Talk:Neoliberalism
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Neoliberalism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Neoliberalism. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Neoliberalism at the Reference desk. |
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
This level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article. If you've come here in response to such recruitment, please review the relevant Wikipedia policy on recruitment of editors, as well as the neutral point of view policy. Disputes on Wikipedia are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Please make page: flexible economic model, economic eclecticism
editMost 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?
editThere 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.
editA 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
editOne 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)
- 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)
Pathetic on US section
editThe 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)