from: http://www.zmag.org/chomneolibfor.htm Chomsky on "neoliberalism" It's not my term. I'm just borrowing it from standard usage. The "neo" part is supposed to indicate that it is a novel version of "liberalism," which is to be understood in the sense of classical liberalism, the market doctrines of Smith, Ricardo, etc. The terminology is highly misleading: the doctrines are scarcely those of classical liberalism, and the current version is centuries-old; in fact, the selective imposition of the doctrines on the defenseless, while they were freely violated by the powerful, is a good part of the reason for the current divide between the 1st and 3d world, much more similar 2 centuries ago. Current "neoliberal" doctrine is sometimes called "the Washington consensus," a term that is more apt. The reference is to the prescriptions of the International Financial Institutions (World Bank, IMF) and the rich countries (G-7 mainly, primarily the US). These include cutback of social programs and public expenditures ("fiscal discipline"), tax reductions (particularly for the rich), deregulation, freedom for foreign investors, freeing up financial flows (so that the local wealthy can export capital at will and foreign speculators are free from constraints -- a good part of what lay behind the Latin American "debt crisis" and the current Asia crisis), privatization (so that foreign investors and local fatcats, usually in bed with the rulers, can pick up the country's assets), etc. As noted, the doctrines are not novel. Nor is their selectivity. The rich, the US in the lead, violate the prescriptions whenever they can get away with it, as before. Noam Chomsky
Share: