4 ms·

That's not what it means here. The label was rehabilitated by Sam Bowman back in 2016: https://medium.com/@s8mb/im-a-neoliberal-maybe-you-are-too-b809a2a588d6

by lhnz 9y ago

That's not what it means here. The label was rehabilitated by Sam Bowman back in 2016: https://medium.com/@s8mb/im-a-neoliberal-maybe-you-are-too-b809a2a588d6 https://medium.com/@s8mb/im-a-neoliberal-maybe-you-are-too-b... Basically used here to describe a politics which is fond of market-based policies but supportive of redistribution when it is necessary for positive outcomes.

aluhut 9y ago
Tough statement. I doubt you can rehabilitate a such negative term in not even 2 years.
- lhnz 9y ago
  I don't agree with you on this. I think that the existence of the AMA itself proves that at least in some circles you can.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - aluhut 9y ago
    An AMA in a sub called "neoliberal" is hardly an indicator.
    - lhnz 9y ago
      Participation by elites in a group that might at one point have had negative connotations is a sign of it being rehabilitated.
      - aluhut 9y ago
        Participation by elites in neoliberalism was the reason why the term has a negative connotation in the first place...
        lhnz 9y ago
        My point is "they don't participate if it's inherently smearing". They are careful about their public selves. This means that they must believe it has become defendable.
        aluhut 9y ago
        I understood you very well. But maybe we are not talking about the same "elites" because I have no idea how you get the idea. They didn't care about the connotation back then. Why should the negativity of it be relevant today? I was thinking of financial elites btw.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - asvabard100 9y ago
    Look at the posts there, it's people having fun with people who identity as neoliberal without any sense of irony. Neoliberal is a dirty word among pretty much every group of contemporary politically minded folks.
    - lhnz 9y ago
      You're not entirely wrong in that there is a tongue-in-cheek aspect. However there is also a serious tone and shared set of beliefs. Take a look at this for example: https://twitter.com/r_neoliberal/status/974992740982370305?s=21 https://twitter.com/r_neoliberal/status/974992740982370305?s... Chief Neoliberal Shill is clearly a joke, but these people do believe in the positive consequences of what they're doing.
- nostrademons 9y ago
  In some circles it was never a negative term to begin with. In other circles it will remain a negative term forever, regardless of what you do. One interesting consequence of the Internet is that we're becoming very aware that for every label you could ascribe to yourself, there is some group out there who holds a deep, visceral hate for that label, so deep that they wish you would just cease to exist. I guess this was probably the case beforehand, but without instantaneous global communication, you generally weren't aware of the people who hated you. I remember that when I was growing up, terms like "American", "patriotic", "tolerant", and "generous" were unambiguously good, but now for each of those there is some group who considers them a dog-whistle for people they despise.
  - aluhut 9y ago
    I don't talk about extremists. The term itself was hardly known/in use to the general public before the crash 2008 and occupy. Since then it was only known as basically a different word for greed. As another commenter (who obviously decided to delete his comment) wrote here, I also doubt that a re-branding will ever be successful. It's not like coming up with a new term in economy is something hard to do.
    - nostrademons 9y ago
      I doubt any of that matters to Stripe, whose customer base consists of small-to-midsize businesses who need to accept payments over the Internet, oftentimes for marketplace-based business models. By virtue of the problem that they want solved, this group is going to skew towards free markets, free trade, globalization, and all the tenets that r/neoliberalism embraces. They may not themselves want to adopt the label (particularly in front of their own customers, who bring their own baggage associated with it), but they'll be sympathetic to the ideas. Also, the term is still not known/in use to the general public. The set of people who are politically active via Occupy, Tea Party, Trumpism, #Indivisible, etc. is a small subset of all people, and relatively disjoint from the set of people with successful Internet-based businesses.
      - 9y ago
aaron-lebo 9y ago
What's different about this from "Third Way" politics? Clinton (Bill) was a Third Way neoliberal who basically believed what you and that blog post are saying. Clinton (Hillary) saw those policies defeated 2 years ago. [S]omething different and distinct from liberal capitalism with its unswerving belief in the merits of the free market and democratic socialism with its demand management and obsession with the state. The Third Way is in favour of growth, entrepreneurship, enterprise and wealth creation but it is also in favour of greater social justice and it sees the state playing a major role in bringing this about. So in the words of... Anthony Giddens of the LSE the Third Way rejects top down socialism as it rejects traditional neo liberalism. — Report from the BBC, 1999, It seems they are discovering a 30 year old term and blogging about it. What's been rehabilitated? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way It's probably different in degrees, but let's be realistic, nothing has been rehabilitated nor is anything new being said.
- lhnz 9y ago
  Who do you believe is rediscovering a 30 year old term here? Have you heard of the Adam Smith Institute? It is a neoliberal think-tank and over the years many of its policies have been adopted by the UK. That blog post was written by the executive director. > The inability to come up with a new interesting term (or acknowledge the history behind the existing term) doesn't portend great things. Quoting your previous deleted post here. Are you aware that the meanings they're assigning to the term, are actually in line with what was meant when it was first used at the Walter Lippmann Colloquium in 1938?
  - aaron-lebo 9y ago
    Who do you believe is discovering a 30 year old term here? You claimed that that blog post "rehabilitates" the term. I'm saying that the general beliefs that the author describes are well-trod ground within neoliberalism. He's describing himself as a third way neoliberal with slightly more libertarian tendencies. Have you heard of the Adam Smith Institute? It is a neoliberal think-tank and over the years many of its policies have been adopted by the UK. That blog post was written by the executive director. It'd be more impressive without the credentials because it reads like a random blogger. Are you aware that the meanings they're assigning to the term, is actually in line with what was meant when it was first used at the Walter Lippmann Colloquium in 1938? His blog post mentioned rejecting dogmatism. Calling back to 1938 as the "real definition" is very dogmatic. Since then the 1980s through 2016 have happened in the US, all associated with neoliberalism. Just saying, like the other post, that a blog post and a Reddit post with 120 upvotes hardly change the general meaning of a term.

by lhnz 9y ago

aluhut 9y ago

Tough statement. I doubt you can rehabilitate a such negative term in not even 2 years.

lhnz 9y ago
I don't agree with you on this. I think that the existence of the AMA itself proves that at least in some circles you can.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- aluhut 9y ago
  An AMA in a sub called "neoliberal" is hardly an indicator.
  - lhnz 9y ago
    Participation by elites in a group that might at one point have had negative connotations is a sign of it being rehabilitated.
    - aluhut 9y ago
      Participation by elites in neoliberalism was the reason why the term has a negative connotation in the first place...
      - lhnz 9y ago
        My point is "they don't participate if it's inherently smearing". They are careful about their public selves. This means that they must believe it has become defendable.
        aluhut 9y ago
        I understood you very well. But maybe we are not talking about the same "elites" because I have no idea how you get the idea. They didn't care about the connotation back then. Why should the negativity of it be relevant today? I was thinking of financial elites btw.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- asvabard100 9y ago
  Look at the posts there, it's people having fun with people who identity as neoliberal without any sense of irony. Neoliberal is a dirty word among pretty much every group of contemporary politically minded folks.
  - lhnz 9y ago
    You're not entirely wrong in that there is a tongue-in-cheek aspect. However there is also a serious tone and shared set of beliefs. Take a look at this for example: https://twitter.com/r_neoliberal/status/974992740982370305?s=21 https://twitter.com/r_neoliberal/status/974992740982370305?s... Chief Neoliberal Shill is clearly a joke, but these people do believe in the positive consequences of what they're doing.
nostrademons 9y ago
In some circles it was never a negative term to begin with. In other circles it will remain a negative term forever, regardless of what you do. One interesting consequence of the Internet is that we're becoming very aware that for every label you could ascribe to yourself, there is some group out there who holds a deep, visceral hate for that label, so deep that they wish you would just cease to exist. I guess this was probably the case beforehand, but without instantaneous global communication, you generally weren't aware of the people who hated you. I remember that when I was growing up, terms like "American", "patriotic", "tolerant", and "generous" were unambiguously good, but now for each of those there is some group who considers them a dog-whistle for people they despise.
- aluhut 9y ago
  I don't talk about extremists. The term itself was hardly known/in use to the general public before the crash 2008 and occupy. Since then it was only known as basically a different word for greed. As another commenter (who obviously decided to delete his comment) wrote here, I also doubt that a re-branding will ever be successful. It's not like coming up with a new term in economy is something hard to do.
  - nostrademons 9y ago
    I doubt any of that matters to Stripe, whose customer base consists of small-to-midsize businesses who need to accept payments over the Internet, oftentimes for marketplace-based business models. By virtue of the problem that they want solved, this group is going to skew towards free markets, free trade, globalization, and all the tenets that r/neoliberalism embraces. They may not themselves want to adopt the label (particularly in front of their own customers, who bring their own baggage associated with it), but they'll be sympathetic to the ideas. Also, the term is still not known/in use to the general public. The set of people who are politically active via Occupy, Tea Party, Trumpism, #Indivisible, etc. is a small subset of all people, and relatively disjoint from the set of people with successful Internet-based businesses.
    - 9y ago

aaron-lebo 9y ago

What's different about this from "Third Way" politics? Clinton (Bill) was a Third Way neoliberal who basically believed what you and that blog post are saying. Clinton (Hillary) saw those policies defeated 2 years ago. [S]omething different and distinct from liberal capitalism with its unswerving belief in the merits of the free market and democratic socialism with its demand management and obsession with the state. The Third Way is in favour of growth, entrepreneurship, enterprise and wealth creation but it is also in favour of greater social justice and it sees the state playing a major role in bringing this about. So in the words of... Anthony Giddens of the LSE the Third Way rejects top down socialism as it rejects traditional neo liberalism. — Report from the BBC, 1999, It seems they are discovering a 30 year old term and blogging about it. What's been rehabilitated? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way It's probably different in degrees, but let's be realistic, nothing has been rehabilitated nor is anything new being said.

lhnz 9y ago
Who do you believe is rediscovering a 30 year old term here? Have you heard of the Adam Smith Institute? It is a neoliberal think-tank and over the years many of its policies have been adopted by the UK. That blog post was written by the executive director. > The inability to come up with a new interesting term (or acknowledge the history behind the existing term) doesn't portend great things. Quoting your previous deleted post here. Are you aware that the meanings they're assigning to the term, are actually in line with what was meant when it was first used at the Walter Lippmann Colloquium in 1938?
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  Who do you believe is discovering a 30 year old term here? You claimed that that blog post "rehabilitates" the term. I'm saying that the general beliefs that the author describes are well-trod ground within neoliberalism. He's describing himself as a third way neoliberal with slightly more libertarian tendencies. Have you heard of the Adam Smith Institute? It is a neoliberal think-tank and over the years many of its policies have been adopted by the UK. That blog post was written by the executive director. It'd be more impressive without the credentials because it reads like a random blogger. Are you aware that the meanings they're assigning to the term, is actually in line with what was meant when it was first used at the Walter Lippmann Colloquium in 1938? His blog post mentioned rejecting dogmatism. Calling back to 1938 as the "real definition" is very dogmatic. Since then the 1980s through 2016 have happened in the US, all associated with neoliberalism. Just saying, like the other post, that a blog post and a Reddit post with 120 upvotes hardly change the general meaning of a term.