Who are the neoliberals?

[Skidmore]

I've seen this term a few times but haven't really had a lot of time to read further about it. Are they the DLC or a portion of the DLC? Who specifically are they?

[muriel_volestrangler]

1. It's more commonly use for supporters of free trade

It's about international economics - the position that trade benefits the population of the world, and so there should be as few barriers to it as possible, and that private investment is a good thing even for public utilities. The Whigs/Liberals in the 19th century in Britain were in favour of world trade, and removing tariffs (as opposed to the Tories/Conservatives who supported the British landowners, and laws that favoured them). While most European countries developed labour movements to represent the working man politically, and kept 'liberal' to mean someone very keen on capitalism, the USA (and to a certain extent the UK too) started to use it to mean just 'the opposite of conservative' - which gives it a left-wing tinge, as well as a meaning in social rather than economic terms (though most, and maybe even all, self-identified neoliberals would in fact support socially liberal policies). 'Neoliberal' implies a renewal of the original 'liberal' ideas. Some in the USA might call them 'libertarian', but it's not as anti-state as many libertarians can be.

The World Bank is the archetype of 'neoliberal'.

[bananas]

5. Yes - the term wasn't widely used in the U.S.

but apparently was widely used outside the U.S. because it's too confusing.
It means "liberal" in the sense of "global free trade", meaning NAFTA, WTO, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

[neoblues]

14. Neoliberal

"The term neoliberalism was coined by Conservative Republicans to describe a political-economic philosophy that had major implications for government policies beginning in the 1970s – and increasingly prominent since 1980 – that de-emphasizes or rejects positive government intervention in the economy (that complements private initiative), focusing instead on achieving progress and even social justice by encouraging free-market methods and fewer restrictions on business operations ..."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberal

[newyawker99]

31. Hi neoblues!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[bananas]

12. And that's a good example of who specifically is a neoliberal:

Wolfowitz, the World Bank president, is the archetype of neoliberal.

[1932]

18. The IMF is archetypal neoliberal. The World Bank actually has a mission to

reduce poverty and its policies ultimately depend on who is running the bank. Afterall, Joe Stiglitz is anti-neoliberal, and he was the World Bank's chief economist in the late 90's.

No?

IIRC, Stiglitz, in his book Globalization and its Discontents, distinguishes between the World Bank's attitude towards development economics and the neoliberal attitude of the IMF (and the US Treasury Department).

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. But Stiglitz was forced out after he criticised the Bank too much

Both the World Bank and IMF are his targets, eg http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/bwi-wto/wbank/2001/1011stiglitz.htm

[1932]

27. I think it's fair to say the IMF (& Treasury Dep't) are archetypal neo-lib

public/quasi-public institutions, and that the World Bank is an institution whose mission is to alleviate poverty but is often manipulated in a way to support the IMF's neoliberal policies.

IIRC, in Globalization and its Discontents, Stiglitz says that the IMF parachutes teams into a country, they stay a week, leave, and write up repotrs that always advocate the same neoliberal program (see my post below about the 10-point plan). He says that the World Bank has permanent offices in all the developing countries, they work closely with people on the ground, in addition to being people on the ground, and they don't always advocate Washington Consensus programs. The two organizations are HQ'd accross the street from each other in DC, and the president is appointed by politicians (Europe appoints IMF pres, US appoints World Bank Pres) and their leaders can undermine the work of the people on the ground. IIRC, the law requires, that the World Bank can't give money unless the IMF approves the outflow, or somethign like that. So, no matter what the World Bank says a country needs to do, if the IMF won't give the OK, the World Bank can't get the money.

Some of this might be a little off, but that's how I remember Stiglitz describing the differences between and overlap of the WB and IMF.

[pretzel4gore]

2. i guess they're liberals who've been mugged

ie 'conservatives'....alot of the terminology is cooked up to matt drudge (fudge) what's being said, to soft soap a square peg intended for a hole. George Oewell complained about this stuff years ago; how sophisticates use language to disconnect the reality of something from the words used. It's wrong, should be fought, but won't because it appears those most suseptable to the shenanagins of conmen are the loudmouths in the news media/academia, business and politics.....remember, monty burns nearly got elected illinois gov by promising 'tax cuts'...it mattered not that he was just selling snake oil (damn good snake oil, mind you) and everybody knew it, he still became the front runner against a legitimate opponent using a cheap trick. Face it, the human race may be too stupid to live; god and satan are still hammering that one out, it seems(?)...a person's either 'liberal' or 'conservative', the only neo's are guys with 'kill mother' tattooed on their arses

[bananas]

7. No - it came from the economics term "liberal" which means "free trade"

[AtomicKitten]

3. it's kindergarten retribution for "neocon"

The only place I've heard it is from the mouth of neocon-sympathizers, i.e., I know you are, but what am I.

[bananas]

6. I think it was used many years before neocon

neocon and neoliberal mean almost the same thing.

[arcos]

8. Neoliberal is MUCH older than neoconservative...

And the word is used much more by left wingers (socialists, social democrats, left libertarians) than by right wingers.

Most neoconservatives are neoliberals too.

[bananas]

11. Google usenet search

Curiously, google usenet search has the earliest use of each in 1985 (there is one use of neo-liberal in Jan 1980, but I think that message date is wrong because it is a reply to a message from 2004).

http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q=&num=10&scoring=d&hl=en&as_epq=neo+liberal&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_ugroup=&as_usubject=&as_uauthors=&lr=&as_qdr=&as_drrb=b&as_mind=1&as_minm=1&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=31&as_maxm=12&as_maxy=1985&safe=off

http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q=&num=10&scoring=d&hl=en&as_epq=neo+conservative&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_ugroup=&as_usubject=&as_uauthors=&lr=&as_qdr=&as_drrb=b&as_mind=1&as_minm=1&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=31&as_maxm=12&as_maxy=1985&safe=off

[1932]

21. Usenet started in 1985?

You're going to have to use a search technology that predates the internet.

Perhaps the OED?

[muriel_volestrangler]

25. "Usenet was a system started in 1980 ..."

http://infohost.nmt.edu/tcc/help/news/what_usenet.html

[1932]

29. What does OED say about the etymology?

[MindMatter]

9. Maybe it is, but

There is a certain merit to the term showing a symmetry with the neocons.

Traditional conservatives and traditional liberals have much more in common than they have with any of the neo-whatevers. Traditional conservatives (be they social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, or both) share with liberals a primary concern for the welfare of the country and our people. We have genuine disagreements about what is best for the country, but I don't doubt the motives of traditional conservatives.

The neocons are just basically crooks. They are the self-absorbed power mongers intent on grabbing every bit of wealth they can -- from average Americans and when that is not enough, by waging war on the rest of the world. These are the worst America has to offer.

Then what is a Neolib? I'd say they are the DINOs who bend in the wind and don't fight for any principles in particular. Their only purpose seems to be self-preservation and a hope of dining on some of the leftovers the neocons can't swallow.

[arcos]

10. No.

Neoliberalism = Basically traditional liberalism on economic issues

And not the US flavor of "liberalism", but real economic liberalism: free market policies, less government, deregulation, privatization, etc.

[1932]

19. No it's not. It's a term used by progressives and it has been around for

a while now.

[murielm99]

4. Look at this explanation:

http://politicalcompass.org/

[rman]

13. neoliberals are liberals who support RW trade policies

you know, NAFTA, CAFTA etc - so called "free trade agreements" that invariably are to the detriment of local populations to enable corporations to make even more profit then they already do.

To give an idea of what "free trade agreements" are about;

NAFTA's chapter 11

"...gives corporations rights to sue governments in special tribunals, for unlimited compensation for profits lost due to normal governments activities."

"...there have been cases, like "Metalclad".
An American company called "Metalclad" went down to Mexico to build a toxic waste dump on an aquafer; the local supply of water. The government said "no, this goes against our environmental laws".
The people are getting poisoned from the water - what corporation has a right to poison our water? The government passed a law that said "no, you can't operate this thing".
They said "that's to bad, we have rights as a corporation that outweigh your human rights". They sued them for 17.5 million dollars saying it was a barrier to fee trade.
This US corporation takes the Mexican government to a NAFTA court, sues under this chapter eleven, and the ruling is - the Mexican government has to pay millions of dollars in "penalties", for "lost profits" of this corporation."

from the documentary "Trading Freedom" (Indymedia)
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/01/284511.html

also documented at

Berkeley University
http://are.berkeley.edu/courses/EEP131/classpresentations/Metalclad.pdf (PDF)
(turns out the amount in penalties to be payed by the Mexican government was reduced, but "...the judge agreed with the NAFTA panel on the merits that the actions of the Governor constituted expropriation".

New York Law Journal
http://www.clm.com/pubs/pub-990359_1.html

Stop FTAA
http://www.stopftaa.org/article.php?id=37

"NAFTA Chapter 11 Investor-to-State Cases: Bankrupting Democracy"
http://are.berkeley.edu/courses/EEP131/Nafta_Chapter11.pdf (PDF)

[1932]

17. Not exaclty. "Liberal" in 'neoliberal' describes attitude towards trade

and not towards politics.

Neoliberals are people who advocate liberal trade policies. Most republicans today are neoliberals and many democrats (although fewer all the time -- compare the '90s NAFTA and recent CAFTA votes).

[rman]

22. Politics governs trade policies.

So any attitude towards trade implies a (compatible) political attitude. Any regulation of trade - or lack thereof - is very much a political issue.


I think i do get your point though. To put it in other words: the official meaning of the term "liberal" is not equivalent to political left, progressive or democrat - nor right-wing or conservative for that matter. Indeed it strictly refers to a certain attitude towards trade.
That is how it can be that the popular meaning of the term "liberal" in the US is the opposite of what it is in Europe; in Europe "liberal" is popularly used as equivalent to conservative and right-wing (being in favor of de-regulation and self-regulation of commerce).

But since most people are not aware of the official (political science) definition of "liberal", it is to be expected that the term "neo-liberal" is commonly associated with left/progressive/democrat - specifically implying that it is a "new" kind of left/progressive/democrat view. Also in practice you don't hear many republicans identifying themselves as "neo-liberal".

So i used the term "liberal" in the popular meaning of the word, as it is typically used here on DU.

[1932]

23. "liberal" in neoliberal modifies "one's attitude toward trade regulation"

It's like sex and politics. If you have liberal attitudes toward sex, you're not necessarily a political liberal.

Muriel has a good post on this above, but I think you got it.

I think the important thing is that people realize that most Republicans are neolliberals, and that neoliberals are not an extreme wing of the Democratic party. I also think it's important that people don't refrain from disucssing neoliberals because they think it's some kind of insult against democrats.

[rman]

26. But if you have liberal attitudes toward sex,

does it not stand to reason that you then also have a liberal political view in so far that it relates to sex - for instance you'd be opposed to passing legislation that regulates sex?

Same thing with liberal attitudes towards trade; you'd be opposed to passing legislation that regulates trade, and you'd support passing legislation that deregulates trade. (though reality is that politicians with a (neo)liberal view towards trade do create many regulations and "agreements", it's just that those benefit the owners of corporations at the exclusion of everyone else).

I don't mean to imply that neoliberals are an extreme wing of the Democratic party. But fact is that many Dem politicians are neoliberals, supporting the same exploitative '(de)-regulation'/'free market principals' as many Repubs/(neo)conservatives do. There are some Dems who apparently know what so-called free trade, free market, deregulation, privatization etc is really about, and who because of that do oppose such regulations. I'd say those are not neo-liberals.

I can only wonder how many politicians there are who also know what it's really about - but who do support it because it benefits them and their kind greatly, and because they know they can get away with it as long as the deception of the people who are being exploited as a result of those regulations (which is all the rest of "us"), holds up.
I think it's quite appropriate to call those politicians extremist. But then again i'd also argue it would be appropriate to not call them politicians in the first place.

[1932]

28. Ask the lobbyists who frequented Abramoff's (alleged) brothel.

[Totally Committed]

15. The "Neo-Liberals" are the "Neo-Cons" of the Democratic Party...

They are far to the Right on everything, especially Defense (and everlasting war), and Corporate dominance over all. Just like the "Neo-Cons", they are out to take over the Party to which they are affiliated (in our case, gawdhelpus, it's the Democratic Party), and if they succeed, will render our Party unrecognizeable, as the Neo-Cons did to the Republican Party.

TC

[1932]

20. No they're not. See the other posts in this thread.

[1932]

16. Market fundamentalist free-traders; here is its 10-point program:

The DLC is strongly free-trade and supports market fundamentalism, so there's overlap there.

Neoliberalism isn't a club with membership lists and dues. It describes a political-economic philosophy. There's isn't a "neoliberalism standing committee" within the DLC.

John Williamson, an IMF adviser in the 1970s codified the 10-point neoliberal program in 1989 (with my comments parenthetically):

1) fiscal discipline/no budget deficits (which is anti-Keynesian)
2) reduction in public expenditures by the government for everything, including the military and public services (this is to keep the government from being a market maker interfering with the free market, but, conveniently it keeps armies small so that the US military can't be repelled, and it keeps people miserable so that they accept low wages; notably, most countries adopting these policies end up buying a lot of military hardware from the US)
3) tax reform -- to create a broad base of revenue (ie, they need the working class to pay taxes disproportionately, and they want capital gains and dividend income taxed lightly, if at all)
4) financial liberalization with interests rate set by the market, not by the government
5) competitive exchange rates to encourage exports (or, to guarantee cheap prices for the things the US wants to buy, since exchange rates turn out to be easily manipulated)
6) trade liberalization/elimination of export tariffs and licenses
7) welcoming foreign direct investment (which is the instrument of exploitation and control -- read Confessions of an Economic Hit Man)
8) Privatization of state industries
9) deregulation of the economy
10) protection of property rights (these last three speak for themselves).

(I just read this in Richard Gott's Hugo Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution, p. 81-2.)

[ProudDad]

30. Another word for Neo-Liberal

is capitalist pig...

on edit:

In the late 1800's the term was "Robber Baron", a phrase that's coming back into common usage regarding this latest crowd of neo-liberal/neo-cons.