me: > > what does [Hall] say? does he say that the rise of neoliberalism isn't > > just their victory, but also a result of the weakness of the > > alternative? if so, that seems pretty obvious.
Doug: > It's been 20 years since I read it, but as I recall, the right got > people to think that unions were a problem, that markets are flexible > and liberating, and that the nanny state stifled innovation. The > revolution in consciousness preceded their victory - made it > possible, really. But I must re-read. sounds like a Lakoff-type "framing" argument. That's okay, I guess. But I think that the ability of Mrs. T to convince people that "unions were a problem, that markets are flexible and liberating, and that the nanny state stifled innovation" [and that innovation is always good] in part reflected the organizational and ideological weaknesses of the Labour Party and the unions at the time, not to mention those of the ultras of my ilk. BTW, I think Doug was using the term "common sense" in a technical sense, to refer to the view that people have of the system when viewed from the inside. This "common sense" can change when organizations of the left weaken and fall, so that understanding of the totality are lost. -- Jim Devine / "The truth is at once less sinister and more dangerous." -- Naomi Klein.
