From: Jim Devine9-1
As I said, I didn't want to name neoliberalism after any individual.
In terms of what I said before, "Volckerism" is clearly inadequate.
But Volcker's ascent does mark a turning-point in US government policy
(and one that helped Reagan win in 1980). For those who emphasize
events happening "behind the scenes," he rose due to a "hidden
election" representing a mobilization of financiers against William
Miller, the previous Fed Chair, who was seen as "soft on inflation."
(Gerald Epstein has an article on this.) I'd instead blame the overt
debates within the capitalist class about how to deal with the low
profit rates, low real interest rates, and stagflation of the 1970s.
If we have to name neoliberalism after anyone, it would be even better
to name it after Pinochet or Milton the F, but his type of policies
didn't take hold outside of Chile for awhile.
^^^^^^
CB: Reaganism includes neo-liberalism and more.
^^^^^^^^
> The effort to make Carter as responsible for Reaganism as Reagan in
> order to establish the Dem are no different than Reps ?is Political
> Peter Panism, ultra-left nonsense.
It's just as unreasonable to make Reagan responsible for his tax cuts.
Instead, he represented a social movement, the employers' offensive
(to restore profitability). He was just the spokes-model (and in his
second term, clearly senile). The kind of reverse "cult of
personality" that blames Reagan or his ideology for all of the bad
things that have happened in recent decade represents shallow version
of the idealist theory of history. (If we could just replace such bad
leaders or bad ideas with good leaders and good ideas, everything
would be copacetic...)
^^^^^^^
CB: Reagan_ism_ is specifically not to blame Reagan the individual for
all that ocurred in the recent decade. The _ideology_ he popularized
_is_ responsible for the last thirty years.
As to idealism and materialism, as Marx put it in "Intro to Critique
of Hegel's Philosophy of Right", when an idea grips masses, it becomes
a material force. Reagan, not Volcker, was the main propaganidizer who
got Reaganite ideas ( largely repudiation of the criticisms of
American racism and imperialism from the movements of the 60's and
70's) to grip American masses and become a material force. That's why
this era is better termed Reaganism.
Either CB has never read my missives before or he has forgotten what
he read. He should know that I do _not_ equate Dems and GOPs, Carter
and Reagan. But neoliberalism is a bipartisan movement involving both
of them. (In the early stages, even Nader lent a helping hand.)
^^^^^
CB: Sorry. Apologies.
I'd say Reaganism became bipartisan , with the Republicans leading.
The Congress was majority Democratic throughout Reagan and Bush I's
terms.
^^^^
Please refrain from insults ("Political Peter Panism, ultra-left
nonsense"). I'm not the one who calls you names. To drag out silly
insults undermines the credibility of your postings, CB.
^^^^^
CB: Ok sorry.
^^^^
me:
> Face it, neoliberalism is a bipartisan movement. That of course does
> not say that it's a conspiracy of some sort or that all neoliberals
> believe in exactly the same thing. One can point to the left and right
> wings of neoliberalism...
CB:
> but the Republicans play the lead role. The left wing puts
> up some resistence - face that.
The GOP play the lead role? in the case of Clinton's NAFTA or his
"welfare reform" or his deregulation of finance?Maybe the GOP is
leading the dance, but the DP acts pretty passively, being perfectly
willing to do the same tricks while backward and wearing high heels.
^^^^
CB: I couldn't have thought of a better metaphor myself. Clinton got
shoved to the right by the vote that created the Gingrich takeover.
Then you had the rightwing Judge Starr tailing Clinton.
^^^^^^^
Crucially, the "left wing" is not the same as the DP, which is
basically a capitalist political party, but representing different
fractions of the capitalist class than does the GOP.[*]
^^^^
CB: Exactly, the left-wing of the Democratic Party resists. There's
only one non-Democratic Party left-winger in Congress. The only way
to resist effectively is in Congress or the left of a President's
administration.
The DP , contradictorily , represents sections of capital and labor as
well. The Democratic Party is characterized by being contradictory or
two-faced.
^^^^^
What exactly would be the "left wing" of neoliberalism?
^^^^^
CB: There wouldn't be much of a left wing of neo-liberalism. The
left-wing I referred to above would be Democrats in Congress who voted
against neo-liberal policies.
^^^^^
Neoliberalism
is the ideology of free-market capitalism. Within that context, the
"left wing" would be (1) be interested in promoting feminism, civil
rights, abortion rights, gay rights, and the like without going beyond
free-market views; and/or (2) be very concerned with maintaining the
_legitimacy_ of the capitalism and its "free market," noting the way
that capitalism can and does erode social conditions (communities,
etc.) that keep the peace without limited need for direct intervention
by the police and the armed forces.
^^^^^^^
CB: Ok well, we might look to leftwing and more leftwing. You describe
the leftwing. The more leftwing would be for pre-neo-liberal Liberal
policies , as from the New Deal and Great Society.
^^^^^
Though (in general), the first "left wing" has helped in the fights I
listed (and that was a good thing), I see that "wing" as an attenuated
expression of grass-roots movements for feminism, etc. The second
"left wing" (people like Soros) express fears of the system being seen
as illegitimate not because they are inherently pro-working class, but
because of the possibility of actual unrest (either left- or
right-wing) bubbling up from the working class. In sum, the "left
wing" tendencies of the DP come from outside the DP itself, just as
McGovernism in 1972 was an expression of the anti-war movement that
was largely _against_ the DP. (Remember that it was LBJ who was the
main leader of the war. He was the leader of the DP at the time.)
^^^^^^^
CB: Conyers and Kucinich , for example, are leftwing tendencies of the
DP that come from inside the DP itself. There are leftwingers in the
DP.
LBJ is a good example of the special contraditoriness of the
Democratic Party. He prosecuted the war , yet won the Civil Rights
Act, Great Society and War on Poverty programs. He was right and left
at the same time.
^^^^^^^^
Part of the "left wing" is in the DP base (and some not). It's not the
leadership, who are pretty busy studying the results of focus groups
and polls, sucking up to the moneyed to get campaign contributions,
wheeling and dealing to find compromises that might look good in
public but represent deals among business groups (and raise more
funds). Alas, the part of the "left wing" that's in the DP weakens its
case by catering to that leadership, losing its independence of
thought and action, and apologizing for the DP.
^^^^^^^^^
CB: Pretty much. Especially, since Reaganism which has shifted the
whole political spectrum to the right. There is a much weaker and
smaller left in the DP since Reaganism. But there is a left in and in
the base of the DP.
Weakens its case to whom ? There's not much choice but to _follow_
the leadership. The DP ( and RP) has democratic centralism.
--
[*] I heard a part of an interesting piece about how the DP lacks a
backbone on NPR's "This American Life," about how it is totally
unwilling or constitutionally unable to talk back to business. For
example, why didn't Obama respond to the "right-wing" attack on his
health insurance reform as involving "death panels" by pointing to the
_real_ death panels of private insurance companies? As far as I heard,
the story didn't have an answer. My answer: Obama was deliberately
allied with the insurance industry at that point. In general, the DP
doesn't talk back to business because it represents part of the
business community.
^^^^^^^^
CB: If you are saying the O admin tried to sabotage its own
healthcare` legislation , naww. I have an email somewhere with O admin
responses to the death panel lies.
At any rate, the DP talks out of both sides of its mouth for business
and for labor.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
