Neoliberalism

...

Neo-liberalism is also cultural liberalism. Everything that is promoted by the left - social "justice", feminism, anti-racism, race mixing - is cultural liberalism and is promoted by the capital, which is why these ideas became mainstream and are portrayed everywhere in the medias. Neoliberalism is a cancer that tends to unify everything, even individuals, so a rich elite can enjoy its privileges while staying culturally and racially pure. It's not surprising to see that Scandinivia is neoliberal but also promotes cultural "marxism". Neoliberalism's main goal is to make Man a slave to his desires.

Neoliberalism is everything that is wrong with the Western world.

>people still unironically think neo-liberalism works
>people still unironically think capitalism will survive

He would have supported Venezuelan policies in 2006, like everyone else who hated neoliberalism in Latin America.

Of course, after it fails, these people pretend they never supported the policies that led to failure.

Milton Friedman was the son of Eastern European Jews, he was born and raised in Brooklyn.

99% of Jews in this context became commies, so how did Milton Friedman not become one? My theory is that Milton Friedman was a crypto-communist. His political project was to remove the several cultural, political, social and economical barriers put on capitalism during the 20th century and that basically finished communism as a strong political force in most of the Western world around the 50s and 60s.

Remember that Karl Marx himself said that capitalism must fulfill it's role in destroying all traditional orders and social relations before communism comes to be. Milton Friedman wanted to ensure that, he unleashed unfettered capitalism, with the purpose of increasing inequality and making communism viable again.

In this sense, he was much more effective as a communist activist than the other communist Jews of his generation, he was the only one who actually understood what Marx wanted and how he could achieve that.

>Reminder that neoliberalism is a good thing.

They'll be dead soon.

imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2016/06/ostry.htm

>Reminder that neoliberalism is a good thing.

Question: which countries have gone from shit to wealth with neoliberalism?

Have you read either of them

Milton is the complete opposite of a communist he's the representation of what elite jews really are

This post is so autistic

Chile
Sort to speak,at least if we compare it with its Neighbours

>neoliberals ignore Republicans attempting to actually monitor and fix the anarcho-corporate issues of the 19th century, let Wilson and Roosevelt cripple the free market, then blame the free market

neither of those presidents is popular with neoliberals, nor classical liberals, they both had contempt for the constitution

You're still riding that sinking ship?

fortune.com/2016/06/03/imf-neoliberalism-failing/

he never had the makings of a varsity athlete

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
>Neoliberalism (or sometimes neo-liberalism)[1] is a term which has been used since the 1950s,[2] but became more prevalent in its current meaning in the 1970s and 80s by scholars in a wide variety of social sciences[3] and critics[4] primarily in reference to the resurgence of 19th century ideas associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism.[5] Its advocates support extensive economic liberalization policies such as privatization, fiscal austerity, deregulation, free trade, and reductions in government spending in order to enhance the role of the private sector in the economy.[6][7][8][9][10][11][12] Neoliberalism is famously associated with the economic policies introduced by Margaret Thatcher in the United Kingdom and Ronald Reagan in the United States.[7]
I guess you could consider it left wing... if you think that Paul Ryan is left wing because he gets upset when Donald Trump says racist things instead of cloaking his racism in the smoke and mirrors of neoliberal economics

>free market economics is racist

Neoliberalism is dead.

Post-neoreactionary Marxism is the future.

Not always, but often. Usually it's done through the guise of dog whistles like "welfare queen". Everyone knows what you really meant was 'nigger' but you'd get in trouble for saying that so you cover your ass with euphemisms that allow you to maintain plausible deniability.

And the free markets tendency to ramp up income inequality to unsustainable and economically deleterious levels serves nicely if your goal is to keep blackie working for as small a paycheck as possible.

Black unemployment doubled under Obama.

Life has gotten shitty for people in general under Obama. Turns out that neoliberalism still sucks when it's a limp-wristed Democrat trying to enact such policies.

>income inequality
>Bad
All this uneducated Marxists. When will they learn?

ah yes the welfare reform was racism because some republicans used that term, There were and are poor white people who do/did the same thing.

Irish used to be dirt poor, they are not now, It would be racist not to expect the same for black people. Its not our job to correct centuries of inequality in our lifetimes.

see
Let me guess: you think the IMF is marxist?

>Black=Welfare queen
I'm not racist no really. If someone built a marxist robot, it would probably meltdown do to the sheer number of paradoxes it would have to deal with.

>DA FREE MARKAT IS RAWIST NIGGA
>WE WUZ KANGZ IN EGYPT OR GERMANY BEFORE THE EVIL MARKATS CAME I TELL YA

aww, did I trigger you? I knew that would trigger right-wingers, they HATE it when their sacred cows are exposed.

Yes, the implementation of welfare policies certainly wasn't done by racists.

IMF preductions fail on a regular basis. Income inequality is good,and has always been. More concentrated wealth= more potential to capitalization. The goverment is also a form of capital accumulation that creates huge disparities, and the state can perform costly invesments. Only literal niggers believe that inequalities between individuals or entities is bad.

>ah yes the welfare reform was racism because some republicans used that term
Not "some republicans".

Conservatives.

common people who don't have to play the game of putting on a nice face for politics.

People who when confronted with a systemic problem, blame the people within the system instead

>they HATE it when their sacred cows are exposed.

>HATE it when their sacred cows are exposed.

:^)

>IMF preductions fail on a regular basis.
And the IMF was the neoliberal world capital up until very recently

ohhh no! What will I do in the face of such withering MAYMAYS?!

boy you suuuure showed me

...

Lyndon Johnson was a southern conservative Democrat.

I don't blame the "democrat" part, I blame the "southern conservative" part.

You havemt given an argument other than giving an abstract entity the quality of "being racist". You just deserve memes for the bullcrap that you just typed

What are you trying to say? That the people inside of a society aren't responsible for what occurs inside that society?

ISHYGDDT. Are all Americans this stupid?

>I'll have those niggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years

The guy was an utter cunt, but you can't deny that he was a genuinely masterful politician. The nigs will in fact vote for Democrat gibs for as long as the gibs exist.

>Are all niggers this stupid?
Yes

No, I just called you on your bullshit and you couldn't handle it so you broke out the fedora maymays

>What are you trying to say? That the people inside of a society aren't responsible for what occurs inside that society?

That it's not "all Americans", it's a very specific kind of American who has this problem

>I don't blame the "democrat" part, I blame the "southern conservative" part.

Please signal your virtue more.

You tell me that IMF "preductions" fail on a regular basis, I remind you that the IMF has been the most neoliberal institution on the planet for decades

His policies weren't conservative and the actual conservative party voted in unison for the civil rights act. Their conservatism was in the opposition to judicial activism, and in their want to preserve capitalist economics as opposed to socialist policies. The policies of the democrats were in line with the policies of modern progressives. They did not come from a place that viewed all men as being equal. Rather they came from people who knew that their identity as the welfare party could create the most powerful political machine in American history.

Judicial restraint was originally a progressive policy, because they did not like it when judges ruled against their unconstitutional laws.

If there is a big problem with local wild animals being kicked people blame the animals for being there or being a bother rather then deal with the bigger problem aka why are humans and wildlife so close together in the first place that conflict starts, why are people being such assholes and kicking animals and shifting the blame on them?

He has never been proven to say that statement at all from both sides of the spectrum.

Middle class college students?

Stop blaming blacks, it's not their fault that they've been fed non stop propaganda, and that instead of telling to them wake up enough conservatives have only offered them racism and condescension.

>, I just called you on your bullshit
How dumb fuck? Saying that the market is racist is probably the dumbest thing I have ever read. It is like saying that the sun hates white people.

>I remind you that the IMF has been the most neoliberal institution on the planet for decades
They proposed expending as the solution to get out of the recession,and they fucked Spain and Greece who followed those advices. The IMF is garbage and saying that it was neoliberal at some point is not an argument

>His policies weren't conservative
maybe not by the standards of post-Reagan "true" conservatives, but he sure didn't make liberals happy with his foreign policy.

> They did not come from a place that viewed all men as being equal. Rather they came from people who knew that their identity as the welfare party could create the most powerful political machine in American history.
if government assistance were all it took to earn the permanent loyalty of generations of voters then old white people on Medicare would be staunch Democrats.

>condescension
Saying that the markets are racist is just dumb. And pointing that out is not condescension. What do you want to do teach them basic staff? Make spong bob square pants episodes about economy? Some black people have realised that welfare has fucked them,and they are widely ignored by the community,as blaming whitie is easier

>Saying that the market is racist
You need to work on your reading comprehension skills. I don't doubt that there are libertarians on the internet who take an idealistic approach to the market and insist that race has nothing to do with it. But I also don't doubt that southern conservatives who DO want to make everything about identity politics and will appropriate the language of freedom as it suits them.

Most southern conservatives would probably have a problem with pure neoliberalism anyway. They and the rust belt tend to be more protectionist.

I also doubt the average republican or conservative supports neoliberalism in order to keep the black man down

You can't fucking blame the issues of Blacks solely on welfare at all.
You think Blacks were better off before welfare was a thing let alone being treated as equal citizens?

So black Americans are animals without agency, gotcha. So America isn't paying taxes for massive welfare programs that low income Americans from all over the country have become dependent on. So you're telling me that the root cause of black American's problems isn't the destruction of the black family, the rampant gang-crime in the black community, the glorification of gang culture, the endless tension with authorities, and the growing antagonism between blacks and rest of the country. You're part of the problem user. The days of Jim Crow are over you can only move on, the world's always a better place when you move on.

>I don't doubt that there are libertarians on the internet who take an idealistic approach to the market and insist that race has nothing to do with it.
Could you explain how trading in a market freely is racist? Serious question.

Well if there's one thing we learned from the 2016 election season, it's that the vast majority of people don't give two shits about ideological purity. Conservatives had a huge variety of "true conservative" Republican candidates promising to tear down and privatize vast swathes of the government and they chose the guy who promised to build them a wall to keep out the Mexicans.

>I don't doubt that there are libertarians on the internet who take an idealistic approach to the market and insist that race has nothing to do with it.
Could you explain how trading freely is racist? Serious question.

>You can't fucking blame the issues of Blacks solely on welfare at all.
No. Them being drug adicts and criminals is an issue too,welfare just perpetuates this lifestyle. Which really keeps afloat fucked up communities.

Ending welfare won't stop it and will make it much worse and the issue of criminality and addiction in poor communities across the state area collection of several causes.

Because there are multiple kinds of conservatives? Lefties are not the only ones with an infinity number of "my own kind of..." in politics.

At the beginning,you may be right,but in the long run will fix those communities. The shock of not consuming heroin for an adict is at first big,but is the only way to clean him.

Neoliberal means liberalism (muh property) with neoclassical economics (muh markets)

it's just "rich people having all the stuff is moral: the philosophy"

user you can die from going cold turkey with heroin.

>Could you explain how trading in a market freely is racist? Serious question.
Because the language of free market puritanism is intentionally designed to be slippery and evade the implications of their policy.

For example, when Sam Brownback got rid of the income tax, promising a huge surge in economic growth (that never actually materialized and is to date one of neoliberalism's most embarrassing failures), he had to figure out how he was going to fund public schools now that there wasn't enough money to go around. In the ensuring budget fight the Kansas supreme court is threatening to shut down every public school in the state because of how disproportionately the Brownback administration is distributing funds to affluent schools in white counties at the cost of impoverished schools in minority counties. Brownbacks response is to pass legislation hamstringing the supreme court.

Of course then a free marketer will just say "but what about privatizing the schools?!" and that would only make the problem even more pronounced because that's what privatization has brought us.

Some people will have to die.

They were definitely better off without welfare.

I was just pointing out that conservative s would be better pointing out to blacks the damage welfare programs have caused and that if they want their community to improve they must look inside their own communities. Not by out otherizimg them by calling them niggers.

We're not talking about his foreign policy which was pretty consistent with American foreign policy at the time. It's not actually that simple for you is it

"GOP=War, Racism, and Capitalism"
"Dem=Good boys"
Last time I checked Dems are only anti-war when they're not the ones who started it.

>if government assistance were all it took to earn the permanent loyalty of generations of voters then old white people on Medicare would be staunch Democrats.

No one touches medi-care for that very reason. It doesn't matter that it's been an economic nightmare to sustain "need mo votes fo dem policies."

>For example, when Sam Brownback got rid of the income tax, promising a huge surge in economic growth (that never actually materialized and is to date one of neoliberalism's most embarrassing failures), he had to figure out how he was going to fund public schools now that there wasn't enough money to go around. In the ensuring budget fight the Kansas supreme court is threatening to shut down every public school in the state because of how disproportionately the Brownback administration is distributing funds to affluent schools in white counties at the cost of impoverished schools in minority counties. Brownbacks response is to pass legislation hamstringing the supreme court.
#Republicans

Some people will have to die. Current African American family structure is just fucked up,and welfare just perpetuates this

>Because the language of free market puritanism is intentionally designed to be slippery and evade the implications of their policy.
Not an argument. Just a strawman.
> Of course then a free marketer will just say "but what about privatizing the schools?!" and that would only make the problem even more pronounced because that's what privatization has brought us.
Privatization has overall brought positive results. Using memes is not an argument

>I was just pointing out that conservative s would be better pointing out to blacks the damage welfare programs have caused and that if they want their community to improve they must look inside their own communities. Not by out otherizimg them by calling them niggers.
It has been tried to death. Even blacks have tried it.

>We're not talking about his foreign policy which was pretty consistent with American foreign policy at the time. It's not actually that simple for you is it
>"GOP=War, Racism, and Capitalism"
>"Dem=Good boys"
>Last time I checked Dems are only anti-war when they're not the ones who started it.

You're making it about party, I'm making it about demographics.

Look which party is the party of southern conservatives and it becomes pretty obvious who the war hawks are. They supported Democrats all the way up until 1964 when they all jumped ship to the Republicans, and from that point on the GOP was the party of war and the military industrial complex.

Not that the Democrats are innocent, but in the past 40 years which party was the one starting wars? And which party has the politicians calling for more war?

>Not an argument. Just a strawman.
No, it was context for the example I gave which you conveniently ignored

>Privatization has overall brought positive results. Using memes is not an argument

Privatization's benefits have been grossly overstated while it's negative effects, the impact of income inequality, was only recently discovered

Don't take my word for it, take it from the institution which faithfully defended neoliberal policy for decades
fortune.com/2016/06/03/imf-neoliberalism-failing/

>Reminder that neoliberalism is a good thing.
Isn't there another board for this?

>build them a wall to keep out the Mexicans.
Maybe because the working-class realizes they can't compete with cheap foreign labor. "They took er jerbs" isn't just a meme you know. That falling wages are what's destroying our economy, and that the continuation of the bizzaro "neo liberal" policies of the left was feeding into the balkanization of the U.S. and the rapid expansion of the welfare state. That Mexicans from Mexico, still have two feet across the border.

>bizzaro "neo liberal" policies of the left
M8, what the fucking shit are you pulling out of your ass?

If they die that's on your head not ours.

Your argument is that free markets are bad for the poor and the poor are overwelmingly minorities.

But even if true that is just an unfortunate coincidence, and does not make the policies themselves racist

A fuck ton will die ot you force a Cold turkey drug rehabilitation program. It's fucking Abstinence sex ed tier stupid.
Then why not actually invest in programs for drug use and after school programs. That shit have been proven to work countless tiepins all over the U.S why is it that these poor blacks and Whites must suffer and face possible death to "Overcome" their issues while the rest of America can just access social services to help them out?

>define social democracy as neoliberalism
>now neoliberalism is a good thing

Retarded to be quite honest.

1) Free market is a nonsensical term. State capitalism is not only superior but has in the real world been the state of affairs for every successful nation.

2) You're forgetting another component of neo-liberalism, that is free-trade, which is disastrous for everyone who isn't one of the most industrially advanced nations.

This level of ignorance is astounding. For instance, how is one even aware of the term neoliberalism while being ignorant of how its actually used?

>#Republicans
>#
Honestly I swear to God did you think about where you were before you typed that. No one's going to like your post user, but if you go back to tumblr or IG I'm sure people will do so then.

>You're forgetting another component of neo-liberalism, that is free-trade, which is disastrous for everyone who isn't one of the most industrially advanced nations.

false. it has led to higher wages and standards of living in many countries

>Maybe because the working-class realizes they can't compete with cheap foreign labor. "They took er jerbs" isn't just a meme you know.That falling wages are what's destroying our economy,
You know, part of what amused me so much about the user above posting fedora memes was that he assumed I was a reddit-tier socialist, when in practice I consider myself a nationalist and I agree with you %100 that it's a problem, but in my mind blaming the immigrants themselves is blaming the victim, and the real problem are the companies who are in such a mad rush to take advantage of them.

These libertarians want us to believe that it's a good thing that these companies are exploiting such cheap labor and should be allowed to keep doing so without interference from the government.

>and that the continuation of the bizzaro "neo liberal" policies of the left
Dude, neoliberalism is worship of the free market. Paul Ryan, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and all the rest of the Republicans all own that shit, and they were the ones with buyers remorse when their plans to privatize Social Security and maintain the immigration status quo fell flat when Donald Trump called them out for being idiots.

>They were definitely better off without welfare.

>"The New Deal solidified welfare's stratification along racial as well as gender lines. Northern New Dealers struck a bargain with Southern Democrats that systematically denied Blacks' eligibility for social insurance benefits: Core programs allowed states to define eligibility standards and excluded agricultural workers and domestic servants in a deliberate effort to maintain a Black menial labor caste in the South. Whites feared that Social Security would make both recipients and those freed from the burden of supporting dependents less willing to accept low wages. In addition, New Deal public works programs blatantly discriminated against Blacks, offering them the most menial jobs and paying them sometimes half of what white workers earned. Even Aid to Dependent Children was created primarily for white mothers, who were not expected to work; the relatively few Black recipients received smaller stipends on the ground that "blacks needed less to live on than whites."

Being excluded form the material benefits that white Americans were guaranteed had a huge negative impact on the communities development as well as federal and state polices enforcing poverty in various ways.

>No, it was context for the example I gave which you conveniently ignored
Saying that the market= what a polititan did or said is a strawman.

They were wrong in the past because they always agreed that inequality was a good thing you retard, this is you contradicting yourself by denouncing an authority that has always agreed with you.

Anyhow, there is a difference between a sovereign currency nation and the ones in the EU. Spending is the way to get out of a recession.

I'll actually respond to your argument though.
Do you trust the OECD? oecd.org/newsroom/inequality-hurts-economic-growth.htm
You don't have to read far:
>Reducing income inequality would boost economic growth, according to new OECD analysis. This work finds that countries where income inequality is decreasing grow faster than those with rising inequality.

Even forgetting that, basic economic theory shows you that more concentrated wealth in the hands of capitalists just means that there is less wealth in the hands of consumers and capitalists then are unable to sell anything. When aggregate demand is below aggregate supply you get a recession. Quite literally simple as that, so no inequality isn't good for growth you illiterate.

>Only literal niggers believe that inequalities between individuals or entities is bad.
If we're talking about any inequality at all, this doesn't matter. Why? Because even if everyone had the same amount of money a business person who wanted to expand or an entrepreneur can simply get the money they need by going to a bank - banks create money and will lend if they think you'll be successful. So again there is no need to have some people extremely rich and it wouldn't hurt to have everyone the same wealth - which I wouldn't bother trying to advocate anyway.

But with less government/legal oversight, racists are more easily able to flourish.

There's an old anecdote about Barry Goldwater's opposition to the civil rights act on idealistic grounds that he didn't think the government had any right to tell a business who they should and shouldn't serve, and was genuinely surprised that the only people agreeing with him were the racists making an issue of it in the first place!

God question let's see.
WW1 Democrats
Banana Wars Democrats
WW2 Democrats
Korea GOP
Vietnam Democrats again
Greneda GOP
Desert Storm GOP
GWOT Somalia Democrats
Kosovo Democrats
GWOT Iraq GOP
GWOT Afghanistan Democrats
Libyan Intervention Democrats
Arming of Ukraine Democrats (hardly worth mentioning but it falls under MIC)
Syrian Crisis Democrats
Pivot towards Asia Democrats.

> which party has the politicians calling for more war?

"I think we're to involved in other countries"

-Donald J. Trump

Look the GOP aren't angels but put down the partisan koolaid.

>Then why not actually invest in programs for drug use and after school programs. That shit have been proven to work countless tiepins all over the U.S why is it that these poor blacks and Whites must suffer and face possible death to "Overcome" their issues while the rest of America can just access social services to help them out?
Because those programs have been failing. They just perpetuate a certain lifestyle. The current structure of black society is unsustainable and harmful,and fixing it will require time and shock value

>State capitalism is not only superior but has in the real world been the state of affairs for every successful nation.
Wrong. It really depends on the country. Free market capitalism with pubkic intervention,not only by regulations,but through subsidies or research is probably the most efficient form of it.

>Barry Goldwater

I feel sorry for him desu.