Thanks for sharing this! I didn't know such a community had formed, and with that name. I can relate to everything you described, with few changes. Browsing the subreddit now, too. 👍
I found this interesting and so I've joined the subreddit - I'm not sure if I'd describe myself as "neoliberal", but I agree with the movement as described, although I think I'd place more emphasis on the social welfare side of things and describe myself as a Social Democrat - the National Health Service fills me with patriotic pride, and I really love the policies (and fjords) of Norway.
I'm still working out my opinions on issues like drug policy, but I'm becoming more sympathetic to the argument that just because I think something's a bad idea doesn't mean it's a good idea to ban it, so I think I'm becoming more neoliberal over time.
>Project to promote the new “neoliberal” identity as an alternative to socialist and right-wing populism
Neoliberalism doesn't distinguish itself from socialism with it being pro: LGBTQ, immigration, public-transport oriented urban development, climate action... So I guess the thing that's left is being pro-market. But this is strange since many strands of socialism are pro-market such as liberal socialism, libertarian socialism, market socialism and democratic socialism (although some online democratic socialists disagree).
What these socialists dislike though is capitalist firms and want socialists firms instead (co-ops). So if socialists are excluded from the neoliberal big tent that means they're pro capitalists, and anti socialists firms.
Socialists say that capitalist firms cause "alienation", which means a degradation in social connection and mental wellbeing. We've seen a year over year increase in loneliness and mental health issues, which workers attribute to their working conditions. But just because capitalist firms cause alienation doesn't mean that socialists firms would be better, do we have any evidence for this?
Neoliberals see one of their distinguishing factors as being evidence based, but the truth is that the socialists have a wealth of data to back up their claims, and I don't really see neoliberals engaging with them.
But maybe this comes at the cost of work-ethic. It's all well and good if the workers are happy, but if they become lazy/unproductive under socialism the economy regresses which causes other problems. Well actually workers in a co-op put in *more* effort:
Now I'm not a committed socialist (although I do slightly lean that way), but I will say that I've found neoliberals patting themselves on the back for being the foremost evidence based/data-driven ideology while not engaging with the evidence and data that points in favor of socialism rather disappointing.
i'm a recovering reluctant political activist and even 'organizer' (mostly on the 'anarchist' side of things) but i reverted to my natural mode of 'theory'. theoreticians don't do anything except sometimes write--but i've given that up as well mostly. i have put my classic collection of books and papers in a nearby library for those who like reading---its on a conveniant planet just beyond mars.
i see neoliberalism as i describe it--overlaps a bit with your definition ---as midway between
anarcho-communism/post--technocracy/mutualism of people like proudhon, bakunin, kropotkin and maybe bookchin, and 'plato's republic' (beneficient dictator').
i didnt notice 'environment' or nature mentioned . your neoliberal shills include matt y of vox. he wants 1 billion americans. i'm ok with that so long as they all stay in his house-he could use 700 million servants. just stay off my grass and out of my forests.
Most neolibs support carbon pricing (carbon taxes or cap-and-trade) and upzoning cities to reduce their carbon footprint and reduce the land they take up.
i agree---but i sort of believe in a kind of 'voluntary simplicity' for myself. live in the country except have an internet connection as my main contact with much of the modern world. we could cut 50% of car and plane travel, consumer goods, sports, casinos, hollywood , media, junk food, and more and i dont think it would be missed.
to some of us neoliberal is like the clintons (and i was born in arkansas as well), globe trotting, gates, silicon valley, and thiel, and even trump. if streams were clean, bottled water would be less needed.
i'd rather live right next to mountains... and just ocassionally see a big city.
(your article is very well written---but to many on 'left' neolibera; is an epithet. i view many on the ' left ' ---espercially dsa---as 'stalinist-lite ' ---being a stalinist is no longer trendy so they downplay that part---i actually support much of what dsa/ bernie sanders support; its what they leave out that makes them stalinists--ie they are 'pro-workerist', except for themselves. they want others to have "good 15$/hr jobs loading trucks'
Thanks for sharing this! I didn't know such a community had formed, and with that name. I can relate to everything you described, with few changes. Browsing the subreddit now, too. 👍
I found this interesting and so I've joined the subreddit - I'm not sure if I'd describe myself as "neoliberal", but I agree with the movement as described, although I think I'd place more emphasis on the social welfare side of things and describe myself as a Social Democrat - the National Health Service fills me with patriotic pride, and I really love the policies (and fjords) of Norway.
I'm still working out my opinions on issues like drug policy, but I'm becoming more sympathetic to the argument that just because I think something's a bad idea doesn't mean it's a good idea to ban it, so I think I'm becoming more neoliberal over time.
Awesome! There are definitely a lot of social democrats in the community - I also lean towards being a socdem.
>Project to promote the new “neoliberal” identity as an alternative to socialist and right-wing populism
Neoliberalism doesn't distinguish itself from socialism with it being pro: LGBTQ, immigration, public-transport oriented urban development, climate action... So I guess the thing that's left is being pro-market. But this is strange since many strands of socialism are pro-market such as liberal socialism, libertarian socialism, market socialism and democratic socialism (although some online democratic socialists disagree).
What these socialists dislike though is capitalist firms and want socialists firms instead (co-ops). So if socialists are excluded from the neoliberal big tent that means they're pro capitalists, and anti socialists firms.
Socialists say that capitalist firms cause "alienation", which means a degradation in social connection and mental wellbeing. We've seen a year over year increase in loneliness and mental health issues, which workers attribute to their working conditions. But just because capitalist firms cause alienation doesn't mean that socialists firms would be better, do we have any evidence for this?
Neoliberals see one of their distinguishing factors as being evidence based, but the truth is that the socialists have a wealth of data to back up their claims, and I don't really see neoliberals engaging with them.
Because empirically it does seem like co-ops are better at creating social trust than capitalist firms: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254445736_Do_cooperative_enterprises_create_social_trust
But maybe this comes at the cost of work-ethic. It's all well and good if the workers are happy, but if they become lazy/unproductive under socialism the economy regresses which causes other problems. Well actually workers in a co-op put in *more* effort:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3108241
and this meta-analysis shows co-ops are *more* productive:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304459942_Employee_ownership_and_firm_performance_a_meta-analysis_Employee_ownership_a_meta-analysis
Now I'm not a committed socialist (although I do slightly lean that way), but I will say that I've found neoliberals patting themselves on the back for being the foremost evidence based/data-driven ideology while not engaging with the evidence and data that points in favor of socialism rather disappointing.
I do have my own thoughts about co-ops though if you're interested: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/pQs6bAq4BJbHDpSYb/democratizing-the-workplace-as-a-cause-area-1
i'm a recovering reluctant political activist and even 'organizer' (mostly on the 'anarchist' side of things) but i reverted to my natural mode of 'theory'. theoreticians don't do anything except sometimes write--but i've given that up as well mostly. i have put my classic collection of books and papers in a nearby library for those who like reading---its on a conveniant planet just beyond mars.
i see neoliberalism as i describe it--overlaps a bit with your definition ---as midway between
anarcho-communism/post--technocracy/mutualism of people like proudhon, bakunin, kropotkin and maybe bookchin, and 'plato's republic' (beneficient dictator').
i didnt notice 'environment' or nature mentioned . your neoliberal shills include matt y of vox. he wants 1 billion americans. i'm ok with that so long as they all stay in his house-he could use 700 million servants. just stay off my grass and out of my forests.
Most neolibs support carbon pricing (carbon taxes or cap-and-trade) and upzoning cities to reduce their carbon footprint and reduce the land they take up.
Beyond that, there's great diversity of thought among members of the movement. Personally, I think that carbon pricing is not enough to transition quickly from fossil fuels, so I also support heavy government investment in clean energy technologies (https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/21426920/climate-change-renewable-energy-solar-wind-innovation-green-new-deal).
i agree---but i sort of believe in a kind of 'voluntary simplicity' for myself. live in the country except have an internet connection as my main contact with much of the modern world. we could cut 50% of car and plane travel, consumer goods, sports, casinos, hollywood , media, junk food, and more and i dont think it would be missed.
to some of us neoliberal is like the clintons (and i was born in arkansas as well), globe trotting, gates, silicon valley, and thiel, and even trump. if streams were clean, bottled water would be less needed.
i'd rather live right next to mountains... and just ocassionally see a big city.
(your article is very well written---but to many on 'left' neolibera; is an epithet. i view many on the ' left ' ---espercially dsa---as 'stalinist-lite ' ---being a stalinist is no longer trendy so they downplay that part---i actually support much of what dsa/ bernie sanders support; its what they leave out that makes them stalinists--ie they are 'pro-workerist', except for themselves. they want others to have "good 15$/hr jobs loading trucks'