Guardian UK: The march of the neoliberals

[marmar]

The march of the neoliberals
The coalition's neoliberal agenda is the most radical social revolution in decades – with the dismantling of the tyrannical state at its heart. Cultural theorist Stuart Hall looks at the rapid advance of the ideology and asks: can it be reversed?

Stuart Hall
guardian.co.uk, Monday 12 September 2011


We are living through an extraordinary political situation: the end of the debt-fuelled boom, the banking crisis of 2007-10, the defeat of New Labour and the rise to power of a Conservative-Liberal Democratic coalition. What sort of crisis is this? Is it a serious wobble in the trickle-down, win-win, end-of-boom-and-bust economic model that has dominated global capitalism? Does it presage business as usual, the deepening of present trends, or the mobilisation of social forces for a radical change of direction? Is this the start of a new conjuncture?

My argument is that the present situation is another unresolved rupture of that conjuncture which we can define as "the long march of the Neoliberal Revolution". Each crisis since the 1970s has looked different, arising from specific historical circumstances. However, they also seem to share some consistent underlying features, to be connected in their general thrust and direction of travel. Paradoxically, such opposed political regimes as Thatcherism and New Labour have contributed in different ways to expanding this project. Now the coalition is taking up the same cause.

Neoliberalism is grounded in the "free, possessive individual", with the state cast as tyrannical and oppressive. The welfare state, in particular, is the arch enemy of freedom. The state must never govern society, dictate to free individuals how to dispose of their private property, regulate a free-market economy or interfere with the God-given right to make profits and amass personal wealth. State-led "social engineering" must never prevail over corporate and private interests. It must not intervene in the "natural" mechanisms of the free market, or take as its objective the amelioration of free-market capitalism's propensity to create inequality.

According to the neoliberal narrative, the welfare state mistakenly saw its task as intervening in the economy, redistributing wealth, universalising life-chances, attacking unemployment, protecting the socially vulnerable, ameliorating the condition of oppressed or maginalised groups and addressing social injustice. Its do-gooding, utopian sentimentality enervated the nation's moral fibre, and eroded personal responsibility and the overriding duty of the poor to work. State intervention must never compromise the right of private capital to grow the business, improve share value, pay dividends and reward its agents with enormous salaries, benefits and bonuses. .............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/sep/12/march-of-the-neoliberals

[xchrom]

1. and formerly progressive and even socialist parties have latched onto

neo-liberalism as their guiding doctrine.

it's what bill clinton turned the democratic party into -- imo.

[yurbud]

3. its not so much that progressives and socialists latched onto it--it latched on to them

[roguevalley]

2. neoliberal? No such thing. They are just conservatives in disguise.

They have identical agendas. Liberals are do or die. These poseurs? Not so much.

[Blue_Tires]

4. kick

[Fokker Trip]

5. Its universal now in the English speaking world.

All of the English speaking countries of the world are now moving in lock-step to the beat of the exact same drummer. Neo-Liberalism/Neo-Conservativism.

It was f***ing Hayek and the insane Austrian school of economics. Austria has a large population of Neo-Nazis and Mr. Hilter was also from Austria. There is something odd about the kind of people that Austria produces. Hayek had huge influence on Reagan and Thatcher (and Rand I believe?) and gave the oligarchy a guiltless way of feeling good about enriching themselves at the expense of everyone else.

I believe that language barriers slow down the spread of the contagion to non-English speaking countries.

This parallel action by so many politicians speaks to the potential for a much higher control mechanism.

Not to be tin-foil hatty, but the Bilderberg meetings do happen and leaders that are summoned to these meetings very often or always go on to become leaders of their respective countries(Blair and Clinton are good examples).

Several years ago John Howard, PM of Australia and Stephen Harper(I can barley type his name I detest the filthy man so much) PM of Canada gave the EXACT SAME SPEECH.

People higher up are pulling the strings and orchestrating the re-alignment of the English speaking nations (at least).

Global Oligarchy anyone?