> Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: Doug Henwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [PEN-L:9522] Re: neo-liberalism question > People have adopted the term neoliberal because they're unwilling to or > afraid of talking about capitalism. . . . Gee, I thought I was just being hip to the international scene by using the term. On the real side, I propose that 'neoliberalism' is a special case of capitalism characterized by withering barriers to international trade, falling labor standards, tight money, deficit mania, and intense political pressure on social insurance systems. The sad state of under-developed countries might be included in the list, but I couldn't say whether that situation is much worse than it's ever been. Key causal factors include the disappearance of socialism as a competitor system, increased mobility of capital, and the aging of the population in industrial nations. Since I think neoliberal policies are subject to political reversal by a mobilized, non-revolutionary working class, N-L would not be synonymous with capitalism from my standpoint. As far as Comrade Weinstein is concerned, I wouldn't call it insane to criticize capitalism (or to call it 'wacky'), but I do think the usefulness of the excerise is limited. But then, maybe my definition stems from neoliberalism. In any case, I'm proud of myself for being concise and for not being John Roemer. MBS =================================================== Max B. Sawicky Economic Policy Institute [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1660 L Street, NW 202-775-8810 (voice) Ste. 1200 202-775-0819 (fax) Washington, DC 20036 Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views of anyone associated with the Economic Policy Institute. ===================================================
