Talk:Neoliberalism

Please make page: flexible economic model, economic eclecticism

Most Western countries are flexible with some inertia after the change in conditions.

They might exhibit even Keynesianism while maintaining neoliberalism. Actually governments adjust the percentages of eclecticism. We are supposed to (also) write what actually happens, and not only present idealized theories.

No mention of Higher Education?

There is no mention here of higher education and credentialing -- enrollments track incarceration, right?

There are two recent books by Michael Lind -- another outspoken conservative critic of neoliberalism -- that contextualize what he calls the "credential arms race" in terms of declining situation of workers brought on by the post-New Deal shift to neoliberalism. "The New Class War" (2020) and "Hell to Pay" (2023) 182.2.140.147 (talk) 08:12, 26 May 2023 (UTC) 50.4.132.185 (talk) 17:29, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

IPs vandalizing the page.

A certain IP is now insistently vandalizing the page to add a picture of a brain tumor as a "helpful image". I don't want to get enrolled in an edit war, so I'm bringing this issue here. Daniel de Louro (talk) 12:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Criticism section is too long

One third of the article. I think it should be trimmed. 177.86.143.52 (talk) 14:28, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I think that it has become sort of because a coatrack / soapbox for critiques on how the world runs and/or free markets and/or capitalism. I did a quick sample of (on line) references and the first 5 that I found didn't even mention neoliberalism. North8000 (talk) 17:36, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Any content from references that do not mention neoliberalism is inherently original research and should be removed imediately. StellarHalo (talk) 13:37, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Looking over the sources it appears that the vast majority are not only reliable, academic sources but directly pertain to the topic of the article. The section is by far the most well sourced of all the sections here. If length is the issue and not sourcing I have long advocated for the section to be turned into its own article (like Criticism of Capitalism, for instance) and the criticism section here dramatically shortened into a summary of the new article. Outside of that I would oppose mass deletions of reliably sourced, long-standing material, and would probably be inclined to restore such mass deletions unless a significant consensus is found here for such deletions. If anything, the section of the article which appears to have sources not pertaining to neoliberalism would be the traditions section.--C.J. Griffin (talk) 15:04, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Pathetic on US section

The neoliberalism was brought about by Ronald Reagan. Not Democrats. Clearly POV with one or two citations by the author to clearly show the authors intentions. This is a deceit. Reagan’s policies were what brought about neoliberalism that Clinton was forced to coincide buy. And he didn’t purge anything as both Bush presidents continued the policy of defense spending and traditional values. Clinton was forced by a GOP congress as well in the 90s to adopt neoliberal policies too. 2601:58B:900:72D0:2C85:33B7:4A95:6B6D (talk) 19:43, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

 Additional information needed OK, but do you have some some citations from a reliable source to back up your statements? Otherwise it is just original research, which is disallowed on English Wikipedia. Peaceray (talk) 23:00, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

This is an online encyclopedia. I’d suppose the writers of this should know this and get the sources. I’m sure I can find them. It is clearly a matter of common sense experience when it comes to my comments. Im not editing the section. Would think that would be the job of the writers of this section. Otherwise I would’ve attempted to edit the section with sources 2601:58B:900:72D0:4CCA:FA2E:CE7:1F56 (talk) 03:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Here is one source:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/05/books/review/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-neoliberal-order-gary-gerstle.html 2601:58B:900:72D0:4CCA:FA2E:CE7:1F56 (talk) 03:24, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Neoliberalism actually starts with Nixon & Carter according to at least some analyses. Both Democrat & GOP were neoliberalist by the time of Reagan & Clinton. The above sounds like a common narrative that tries to blame one party while holding the other virtuous but with hands tied. – ishwar  (speak) 00:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

"starts with Nixon & Carter" Why is Gerald Ford excluded? Dimadick (talk) 11:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

I may not have a reference for Ford, but you should add some information to the article if you have it.

It seems to me that folks mention Carter as a reaction to the idea of neoliberalism starting with Reagan, and now I see that Nixon is mentioned as a reaction to the idea that neoliberal policies start with Carter. Although I'm not a historian or expert in neoliberalism, I would a priori guess that all of this is an oversimplification because why should businesses try to influence government policy to their favor only during a particular presidency. Seems more likely that there would always be pressure to change the New Deal policies and that over time changes may successful. Another question I would pose is what roles did the legislative and judicial play – can most every thing really be attributed only to president administrations? It's probably complicated, so a lot of research is needed. – ishwar  (speak) 23:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

If one mentions that they are no expert, then why say it started with Nixon and Carter? The above comment seems to be guessing and make a common narrative that way. Nixon and Carter were part of the New Deal Era started by FDR. They were clearly not neoliberal. None were tax reducers, deregulators, and/or free traders. 2601:58B:900:72D0:4CCA:FA2E:CE7:1F56 (talk) 03:34, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

No it does not. It started with Reagan in the USA. Neither Nixon nor Carter were neoliberal. They were regulators and big government 2601:58B:900:72D0:4CCA:FA2E:CE7:1F56 (talk) 03:15, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Why do I say it? Because that's what the historians say. Just consult the sources. I'm just dubious that blame can be placed on single President and no one else and that the change happened suddenly. On one of your points, Carter was a deregulator. So, you might want to check that topic before editing the article.

Some historians are disagreeing with you and saying otherwise. If you have sources saying that it suddenly happened with Reagan without any influence from previous governments, that's fine. You just present the evidence from all sides of the argument. – ishwar  (speak) 10:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

No Carter was not a deregulator. And cause historians say? Which ones might that be? How about that those historians are incorrect. And history (as well as historians) disagree with you. It started in the USA with Reagan. You should consult the sources with common sense. Not “just consult the sources” when those “sources” are misleading. It is a known fact, neoliberalism in the modern sense, started in the 1980s in the USA.

One of my points? Because of one deregualtion Carter made? Eisenhower cut taxes and was balanced the budget, that make him a neoliberal too? Does Teddy Rosselvelt trust busting make him a new dealer? I suppose I can find a source that would claim that, but it would clearly be wrong. Same here. You might want to check your reasoning before editing things. Blame one president you say. Blame? What, is there a pov with that comment? Perhaps, one responsible is a better term.

I already gave the sources. And no, all sides of the arguement shouldn’t be made if it’s spreading mistruths. 2601:58B:900:72D0:C08B:21EC:AE13:FD52 (talk) 00:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

If Carter deregulated (more than one industry), then he is a deregulator. I don't see how one can dispute that. You seem to be saying that there needs to be a certain amount of deregulation that meets some threshold to call a person a deregulator.

You are hung up on characterizing a president with the term as the main essence of their administration. And, you think Carter doesn't have enough neoliberal tendencies to qualify to be called a neoliberalist. The folks I'm referring to are not trying to apply a label to a president. Instead they point out things that are characterize neoliberalism are found in Carter's presidency as well. It's a more nuanced view than your characterization. I think it's fine to say there were more neoliberalist policies coming from Reagan and following presidents. The ones making the claim that neoliberalism starts sooner aren't saying that Carter is as much of a neoliberalist as Reagan or Clinton. They are just saying that neoliberal policies & influences predate Reagan (regardless of whether one wants give a president the label 'neoliberalist'). I would consider it misleading to ignore neoliberalist policies of earlier presidents in order to fit a label. Reality is often messy and complex, but that doesn't mean one should simplify it. – ishwar  (speak) 11:22, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Short description

Thoughts on changing the short description from "renewal of concept of unfettered capitalism" to "renewal of unfettered capitalism as policy" ?

The current version feels clunky and unclear. SSR07 (talk) 02:06, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

I support your change: "policy" is a better way to put things than "concept". — Charles Stewart (talk) 03:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)