3 ms·

I hadn't seen the phrase "Eurocentric Modernism" before, but reading through the article it seems to me it's just a more complicated way of saying "neoliberalis

by wfo 10y ago

I hadn't seen the phrase "Eurocentric Modernism" before, but reading through the article it seems to me it's just a more complicated way of saying "neoliberalism". But I wouldn't necessarily take e.g. Trump to be a harbinger of the neoliberal apocalypse; things like TPP, the cruelty of denying people health care and letting them die miserable because "well, that's just the way the market crumbles", yes. An abusive, hateful, nasty demagogue in a position of power? Not necessarily, you will see this as well in the pre-enlightenment 'noble savage' civilizations Kanth idolizes. There are power structures there as well, even if the society is a "compact" based on "nurturing" and "feelings", and just like in neoliberal societies the nastiest people are the ones who seek out power.

edblarney 10y ago
+ I think the author would put socialism square in his view of 'Eurocentric Modernism' as well. + Trump is the farthest thing from a neoliberal. He's a nationalist/protectionist, anti free trade. I reject a lot of the author's claims about Adam Smith and 'narrow self interest'. Generally, people are concerned about their own well-being more than others, that's just a fact, it doesn't make us greedy. Knowing this, we can model human behaviour and markets etc. with some degree of rationality. Adam Smith believed the #1 attribute of a CEO was 'benevolence' for gosh sakes :). So much hardcore capitalist stuff is attributed to Smith, when really he was not. He was explaining how things work, not an ideologue.
- jstewartmobile 10y ago
  The Smith Rule: If you bring WoN into your argument, you probably never read it. Gatto, Chomsky, and perhaps Taleb are the only three talkers I've come across who talk about Smith as though they actually read him.
AnimalMuppet 10y ago
The author talks about this as the last 400 years. Focusing on events of the last two months seems a bit narrower than the author's claim. (Or even the last two decades - how long have we had "neoliberalism"?)

by wfo 10y ago

edblarney 10y ago

+ I think the author would put socialism square in his view of 'Eurocentric Modernism' as well. + Trump is the farthest thing from a neoliberal. He's a nationalist/protectionist, anti free trade. I reject a lot of the author's claims about Adam Smith and 'narrow self interest'. Generally, people are concerned about their own well-being more than others, that's just a fact, it doesn't make us greedy. Knowing this, we can model human behaviour and markets etc. with some degree of rationality. Adam Smith believed the #1 attribute of a CEO was 'benevolence' for gosh sakes :). So much hardcore capitalist stuff is attributed to Smith, when really he was not. He was explaining how things work, not an ideologue.

jstewartmobile 10y ago
The Smith Rule: If you bring WoN into your argument, you probably never read it. Gatto, Chomsky, and perhaps Taleb are the only three talkers I've come across who talk about Smith as though they actually read him.

AnimalMuppet 10y ago

The author talks about this as the last 400 years. Focusing on events of the last two months seems a bit narrower than the author's claim. (Or even the last two decades - how long have we had "neoliberalism"?)