Neoliberalism is supposed to promote market competition. But the biggest corporations at a given time have political power, and they will obviously use that power to minimize competition (patents, less antitrust, simply swallowing smaller competitors etc). So neoliberalism has internal contradictions.
Also while neo-liberals in theory promoted social freedom. In practice it came with a massive crackdown on those at the bottom of society by the police state and gutting of the social safety net.
@Dominique Roydor Yes, it can. The difference being, those who do what they do indifferently, and those that do it with a sense of sadness as they pull the trigger. The differences are small, but they are there, generally in terms of the people who vote for the people who come to power. No one would really vote for facism, knowing what it is and what it will do. Plenty of people will vote for neoliberalism by believing it is the "best thing, for everyone's own good".
As someone who is often accused of being a neoliberal, I'm really happy for this video because I know I don't support it. If anything, I'm glad I understand its actual definition and how to debate those who think neoliberalism is some other definition than what was given here.
There may be indeed authoritarian tendencies in neoliberalism but there is also a strain of nationalism in far left isolationist progressivism. The only way we are goi g to survive as a planet is if we become a global society. Period. So we just can’t simply reject economic globalism.
Free trade is actually economic globalism as well. Neo liberal policy has been traditionally for open borders in private at the very least. But the idea of free trade in practice is a hard one because everyone needs to consent to open borders or it doesn't work. That is why free trade works in EU where they have open borders amongst themselves or in the Schengen project. But not beyond that.
Elijah Ford It is. It’s the extreme of laissez-faire free market ideology without the tempering of social policies that keep neoliberalism’s excesses in check.
2008 left me open to the ideas espoused in ‘Zeitgeist’, fueling libertarian thoughts to a decent extreme. Learning and understanding regulations in regards to running a business on a river showed me the importance of governance.
Lemme guess: they say something like "Well you can buy a tv that goes on your wrist today, but that would've cost more than a house back then". Maybe try pointing out that a loaf of bread is many times more expensive today while wages have just doubled. Back then it was about $0.40 per loaf, today it's $3.50 or more. Even adjusting for inflation that's a huge increase. You have to compare apples to apples. Or just shake your head and say okay boomer :P
I had that same discussion with mine (fyi I'm your parents age). They are right with respect to technologically related material like televisions, cars, etc. But they are wrong when it comes to homes, medical care and college to name several. Parents bought house, 27 years later it sold for 11 times the price. College was $5,000 a year at an exclusive school, today it's $65,000. When I was young you got full medical even at minimum wage with Zero contributions from the employee.
British Columbia, Canada has had a Liberal gov't from 2000 to 2018,.It was a truly Neo-Liberal gov't, the province is an economic mess now. Left to an NDP (Labor) and Green Party co-alition to try and sort it out.
I was a bit confused about what she was saying, around 11 to 12 minutes in, about how the left has maybe struggled with the moral dimension of neoliberalism (vs the economics of neoliberalism which apparently the left has strong push back on she says). I couldn't figure out if she was saying we should get the state involved or not with regards social justice issues - I couldn't tell if she was saying we should remove the state in so far as neoliberalism is concerned, or just the state in general regardless of the socio-economic-political system we have? I don't need to be made aware of the problem, but I am not an expert and it would have been nice if she conveyed the point more clearly... It always seems to way with experts: it's like defusing a bomb and you just want to know if you should cut the red wire or the blue wire but there is always too much static in the radio communications and the cruical moment. Please stop it. Seriously
"Understanding that markets are not necessarily natural, even if they're good. They need a lot of state support..." This is the usual vague professor speak. What do you mean markets aren't natural?? That's like saying freedom isn't necessarily natural.
Which is much better what I feel this professor was hoping the new lefr should be. She said Neo liberals were less authoritarian than others when it came to individual rights. That makes no sense. Neo Liberalism is an economic ideology. And as such has foreign policy elements to it due to trade and business interests coming into the picture. And may even encompass some civil liberty concessions when it comes to an increased security state to bolster industry interests and combat the negative after effects of it's adventurous foreign policy. But the main attraction for it has been that is is silent on social issues. And they are the loudest issues on the political media scape . So it was palatable to both Republicans and Democrats who switched their social positions but kept their neo liberal theory intact while doing so.
I wouldn't say it's a contradiction. I think that with good leadership and implimentation this ideology could work... I don't agree with it, and I think it's stupid, but it's not contradictory. I'd call it 'fanciful', and 'lazy'.
But also it's important to keep in mind what "personal liberty" entails. Cause while it might sound nice in theory in practice it means those with power can take away the freedoms of others.
Left leaning neoliberalism is simply superior. Subtract "traditional values" and interventions for the purpose of free markets. It's replaced by intervention for the purpose of moral Democracy throughout the world, which the by product usually is opened markets and economic gain.
What was absolutely fascinating here I really don't know. This woman is a typical example of professor that completely misunderstands the question or simply doesn't know how to answer one. One of the worst interviews I've every watched here at DP show.
Tariffs? Internal taxes? Incentives? Subsidies? These don't affect the market? Sure some things, like healthcare and education, have inelastic demand, but everything that doesn't can be controlled by anyone with enough power/capital. It takes capital to participate in capitalism. Unfortunately about half of the people in this largely capitalist country have effectively 0 capital.
this is professor at UC Berkeley. amazing. i can confidently say social sciences are DEAD. except maybe economics. I bet she doesnt know basic calculus.
One of the worst things that's happened in the last 30 yrs is "politically correctness"!! Why does everything and everybody have to fit into a tidy little box with a TITLE on it? A name for everything and a place to put it, really?!? People need to get off this silly train and start thinking for themselves once again! JMHO
@@olaf2627/videos There are at least two types of political correctness: Here's a good example of the worse one: th-cam.com/video/OKL_I4pJs84/w-d-xo.html Politically correct need not be factually correct, it's just whatever is convenient for the politicians in charge. The second type can range anywhere from simply not being a dick, to using faux/real outrage in order to push your ideals on others.
Having a job doesn't mean you can survive. If my job doesn't allow me to have a house to live in, food to eat, and time to live my life its not a job worth having. Many people make compromises to stay alive including having a "job" that pays an unlivable wage. Ignoring for a moment that the type of unemployment rate you're citing is flawed and displays a bad picture. The number of jobs people have will never matter if the quality of those jobs and the pay of those jobs can't support americans. #Trumps5000burgerswhile5000starvetodeath
WTF This is BS ! just live life to the full less .... life is too short ! THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE ! TO BE SECURE IN THEIR PERSONS , HOUSES , PAPERS AND EFFECTS!
Secure in their persons: like when Trump locks people up for showing up at the border? Not even crossing it, just showing up seeking asylum. Secure in their houses: like the thousands of houses/businesses along the border that Trump will have to steal through eminent domain to get his wall built? Papers: like the money he is funneling from the poor to the rich? Or like the disenfranchisement going on in every republican controlled state? Effects: Trump said: I support the ban on assault weapons and a slightly longer waiting period. He said he doesn't like suppressors. He banned bump stocks, until the NRA called and yelled at him. He bragged that he increased federal firearm prosecutions 44%. He was right, that was a record high. The last time it was that high was... Bush jr. Obama increased NICS, Trump increased it more with the fix NICS act.
Neoliberalism is supposed to promote market competition. But the biggest corporations at a given time have political power, and they will obviously use that power to minimize competition (patents, less antitrust, simply swallowing smaller competitors etc). So neoliberalism has internal contradictions.
Also while neo-liberals in theory promoted social freedom. In practice it came with a massive crackdown on those at the bottom of society by the police state and gutting of the social safety net.
Thanks David for bringing fresh, informed content to the channel.
Have her on again
My one sentence definition of neoliberalism is:
"A 'kinder', 'gentler' facism"
so accurate
@Dominique Roydor Yes, it can. The difference being, those who do what they do indifferently, and those that do it with a sense of sadness as they pull the trigger. The differences are small, but they are there, generally in terms of the people who vote for the people who come to power.
No one would really vote for facism, knowing what it is and what it will do. Plenty of people will vote for neoliberalism by believing it is the "best thing, for everyone's own good".
This was quite informative and well presented. Great guest, hope you have her back again.
@Optimus Prime ~ Go back to 4chan, kid.
As someone who is often accused of being a neoliberal, I'm really happy for this video because I know I don't support it. If anything, I'm glad I understand its actual definition and how to debate those who think neoliberalism is some other definition than what was given here.
The two biggest tenants of neo-liberalism to me is market magic and victim blaming.
Omg!! I've read, and written many essays on, her book Walled States, Waning Sovereignty. You should check this book out as well!
Have her on again please, and for longer next time :)
There may be indeed authoritarian tendencies in neoliberalism but there is also a strain of nationalism in far left isolationist progressivism. The only way we are goi g to survive as a planet is if we become a global society. Period. So we just can’t simply reject economic globalism.
Free trade is actually economic globalism as well. Neo liberal policy has been traditionally for open borders in private at the very least. But the idea of free trade in practice is a hard one because everyone needs to consent to open borders or it doesn't work. That is why free trade works in EU where they have open borders amongst themselves or in the Schengen project. But not beyond that.
I agree on that. The real question is though rather leaving it in the hands of unelected billionares is a good idea.
Neoliberalism just sounds like conservatism.
It is. It’s an economic ideolohub
Personally, I think that isms are fucking stupid. I don't care about ideology at all. I'd rather spend time thinking about the actual issues.
Elijah Ford
It is. It’s the extreme of laissez-faire free market ideology without the tempering of social policies that keep neoliberalism’s excesses in check.
More, please!
I'd love to see more interviews with Prof. Wendy Brown in the future. This was super interesting.
Good content. Thanks David
Thank you for defining this term. As a liberal, I was always confused by the term "neo-liberalism."
2008 left me open to the ideas espoused in ‘Zeitgeist’, fueling libertarian thoughts to a decent extreme.
Learning and understanding regulations in regards to running a business on a river showed me the importance of governance.
My parents dont believe they had more purchasing power 30 years ago than I do now.... ffs.
Lemme guess: they say something like "Well you can buy a tv that goes on your wrist today, but that would've cost more than a house back then".
Maybe try pointing out that a loaf of bread is many times more expensive today while wages have just doubled. Back then it was about $0.40 per loaf, today it's $3.50 or more. Even adjusting for inflation that's a huge increase. You have to compare apples to apples. Or just shake your head and say okay boomer :P
I had that same discussion with mine (fyi I'm your parents age). They are right with respect to technologically related material like televisions, cars, etc. But they are wrong when it comes to homes, medical care and college to name several. Parents bought house, 27 years later it sold for 11 times the price. College was $5,000 a year at an exclusive school, today it's $65,000. When I was young you got full medical even at minimum wage with Zero contributions from the employee.
Great discussion
British Columbia, Canada has had a Liberal gov't from 2000 to 2018,.It was a truly Neo-Liberal gov't, the province is an economic mess now. Left to an NDP (Labor) and Green Party co-alition to try and sort it out.
A very learned lady and a very good explainer!
Excellent video
Bernie/Nina 2020❤💚💙Bernie/Ñina2020! Vote, Vote,Vote Bernie 2020! 🙏🙏🙏
I was a bit confused about what she was saying, around 11 to 12 minutes in, about how the left has maybe struggled with the moral dimension of neoliberalism (vs the economics of neoliberalism which apparently the left has strong push back on she says). I couldn't figure out if she was saying we should get the state involved or not with regards social justice issues - I couldn't tell if she was saying we should remove the state in so far as neoliberalism is concerned, or just the state in general regardless of the socio-economic-political system we have? I don't need to be made aware of the problem, but I am not an expert and it would have been nice if she conveyed the point more clearly... It always seems to way with experts: it's like defusing a bomb and you just want to know if you should cut the red wire or the blue wire but there is always too much static in the radio communications and the cruical moment. Please stop it. Seriously
Neoliberalism is European liberalism aka conservatism. It’s not “Democrats” it’s Thatcher/Reagan
Nope
You were thinking of Israel again m8.
"Understanding that markets are not necessarily natural, even if they're good. They need a lot of state support..." This is the usual vague professor speak. What do you mean markets aren't natural?? That's like saying freedom isn't necessarily natural.
Neoliberalism sounds a lot right-Libertarianism, except with a focus on authoritarianism.
Edit: Damn David said it a few minutes after I thought it.
7:00: So... an illiberal democracy.
Can you do a same video but explaining neo conservatives ?
"I am a left-liberitarian." - Kyle Kulinski
Which is much better what I feel this professor was hoping the new lefr should be. She said Neo liberals were less authoritarian than others when it came to individual rights. That makes no sense. Neo Liberalism is an economic ideology. And as such has foreign policy elements to it due to trade and business interests coming into the picture. And may even encompass some civil liberty concessions when it comes to an increased security state to bolster industry interests and combat the negative after effects of it's adventurous foreign policy. But the main attraction for it has been that is is silent on social issues. And they are the loudest issues on the political media scape . So it was palatable to both Republicans and Democrats who switched their social positions but kept their neo liberal theory intact while doing so.
Maggie's in the mud
Emphasis on personal liberty a long as it falls within the traditional values that make up their " moral order". Massive contradiction
I wouldn't say it's a contradiction. I think that with good leadership and implimentation this ideology could work... I don't agree with it, and I think it's stupid, but it's not contradictory.
I'd call it 'fanciful', and 'lazy'.
@@InternetMameluq its absolutely contradictory. How can you put emphasis on personal liberty while also setting boundaries for personal behavior?
But also it's important to keep in mind what "personal liberty" entails. Cause while it might sound nice in theory in practice it means those with power can take away the freedoms of others.
Left leaning neoliberalism is simply superior.
Subtract "traditional values" and interventions for the purpose of free markets. It's replaced by intervention for the purpose of moral Democracy throughout the world, which the by product usually is opened markets and economic gain.
What was absolutely fascinating here I really don't know. This woman is a typical example of professor that completely misunderstands the question or simply doesn't know how to answer one. One of the worst interviews I've every watched here at DP show.
I’m not sure you can stop or really control market forces. I really love your content.
Tariffs? Internal taxes? Incentives? Subsidies? These don't affect the market?
Sure some things, like healthcare and education, have inelastic demand, but everything that doesn't can be controlled by anyone with enough power/capital. It takes capital to participate in capitalism. Unfortunately about half of the people in this largely capitalist country have effectively 0 capital.
this is professor at UC Berkeley.
amazing. i can confidently say social sciences are DEAD. except maybe economics.
I bet she doesnt know basic calculus.
They both had Alzheimer's long before being diagnosed
One of the worst things that's happened in the last 30 yrs is "politically correctness"!! Why does everything and everybody have to fit into a tidy little box with a TITLE on it? A name for everything and a place to put it, really?!? People need to get off this silly train and start thinking for themselves once again! JMHO
The song "Little Boxes" came out in the '60s, this isn't a new thing.
th-cam.com/video/VUoXtddNPAM/w-d-xo.html
@@Jcewazhere okay so I should have said "50 yrs"...smh Whatever.
What do you think PC means?
@@olaf2627/videos There are at least two types of political correctness: Here's a good example of the worse one: th-cam.com/video/OKL_I4pJs84/w-d-xo.html Politically correct need not be factually correct, it's just whatever is convenient for the politicians in charge.
The second type can range anywhere from simply not being a dick, to using faux/real outrage in order to push your ideals on others.
want to end neoliberalism, end the flow of information throughout the world end the internet
WWG1WGA.
WTF is she talking about neoliberalism doesnt have a stance on social issus like LGBTQ & social justice
Yeah Thats what she said. That traditional neoliberalism would stay OUT of social moral issues.
What the heck is neoliberalism? Oh wait, I really don't wanna know. NEO me outta here.......
... meanwhile in real life, there's a 3.5 unemployment in America.♥️ TRUMP-MANIA 2020
Having a job doesn't mean you can survive. If my job doesn't allow me to have a house to live in, food to eat, and time to live my life its not a job worth having. Many people make compromises to stay alive including having a "job" that pays an unlivable wage. Ignoring for a moment that the type of unemployment rate you're citing is flawed and displays a bad picture. The number of jobs people have will never matter if the quality of those jobs and the pay of those jobs can't support americans. #Trumps5000burgerswhile5000starvetodeath
WTF This is BS ! just live life to the full less .... life is too short ! THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE ! TO BE SECURE IN THEIR PERSONS , HOUSES , PAPERS AND EFFECTS!
Secure in their persons: like when Trump locks people up for showing up at the border? Not even crossing it, just showing up seeking asylum.
Secure in their houses: like the thousands of houses/businesses along the border that Trump will have to steal through eminent domain to get his wall built?
Papers: like the money he is funneling from the poor to the rich? Or like the disenfranchisement going on in every republican controlled state?
Effects: Trump said: I support the ban on assault weapons and a slightly longer waiting period. He said he doesn't like suppressors. He banned bump stocks, until the NRA called and yelled at him. He bragged that he increased federal firearm prosecutions 44%. He was right, that was a record high. The last time it was that high was... Bush jr. Obama increased NICS, Trump increased it more with the fix NICS act.
th-cam.com/video/wbSOB-tFdXc/w-d-xo.html