Quotes About Neoliberalism

Chomsky also reveals how neoliberalism is hardly a new thing, but merely the current version of the battle for the wealthy few to circumscribe the political rights and civic powers of the many. Chomsky

Segun la visión ortodoxa neoliberal, el socialismo se derrumbó y murió bajo sus propias contradicciones. Pero... no podriamos imaginar una posibilidad alternativa, la de que el socialismo no se derrumbó sino que fue derribado al suelo a porrazos, y que no murió sino que lo asesinaron?

In Chile, everything from "kindergarten to cemeteries and community swimming pools were put out for bid." Between 1985 and 1992, over two thousand government industries were sold off throughout Latin America. Much of this property passed into the hands of either multinational corporations or Latin America's "superbillionaires," a new class that had taken advantage of the dismantling of the state to grow spectacularly rich.

La crisis de 1982 marca el inicio de lo que será la gran transformación política de fines del siglo XX. Esa transformación tiene el rostro de la democracia en el ámbito político y del neoliberalismo en el económico.

A todo eso se le llama entonces "cambio estructural". Le llamarían neoliberalismo después.

As for Africa, its per capita income grew relatively slowly even in the 1960s and t he 1970s (1-2% a year). But since the 1980s, the region has seen a fall in living standards. This record is a damning indictment of the neoliberal orthodoxy, because most of the African economies have been practically run by the IMF and the World Bank over the past quarter of a century.

Now, if it was only Korea that became rich through such 'heretical' policies, the free-market gurus might be able to dismiss it as merely the exception that proves the rule. However, Korea is no exception. As I shall show later, practically all of today's developed countries, including Britain and the US, the supposed homes of the free market and free trade, have become rich on the basis of policy recipes that go against the orthodoxy of neo-liberal economics.

Unlike what neo-liberals say, market and democracy clash at a fundamental level. Democracy runs on the principle of 'one man (one person), one vote'. The market runs on the principle 'one dollar, one vote'.

The authoritarians of today are also terror managers, and if anything they are rather more creative. Consider the current Russian regime, so admired by the president. Vladimir Putin not only came to power in an incident that strikingly resembled the Reichstag fire, he then used a series of terror attacks—real, questionable, and fake—to remove obstacles to total power in Russia and to assault democratic neighbors.

More enraged men have become less patient with neoliberal trade agreements; more belligerent in their critiques of feminism, Muslims, blacks, Hispanics, academics, homosexuals, and the media; and more prepared to nudge the neoliberal side of the old machine consolidated in the early 1980s toward aspirational fascism.

harsh neo-liberal "adjustment" (the so-called "ajuste duro") of the 1980s.

I am interested in recent scholarly work examining the emergence of women's studies and ethnic studies departments and the development of the neoliberal university.

Neoliberalism's guiding principle is not free markets, nor fiscal discipline, nor sound money, nor privatization and offshoring – not even globalization. All these things were byproducts or weapons of its main endeavour: to remove organized labour from the equation.

JP Morgan spelled it out: for neoliberalism to survive, democracy must fade.

So I want to propose an alternative: first, we save globalization by ditching neoliberalism; then we save the planet – and rescue ourselves from turmoil and inequality – by moving beyond capitalism itself.

There are many branches and brands of neoliberalism, but behind them stands one dominant theme: that free markets in which individuals maximize their material interests provide the best means for satisfying human aspirations, and that markets are in particular to be preferred over states and politics, which are at best inefficient and at worst threats to freedom.

Historically, Hong argues, neoliberalism emerged as a response to the liberation movements of the post–World War II era: "A new neoliberal order arose based on selective protection and proliferation of minoritized life as the very mechanism for the brutal exacerbation of minoritized death."149 In other words, protection of some leads to (as opposed to prevents) the devaluation of others in a cruel but seemingly neutral zero-sum game.

I got involved in cultural studies because I didn't think life was purely economically determined. I took all this up as an argument with economic determinism. I lived my life as an argument with Marxism, and with neoliberalism. Their point is that, in the last instance, economy will determine it. But when is the last instance?

Neoliberalization has meant ,in short,the financialization of everything.There was unquestionably a power shift away from production to the world of finance.

Neoliberal theorists are, however, profoundly suspicious of democracy. Governance by majority rule is seen as a potential threat to individual rights and constitutional liberties. Democracy is viewed as a luxury, only possible under conditions of relative affluence coupled with a strong middle-class presence to guarantee political stability. Neoliberals therefore tend to favour governance by experts and elites.

The assumption that individual freedoms are guaranteed by freedom of the market and of trade is a cardinal feature of neoliberal thinking, and it has long dominated the US stance towards the rest of the world.

Neoliberalism is in the first instance a theory of political economic practices that proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterized by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade.

In a time in which Communist regimes have been rightfully discredited and yet alternatives to neoliberal capitalist societies are unwisely dismissed, I defend the fundamental claim of Marxist theory: there must be countervailing forces that defend people's needs against the brutality of profit driven capitalism.

The very design of neoliberal principles is a direct attack on democracy.