3 ms·

Non-amaricans often think that the US has just one dominant political ideology. Sure, it comes in two flavors, red and blue, but both are neo-liberal capitalist

Non-amaricans often think that the US has just one dominant political ideology. Sure, it comes in two flavors, red and blue, but both are neo-liberal capitalist market ideologies. That ideology also strongly believes in personal responsibility, you are the master of your own outcomes. While there is a realization that yes, the system is rigged in favor of rent seeking and exponential accumulation, there is also the believe that at least some of the wealth is shared through 'trickle down' employment schemes. It is important to realize this 'sharing' is not a deliberate goal, but more like the man in the story hiring a day-laborer to help with his fishing, an accidental byproduct of accelerating rent-seeking wealth accumulation. The fishing aid is not hired for charity, but because the potential of the fishing net in maximizing return is higher even after deducting wages. He also has no concept of sustainability. His motive is immediate profit maximization, so he can go on hiring boats and fisherman until the lake is all fished up. By that time he'll be 'rich', probably living far away or at least long have crossed the threshold where is further wealth accumulation does not depend on any specific lake or industry. It is those hired fishing aids that will feel the brunt of this natural disaster, not the owner. Back to the US. What happens if trickle down stops because machines are better/cheaper/faster? What do you 'do' with 'people'? Let them starve in horrible circumstances while you hide behind big fences guarded by a ruthless G4S private army? Or do you somehow continue to trickle down? But on what basis? 'Meaningless' labor, just because you can't stand 'laziness'? Or do you provide the 'basics', like food, shelter, medicine, regardless of their inherently meaningless chore completion rate? I guess what it realy boils down to in the end is the question of what we believe 'being human' is all about.

dragonwriter 10y ago
> Non-amaricans often think that the US has just one dominant political ideology. Sure, it comes in two flavors, red and blue, but both are neo-liberal capitalist market ideologies. I suppose that from 1992 until (but not including) 2016, looking from the outside only at major party Presidential nominees, it would be easy to miss the substantial dissent from the neoliberal consensus in the US (even within both major parties, and even in the segment of those parties in government.) OTOH, since we elected an authoritarian populist whose economic approach blends mercantilist protectionism with corporatism, the idea that the only economic philosophy with any currency in US politics is neoliberalism isn't even something that relatively disengaged foreign observers can be excused.for.buying into.

dragonwriter 10y ago

> Non-amaricans often think that the US has just one dominant political ideology. Sure, it comes in two flavors, red and blue, but both are neo-liberal capitalist market ideologies. I suppose that from 1992 until (but not including) 2016, looking from the outside only at major party Presidential nominees, it would be easy to miss the substantial dissent from the neoliberal consensus in the US (even within both major parties, and even in the segment of those parties in government.) OTOH, since we elected an authoritarian populist whose economic approach blends mercantilist protectionism with corporatism, the idea that the only economic philosophy with any currency in US politics is neoliberalism isn't even something that relatively disengaged foreign observers can be excused.for.buying into.