Behind the Gibbs' Controversy: Continuing the Neo-Liberal Failure

[amborin]

The neoliberal failure

by: Paul Rosenberg

Wed Aug 11, 2010


The main problem with the Gibbs kerfuffle is the lack of understanding of what lies beneath the surface.
In my previous diary, "Shorter Gibbs", I presented one view: that of the political domninance of economic elites over both parties.....
But another way of looking at it is in terms of specifically what Versailles Dems are up to, in contrast with progressives.
And the most economical way to describe that is in terms of neoliberalism vs. social democracy.

snip

.....around the time of Ronald Reagan's election, with a pronounced re-direction toward the neo-liberal model in which cutting the size of the state was supposed to be the key to prosperity--what quickly came to be known abroad as the "neo-liberal model".
It's the same model, actually, that New Democrats came to pick up on with increasing enthusiasm in the 1990s.
And it's visible in many aspects of Obama's politics today.

Because such policies were implemented so widely around the world--thanks largely to the imposition of "structural adjustment policies" by IMF/World Bank--there's actually a rather robust database by which we can judge the effectiveness of neoliberalism, and five years ago, that's just what the Center on Economic Policy Research (CEPR) did with "Scorecard on Development: 25 Years of Diminished Progress" by Mark Weisbrot, Dean Baker and David Rosnick.



The decline in growth rates for all but the very poorest countries is clearly quite dramatic. And given this decline, it's not surprising to find declines in many other indicators as well. Less text, more charts on the flip to fill out the whole story.

snip

That's the quckie, data-driven overview of neo-liberalism's global failure, 1980 to 2005. In the five years since then... well, we've got ourselves a global great recession, now haven't we? So the picture painted above was that of neo-liberalism's "good times".

I hope that begins to paint a clearer picture of what it is that Gibbs and Obama stand for, and what progressives stand against.
This is not a spat. It is not about who's a professional this, or a drug-taking that.
It's about what works to improve people's lives.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. And the neo-liberal failure is on this side of the neo-con failure.

We're sincerely out of whack.

[glitch]

2. Linky? nt

[amborin]

3. here, sorry

http://www.openleft.com/diary/17149/the-neoliberal-failure

[glitch]

4. Thanks! Excellent article, explains a lot and without the emotion. K & R nt

[BeFree]

5. Hmmm

OK... is economic growth all that matters? Isn't it playing into the economic elitists hands by focusing only on money?

Ecologists will tell you that uncontrolled growth of one thing in an area starves the other things.

So maybe the slow down is actually a good thing?

And I do want Canadian health care and the pentagon replaced.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

6. Great post. Versaille Dems - what an image

It also reminds me of the fact that Marie Antoinette was fond of dressing up like a milkmaid and pretending she was just a simple country girl.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

7. kick