4 ms·

No, it really doesn't. We used to distinguish between 'neoconservative' and 'neoliberal', but the only line in the sand between them was one was from the Republ

No, it really doesn't. We used to distinguish between 'neoconservative' and 'neoliberal', but the only line in the sand between them was one was from the Republican party and the other was from the Democratic party. But since the only significant ideological difference is whether Israel is to be protected for religious reasons (neocon) versus economic ones (neolib), the term neocon has gone out of fashion. Neoliberalism has always been the term applied to the form of justice-free economic globalization pushed by the "left" (that is, pushed by the leaders who co-opted the institutions of the left, starting with Carter and continued under Clinton and Obama). Europe does not consider "liberal" as a political category ("liberal on issues like health care") and instead carries only the economic connotations and is more or less a synonym or neoliberalism. I wish we could push this to "Establishment conservatism", but the truth is that the vast majority of neoliberalisation was initiated under a Democratic president.

dragonwriter 10y ago
Neoliberalism and neoconservative are very differvent, and both involve more than international trade. While support for neoliberal trade had extended beyond the Republican Party in the US by the end of the Reagan/Bush period (which both produced the Perot phenomenon as a reaction as Clinton largely backed neoliberalism trade -- but much of the Democratic Party in Congress did not, hence NAFTA implementing legislation being passed on the back of Republican votes), support for neoliberal trade and even moreso the domestic policy aspects of neoliberalism like privatization of public services remained much higher in the Republican Party (prior to the current election campaign, where things are more in flux.) Neoconservatism isn't about mutually-beneficial free trade the way neoliberalism is, it's more about US imperialist foreign policy aimed at securing control of key economic resources and imposing privatization on the domestic economies of the new colonies as a means for US-aligned capitalists and corporations to secure control of key segments of the economy. There's a little bit of overlap between the two in that Neoconservatism involves selective and forceful export of some of the domestic policy components of neoliberalism, but they are rather different ideas (and both, historically, more attached to both the political right in general and the US Republican party when it comes to US political parties.)
argonaut 10y ago
You are again mistaking "American liberalism" with "neoliberalism." You are correct that economic globalization is part of "neoliberalism", but it is not part of "American liberalism." Now, you are certainly correct that Democrats espouse economic globalization, but so do economic conservatives (who are distinct from populist conservatives). This is reflective of the fact that the Democrats have drifted closer to the center over the past few decades, and are now really a centrist party, possibly center-left. But support for unions is not neoliberalism. Support for a higher minimum wage is not neoliberalism. You also have to be careful about the term "neoconservative." It is typically used only to describe a specific hawkish foreign policy philosophy, and has little to do with economics (and typically doesn't have anything to do with trade - but this is a blurry line).

dragonwriter 10y ago

Neoliberalism and neoconservative are very differvent, and both involve more than international trade. While support for neoliberal trade had extended beyond the Republican Party in the US by the end of the Reagan/Bush period (which both produced the Perot phenomenon as a reaction as Clinton largely backed neoliberalism trade -- but much of the Democratic Party in Congress did not, hence NAFTA implementing legislation being passed on the back of Republican votes), support for neoliberal trade and even moreso the domestic policy aspects of neoliberalism like privatization of public services remained much higher in the Republican Party (prior to the current election campaign, where things are more in flux.) Neoconservatism isn't about mutually-beneficial free trade the way neoliberalism is, it's more about US imperialist foreign policy aimed at securing control of key economic resources and imposing privatization on the domestic economies of the new colonies as a means for US-aligned capitalists and corporations to secure control of key segments of the economy. There's a little bit of overlap between the two in that Neoconservatism involves selective and forceful export of some of the domestic policy components of neoliberalism, but they are rather different ideas (and both, historically, more attached to both the political right in general and the US Republican party when it comes to US political parties.)

argonaut 10y ago

You are again mistaking "American liberalism" with "neoliberalism." You are correct that economic globalization is part of "neoliberalism", but it is not part of "American liberalism." Now, you are certainly correct that Democrats espouse economic globalization, but so do economic conservatives (who are distinct from populist conservatives). This is reflective of the fact that the Democrats have drifted closer to the center over the past few decades, and are now really a centrist party, possibly center-left. But support for unions is not neoliberalism. Support for a higher minimum wage is not neoliberalism. You also have to be careful about the term "neoconservative." It is typically used only to describe a specific hawkish foreign policy philosophy, and has little to do with economics (and typically doesn't have anything to do with trade - but this is a blurry line).