Neoliberalism: what it is and how to end it (part 2 of 4)

But where we've got up to then in our discussion is the point really in the late 60s where these ideas, which some people would already be calling neoliberal, more people would call neoliberal later, have developed this quite well-established network of ideas mainly really academic departments and institutions of the kind we would today call think tanks and some sort of lobbying organisations, all of which are pushing this kind of neoliberal ideology.

But it's worth thinking about this question before we get into the moment when governments start to take up these ideas.

We said at the end of the last episode that you could understand neoliberalism as a fairly well-formed ideology by this point.

But I think one thing that characterizes any ideology is it has a sense of the kind of society it wants to create, the kind of world it wants to create.

And here I think there's an interesting question.

What kind of world do the neoliberals think they want to create? And I think we've probably clarified that already to a fair extent.

They want to create a world in which, as far as possible, every individual is autonomous from any kind of pressure from the community, from the state.

maybe even from their family, and is able to make rational choices about how they live their lives and particularly what they do in order to acquire material goods and what kind of material goods they acquire and how their own capital reserves and wealth are disposed of.

So they don't really like high taxes because that infringes upon individuals' ability to do that.

Of course, you might think that means they just want a kind of solid upon world of free individuals, like doing whatever they want, being however they want.

I mean, it's pretty clear that in the case of people like Hayek, and certainly I think the European neoliberals, they also seem to have some quite conservative assumptions about the desirability or inevitability of traditional family forms, traditional gender roles.

um these people tend historically not to have really been on the side of desegregation in the united states for example so they it doesn't but to the extent they comment on it at all it's not sure if they want a world in which it's not clear always if they want a world in which uh you know personal freedom is extended into the domain of like gender relations and removing racist barriers to personal freedom not really clear

I'm going to say, before

I hand over to Alan, I'm going to say one of the things I think is really worth keeping in mind in terms of the kind of world they think they want

to

create.

They do clearly, I think, want to create a world in which, on the one hand, there will obviously be very high levels of social inequality.

They think inequality is not a bad thing.

They think, if anything, it's a good thing because it incentivizes competition and excellence and other things they agree with, but there will be a relative equality of opportunity for people.

So there will be high levels of social mobility that people will not be able to simply inherit with simply kind of rest on the laurels bequeathed to them by wealthy parents or by institutionalised forms of power.

Of course, you know, why I'm saying all this now is because,

you

know, spoiler, that's not the society they create.

But I think it is sort of implied that's what they want.

Alan, how would you change that or add to it?