tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post4513077840440560472..comments2024-03-18T19:21:49.666+00:00Comments on All That Is Solid ...: Defining NeoliberalismPhilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-42494330105365214612008-02-23T18:16:00.000+00:002008-02-23T18:16:00.000+00:00Just a thank you for making the distinction betwee...Just a thank you for making the distinction between Adams (neo-classical) and neoliberal capitalism. I'm constantly arguing with my econ majors who think that their version of "free market" fundamentalism is not what Adams described in Wealth of Nations. In fact, Adams even had a list of social goods that should not be left up to market forces.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-51341580512928429302008-02-14T20:44:00.000+00:002008-02-14T20:44:00.000+00:00Anonymous - interesting list you have there. Seems...Anonymous - interesting list you have there. Seems to me Chile ranks very well on measurements indicating the social penetration of neoliberalism, but not so hot on other measures - even compared with other Latin American countries. For example the International Living 2007 Quality of Life Index (measuring material wellbeing, gender equality, health, political stability, job security, community and family life) has Chile 9th among Latin American nations. The Environmental Sustainability Index also places it 9th, 16th on the WEF's Global Gender Gap. Chile seems like a great place to be if you're wealthy. Not so hot if you're working class. (Also bear in mind Latin America as a whole is a continent that has been ravaged by neoliberalism for even longer than the West - these wikipedia comparisons are between nations where the free market has and continues to (except in a couple of cases) wreak havoc).<BR/><BR/>Ad, you must have been living in a cave. While the British state has been building up the police this last 30 years it's been attacking social spending, privatising and subcontracting public services, introducing wasteful and needless markets in education and health, and last but not least the con of PFI and PPP schemes. The violence of the state encompasses more than a copper's coshPhilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-48235485059023655752008-02-14T02:20:00.000+00:002008-02-14T02:20:00.000+00:00Ad,Were those miners legally permitted to picket b...Ad,<BR/><BR/>Were those miners legally permitted to picket but prevented from doing so by the police going to "forc[e] someone else to obey" them?<BR/><BR/>So, we've established that was not true - and yes, the police performed the same function in the 19th century. The difference being that there was not at that time a national political police force - MI5.Charlie Markshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12770820928636046622noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-41398842224867885902008-02-13T19:46:00.000+00:002008-02-13T19:46:00.000+00:00Leftwing, the police merely made it harder for the...Leftwing, the police merely made it harder for the strikers to blockade other peoples workplaces, and attempted to protect those miners who did want to work. You are not a victim of oppression just because you are prevented from forcing someone else to obey you, however convinced you are of the virtue of your cause.<BR/><BR/>Even if this were not true, the police performed exactly the same function in 19th century strikes.<BR/><BR/>So, as I asked: “What leads you to think that they have done this more than in the 19th century heyday of classical liberalism?”Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-69149607782183566542008-02-13T16:42:00.000+00:002008-02-13T16:42:00.000+00:00http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chile#International_r...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chile#International_rankings<BR/><BR/>Phil BC - Free markets in Chile seem to have given it a great advantage over the other countries of Latin America in several measures.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-49363123063866016812008-02-13T11:57:00.000+00:002008-02-13T11:57:00.000+00:00"In what way have our "police and military apparat..."In what way have our "police and military apparatus" done this since 1979?"<BR/><BR/>One example of this was the rapid tooling up of Britains police prior to the 1984-5 miners strike which they were used extesnively to breakLeftwing Criminologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369810078697007763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-77043167989459593302008-02-12T20:16:00.000+00:002008-02-12T20:16:00.000+00:00The neoliberals' "small state" is a police and mil...<I>The neoliberals' "small state" is a police and military apparatus armed to the teeth and prepared to spill blood to carry out the programme, a programme not confined to economics: it attacks and remoulds the social fabric, bending it to the needs of capital and the logic of the market.<BR/></I><BR/><BR/>In what way have our "police and military apparatus" done this since 1979? What leads you to think that they have done this more than in the 19th century heyday of classical liberalism?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-76770959394605994242008-02-12T15:55:00.000+00:002008-02-12T15:55:00.000+00:00cjcjc, it went like this..A small elite moved jobs...cjcjc, it went like this..<BR/><BR/>A small elite moved jobs from the developed world to the developing world. The people of the developing world got slightly better jobs but still far less well paid the people of the developed world were largely shown the door.<BR/><BR/>The younger generation in the developing world combined with a lucky few of the older sacked generation got service sector jobs some of which were well paid, a good deal more were poorly paid and all were ultimately sustained by an ever expanding debt bubble.<BR/><BR/>The small elite, grew fat on the exploitation of everyone else, was not held accountable and lived happily ever after.<BR/><BR/>Luis<BR/><BR/>Neoliberalism is not a precisely defined term, I would agree that the market pricing signals do act as transmitters of complex information and I'm a socialist. What I consider to be the problem with neoliberalism is the belief that we should simply follow these signals. I don't think we should simply follow the market.Andreas Patersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06431120459465519240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-38728016180078383352008-02-12T15:13:00.000+00:002008-02-12T15:13:00.000+00:00"For neoliberalism [the market] is an information ..."For neoliberalism [the market] is an information processor and "knows" more about the economy than anyone else."<BR/><BR/>I see. So, for example, Chris Dillow, is a neoliberal is he? Jesus wept.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-62690829998107024022008-02-12T15:02:00.000+00:002008-02-12T15:02:00.000+00:00Have I got this right?Thanks to neo-liberalism wor...Have I got this right?<BR/>Thanks to neo-liberalism workers overseas have got manufacturing jobs they didn't have before, and we now have less dangerous and higher-paid service sector jobs.<BR/>Excellent news.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-8195913073676602962008-02-12T14:11:00.000+00:002008-02-12T14:11:00.000+00:00Stephen, I don't think I've implied that at all. A...Stephen, I don't think I've implied that at all. As far as I know my Smith the market is a means of allocation, nothing more. On the contrary it is the *neo-liberals*, not Smith, who believe markets are fundamentally good. This is why I took the time to show how neoliberal thought *breaks* with Smith and his epigoni in the neo-classical school of economics.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-88120528394912803142008-02-12T13:43:00.000+00:002008-02-12T13:43:00.000+00:00You misrepresent Smith by implying he believed all...You misrepresent Smith by implying he believed all free market outcomes to be ‘good’. In fact he takes no view because like Marx (who was happy to incorporate elements of Smith’s work into his own), he aspired to a science of economics. For Smith, the market is no more than an efficient means for the distribution of resources. He doesn’t claim that it is fair; nor does he claim that it is unfair.<BR/><BR/>This is a common error made by those on left (who consequently blind themselves to Smith’s insights) and those on the right (who falsely claim he proves inequality to be inevitable).<BR/><BR/>But he doesn’t say social outcomes are unimportant and is highly critical of monopoly, which he argued always leads to negligence and corruption. Taking the East India Company as his example, he argued for restricting corporate power and breaking up capital.<BR/><BR/>Conclusions the Neoliberals like to forget, that often surprise those on the left which is rather sad.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-36527115436901970282008-02-11T21:54:00.000+00:002008-02-11T21:54:00.000+00:00One thing I forgot to mention about Mirowski's pap...One thing I forgot to mention about Mirowski's paper was how neoliberalism, when it is a failure, is nonetheless billed as a success. By any measure the experiments mentioned by Neil in Latin America, and Chile particularly under Pinochet, failed to deliver better services or boost the accumulation of capital. But what it did was increase the wealth and power of the rich. This pattern has been repeated time and time again.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-55456959744438894412008-02-11T21:03:00.000+00:002008-02-11T21:03:00.000+00:00Very interesting this, I often use neo-liberalism ...Very interesting this, I often use neo-liberalism and capitalism as interchangable terms, I guess as I'm 30 this is probably right as it has been the dominant capitalist theory for my entire life. As it has been pointed out the Labour movement is the only force that stands in the way of neo-liberalism, but as we are in a capitalist system Labour is an integral part of the system that cannot be done away with. In the past 30 years our leaders have sought to nullify the revolutionary tendancies and solidarity of the working class with the myth of the selfish individual, or maybe more precisely the myth of the selfish consumer. However I think there is a intangible feeling in the UK that there must be more to life than this and people are looking for new ideolgies (new to them), and more and more people are coming to socialist conclusions. As the gap between rich and poor widens more people will come to these conclusions, this can be seen most clearly in Latin America where the Chicago school first tested the warp therories of neo liberalism and where these ideas were pushed farthest.<BR/><BR/>What the neo-liberals don't realise that they cannot eliminate Labour and the tensions between classes can only be resolved permenantly by revolution, the idea that we could reach the "end of history" before these tensions were resolved is a measure of their stupidity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-87023352362196416992008-02-11T13:09:00.000+00:002008-02-11T13:09:00.000+00:00The quasi comical thing is that the greater the in...The quasi comical thing is that the greater the influence of the neoliberals and the smaller the state they demand, the bigger it actually gets. The reason is that the social chaos ensuing from market anarchy cannot really be reconciled with a smoothly functioning society unless it becomes subject to a powerful repressive apparatus. This does not just mean the powerful military/police that is necessary to keep the people's movement down; what we see is also a proliferation of financial etc institutions that mediate disputes between "market forces" so to speak. I think the case of Russia is particularly interesting in this respect, as what we have there is a huge state integrated to and towering over an essentially gangster economy. Every now and then, it will give this or that section of capital a good slapping around in order to keep it in line with the general interests of the class, see *the liquidation of oligarchs as a class*Korakioushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07593180610210015493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-87479173125002405952008-02-11T03:46:00.000+00:002008-02-11T03:46:00.000+00:00Smith was something of a welfarist, though he supp...Smith was something of a welfarist, though he supported the enclosure of the commons he was honest enough to admit the class nature of the state...<BR/><BR/>As for Hayek, his criticisms of socialism's supposed economic calculation problem were beneficial in a strange way - encouraging Marxists to stress that mass participation in planning is essential for the functioning of a socialist economy.<BR/><BR/>And truly, the labour movement is all that stands in the way of neoliberalism - and thus the enmity towards corporatist approaches and the tendency to prevent unionisation and bust it if it exists...Charlie Markshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12770820928636046622noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-79373360809892689832008-02-11T03:35:00.000+00:002008-02-11T03:35:00.000+00:00One interesting thing about Smith is the way that ...One interesting thing about Smith is the way that - to some degree - he has been quite miscontrued by his later followers. Personally, I find Hayek to be pretty interesting, particulary in his later stuff (when he engages in a lot of legal philosophy.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08570084990430000647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-68811988736077768272008-02-11T03:32:00.000+00:002008-02-11T03:32:00.000+00:00This comment has been removed by the author.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08570084990430000647noreply@blogger.com