Thanks, J! I always welcome respectful pushback. Good video link!
I tend to agree that extreme poverty based on a mathematical cutoff line is quite arbitrary. The video clearly attacks capitalism, which is always a subject of fair debate. It offers a different view on the data. Many angles make for better perspective.
In a nuanced way, I still think neoliberalism is very much a part of the major reduction in poverty that the video says occurred mostly in China. I don’t believe the CCP would have gotten as far without global trade and investment.
India is another country that probably deserves a full exploration on its own.
However, neoliberalism also has real side effects! So, stay tuned for part 2!
Though China certainly engages in global trade, the government maintains tight control of it. Far from what might be considered "free market capitalism."
But I get your point.
Thanks for the conversation. I look forward to reading more.
Yeah, and even by their own cherished oversimplified metrics such as headline real gdp growth, they’ve failed, rates have been lower since they got up and running ~50 years ago and declined by alot circa 2000 and then after 2008, the two time points of further consolidation of the world under their program. I’m actually pretty sure theres much less trade than there otherwise would be because they’ve hindered development so badly in so many countries, points about China are fair, but thats mostly a domestic policy story and wile access to tech theft in the beginning and raw commodities imports throughout, both of which can in various ways be argues to have been greatly enhanced by their position in the Global System, were very important, their just one country (but yes a huge one, but still) and while they may have developed less they still would have developed a lot and lots of other countries who didnt could have as well
I really liked the summarized history of the neoliberal movement. Too often I hear complaints about neoliberalism without any substance about what it was or how it happened, and this post helped clarify that for me. I liked this overview.
Looking forward to Part 2 to discuss the side effects and hopefully Part 3 where we can talk solutions for the future that might balance growth with widespread opportunity.
even so called Neoliberalism’s (it wasnt new, its a very, very old program, we went back to the future) own cherished institutions’ stated number mark that if failed even in accordance with its own dumbly oversimplified metrics:
Great article! I appreciate the even handling of the topic. This feels like the radical middle.
I wonder if the topic of the environment is missing from the discussion? Pressure on resource extraction, unsustainable pressure on commons like fishing in an era of fewer / softer regulations.
Thanks, Mark. Sometimes the radical middle can be such a refreshing place in a world of attention-grabbing extremism. You are spot on that I neglected to put environmental consequences and policies into the discussion. It’s a worthy area for assessment. I really wanted to focus more on the human organizational impacts of the neoliberal ideology. Sustainability is a frequent theme in the Common Sense Papers.
Make no mistake, neoliberalism has not gone away, it has evolved into corporate/state fascism. As long as the world bank goes around bankrupting countries and driving them to autocracy neoliberalism is well and strong.
I appreciate the comment. I plan to share thoughts on the evolution starting with part 3 of this ideological roadmap. The evolution doesn’t look promising. Stay tuned!
Neoliberalism also created and used terrorism like 9/11 to create public acceptance of policies the public wouldn’t normally accept absent the threat of terrorism. See “The Power of Nightmares” doc (2005). https://odysee.com/@thisweekinfascism:3/The-Power-of-Nightmares:e
even so called Neoliberalism’s (it wasnt new, its a very, very old program, we went back to the future) own cherished institutions’ stated number mark that if failed even in accordance with its own dumbly oversimplified metrics:
I appreciate the sentiments. Irony clearly noted! The tales of winners and losers from this era sure add up, with too many of the latter are in our own American backyard.
Great post. I am going to push back on one (very common) misconception.
Neoliberalism has not pulled people out of poverty as it is claimed.
These claims are based on erroneous numbers given by the World Bank.
Here's a 6 min explainer video for anyone interested.
https://youtu.be/Co4FES0ehyI?si=e2K1rBoH8o8kZTbH
Thanks, J! I always welcome respectful pushback. Good video link!
I tend to agree that extreme poverty based on a mathematical cutoff line is quite arbitrary. The video clearly attacks capitalism, which is always a subject of fair debate. It offers a different view on the data. Many angles make for better perspective.
In a nuanced way, I still think neoliberalism is very much a part of the major reduction in poverty that the video says occurred mostly in China. I don’t believe the CCP would have gotten as far without global trade and investment.
India is another country that probably deserves a full exploration on its own.
However, neoliberalism also has real side effects! So, stay tuned for part 2!
Can't wait!
Another point of pushback 😁
Though China certainly engages in global trade, the government maintains tight control of it. Far from what might be considered "free market capitalism."
But I get your point.
Thanks for the conversation. I look forward to reading more.
Yeah, and even by their own cherished oversimplified metrics such as headline real gdp growth, they’ve failed, rates have been lower since they got up and running ~50 years ago and declined by alot circa 2000 and then after 2008, the two time points of further consolidation of the world under their program. I’m actually pretty sure theres much less trade than there otherwise would be because they’ve hindered development so badly in so many countries, points about China are fair, but thats mostly a domestic policy story and wile access to tech theft in the beginning and raw commodities imports throughout, both of which can in various ways be argues to have been greatly enhanced by their position in the Global System, were very important, their just one country (but yes a huge one, but still) and while they may have developed less they still would have developed a lot and lots of other countries who didnt could have as well
I really liked the summarized history of the neoliberal movement. Too often I hear complaints about neoliberalism without any substance about what it was or how it happened, and this post helped clarify that for me. I liked this overview.
Looking forward to Part 2 to discuss the side effects and hopefully Part 3 where we can talk solutions for the future that might balance growth with widespread opportunity.
even so called Neoliberalism’s (it wasnt new, its a very, very old program, we went back to the future) own cherished institutions’ stated number mark that if failed even in accordance with its own dumbly oversimplified metrics:
Good chart. Dismal trend.
Great article! I appreciate the even handling of the topic. This feels like the radical middle.
I wonder if the topic of the environment is missing from the discussion? Pressure on resource extraction, unsustainable pressure on commons like fishing in an era of fewer / softer regulations.
Thanks, Mark. Sometimes the radical middle can be such a refreshing place in a world of attention-grabbing extremism. You are spot on that I neglected to put environmental consequences and policies into the discussion. It’s a worthy area for assessment. I really wanted to focus more on the human organizational impacts of the neoliberal ideology. Sustainability is a frequent theme in the Common Sense Papers.
Thanks Joe, I have just found you I look forward to reading more of your work.
Make no mistake, neoliberalism has not gone away, it has evolved into corporate/state fascism. As long as the world bank goes around bankrupting countries and driving them to autocracy neoliberalism is well and strong.
I appreciate the comment. I plan to share thoughts on the evolution starting with part 3 of this ideological roadmap. The evolution doesn’t look promising. Stay tuned!
Looking forward to part 2.
Neoliberalism also created and used terrorism like 9/11 to create public acceptance of policies the public wouldn’t normally accept absent the threat of terrorism. See “The Power of Nightmares” doc (2005). https://odysee.com/@thisweekinfascism:3/The-Power-of-Nightmares:e
"Never let a crisis go to waste..."
even so called Neoliberalism’s (it wasnt new, its a very, very old program, we went back to the future) own cherished institutions’ stated number mark that if failed even in accordance with its own dumbly oversimplified metrics:
I appreciate the sentiments. Irony clearly noted! The tales of winners and losers from this era sure add up, with too many of the latter are in our own American backyard.