crisis, that it was another Clinton/Bush neoliberal-influenced policy that enabled first time home buyers to more easily get loans. It was a part of the "ownership society" thing W had extolled. I kind of liked the idea. Give a little guy a chance. It was, I heard, the mortgage companies - and some borrowers - who abused this neo-liberal policy.


It's not quite that simple, though of course nothing ever is.

Portions of Glass-Steagal were appealed by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act of 1999, which was enacted by Congress, not Clinton. Clinton had to rubber-stamp it, of course, which he did. But the writers of the bill were all Republicans. Clinton, in my opinion, should have foreseen (and maybe he did) the problems it would cause, and how it would encourage people to take out loans they couldn't pay off, and how it would encourage predatory lending practices. But to say he repealed it would be untrue.

yes. but is it untrue to say that long term deregulation before and lack of meaningful oversight after Glass-Steagall earn him the sobriquet "neoliberal"?

Davey thinks so. I don't.


Well, my response was to Jimbo, and that wasn't my argument. And I would decline to comment on that simply because I don't think it's that black and white.

The definition I saw was basically a liberal that believes in the free market. I find that a rather unsatisfying definition. That applies to 90% of people that identify as liberals. It certainly doesn't match the way it's used when used as an insult.
The Great Defector wrote:I still stand by if other people are doing as opposition or its just an everyday day thing, doesn't mean you have to or should do. Work away like, I'm just get your problem.


1959 1963 1965 1981 1988 2017?

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 9662
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Sneelock » 08 Jul 2017, 01:21

Many articles you read about Neoliberalism will have a picture or Reagan & Thatcher next to them. There's a good reason for that. I think it matches the way it's used as an insult remarkably well!

You say tomato, I say tomater.
"I'm eating Dipsy-Doodle corn chips!"

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 22259
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 08 Jul 2017, 01:29

Hatz...where'd you see that definition? It doesn't fit either word.

A neoliberal is a person who believes that markets should be almost completely unregulated by government. The suffix "liberal" does not refer to the left of the political spectrum, but rather the 19th century conception of liberalism that held that laissez-faire policies were always better than government encroachment on liberty.

A paleoliberal is an extreme liberal. I don't see any definitions that link it to the classical use of the word liberal (and it's not even clear that paleoliberal has a long enough history as a word to have a "correct" meaning).
Marginal BCB contributor since 2006

Image

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 22259
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: Neoliberalism

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 08 Jul 2017, 01:30

Classic Rock Sneelock wrote:Many articles you read about Neoliberalism will have a picture or Reagan & Thatcher next to them. There's a good reason for that. I think it matches the way it's used as an insult remarkably well!

You say tomato, I say tomater.


Right. Because everyone less progressive than you is like Reagan and Thatcher!
Marginal BCB contributor since 2006

Image