I wish people would stop using 'neoliberalism' when speaking to Americans! This is European term known in America as 'libertarian' and it should be stated as such when speaking to Americans!
www.investopedia.com/terms/n/neoliberalism.asp Most scholars began to associate the term with Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman. This new meaning of neoliberalism, popular among Spanish-speaking scholars, diffused into the English-language study of the economy. However, the term is rarely heard in the United States. (where it is termed 'libertarian') www.alternet.org/visions/true-history-libertarianism-america-phony-ideology-promote-corporate-agenda Pull up libertarianism’s floorboards, look beneath the surface into the big business PR campaign’s early years, and there you’ll start to get a sense of its purpose, its funders, and the PR hucksters who brought the peculiar political strain of American libertarianism into being - beginning with the libertarian movement’s founding father, Milton Friedman. Back in 1950, the House of Representatives held hearings on illegal lobbying activities and exposed both Friedman and the earliest libertarian think-tank outfit as a front for business lobbyists. Those hearings have been largely forgotten, in part because we’re too busy arguing over the finer points of “libertarian populism.” Libertarians are shills for Corporate Oligarchs... ruclips.net/video/gbL3zRgZUBo/видео.html
Thunderbird Mirowski says that Liberatians and Neoliberals are different, even in America. They parallel each other in several ways, but the way Mirowski describes it libertarians are useful to the Neoliberals, at least up to a point. How they differ is that Liberatians have an almost religious reverence for the laissez-faire market they worship while neoliberals believe in strong government controls to create the markets they want, although they too worship "the market." If I remember I'll try to source where Mirowski says these things.
Neoliberalism and Libertarianism have parallels but can also be very different. It can be quite easy to see actually. Libertarians are mind-numbingly impractical in their core beliefs most of the time - which is why we only have a token number of them in any particular sector, like politics for example. Just read about Galt's Gulch, the Libertarian Paradise... that ended up with the libertarians calling lawyers on eachother(!) when, surprise surprise, their ideology turned out to be pure fantasy that can't work in the real world with real people. Neoliberals are many things, but in no way are they impractical or ineffectual. They can be very very different ideologies. www.vice.com/en_us/article/bn53b3/atlas-mugged-922-v21n10
@@DrayseSchneider Exactly! Neoliberals are statists. Neoconservatives and Neoliberals are two varieties of neoimperialist statists. It's really obvious once you see it. Both end up "projecting power" abroad.
Rest in peace David
Sounds like we are getting into Derrida territory with this quibble over signifiers.
I wish people would stop using 'neoliberalism' when speaking to Americans! This is European term known in America as 'libertarian' and it should be stated as such when speaking to Americans!
www.investopedia.com/terms/n/neoliberalism.asp
Most scholars began to associate the term with Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman. This new meaning of neoliberalism, popular among Spanish-speaking scholars, diffused into the English-language study of the economy. However, the term is rarely heard in the United States. (where it is termed 'libertarian')
www.alternet.org/visions/true-history-libertarianism-america-phony-ideology-promote-corporate-agenda
Pull up libertarianism’s floorboards, look beneath the surface into the big business PR campaign’s early years, and there you’ll start to get a sense of its purpose, its funders, and the PR hucksters who brought the peculiar political strain of American libertarianism into being - beginning with the libertarian movement’s founding father, Milton Friedman. Back in 1950, the House of Representatives held hearings on illegal lobbying activities and exposed both Friedman and the earliest libertarian think-tank outfit as a front for business lobbyists. Those hearings have been largely forgotten, in part because we’re too busy arguing over the finer points of “libertarian populism.”
Libertarians are shills for Corporate Oligarchs... ruclips.net/video/gbL3zRgZUBo/видео.html
Thunderbird Mirowski says that Liberatians and Neoliberals are different, even in America. They parallel each other in several ways, but the way Mirowski describes it libertarians are useful to the Neoliberals, at least up to a point. How they differ is that Liberatians have an almost religious reverence for the laissez-faire market they worship while neoliberals believe in strong government controls to create the markets they want, although they too worship "the market."
If I remember I'll try to source where Mirowski says these things.
Neoliberalism and Libertarianism have parallels but can also be very different. It can be quite easy to see actually. Libertarians are mind-numbingly impractical in their core beliefs most of the time - which is why we only have a token number of them in any particular sector, like politics for example. Just read about Galt's Gulch, the Libertarian Paradise... that ended up with the libertarians calling lawyers on eachother(!) when, surprise surprise, their ideology turned out to be pure fantasy that can't work in the real world with real people. Neoliberals are many things, but in no way are they impractical or ineffectual. They can be very very different ideologies.
www.vice.com/en_us/article/bn53b3/atlas-mugged-922-v21n10
@@DrayseSchneider Exactly! Neoliberals are statists. Neoconservatives and Neoliberals are two varieties of neoimperialist statists. It's really obvious once you see it. Both end up "projecting power" abroad.