After posting a Ron Paul video on my FaceBook, I got the following comment: “Uh free market neoliberalism created the crisis you dumb butt. Where are you learning economics”
What is “free market neoliberalism”?
Someone who doesn’t know their terminology, imo.
Chicago School + right wing, incl supply side and deregulation.
Reagan, Thatcher, Hayek, Friedman all considered neoliberals by ignorant progressives.
It wasn’t a YouTube comment, it was a FaceBook comment.
Damn, I mixed up threads again lol. This is why I should post once at a time, I guess :\
So his premise is that Ron Paul is free market neoliberal. Which is false. I guess he knows nothing about Ron Paul.
Oh, but he heard his name mentioned with all those other right-wing nut extremists when talking to his circle of friends, so obviously, it must be true.
That is the type of reasoning you are up against, if you boldly decide to argue.
It’s like that idiotic article Thom Hartmann had on the Huffpo a few months ago, where he called Mises, Rand and Hayek responsible for the economic crisis, and may have insinuated they are neoliberals.
Ayn Rand is another “neoliberal” according to some fools.
It’s just another epithet like Paultard.
He’s got a BA and an MA from Berkeley, and is getting a PhD from U. Texas. So much for public education.
So what would be the problem with blaming the current crisis on “free market neoliberalism” (as defined by LibertyStudent).
A buzzword used by angry Marxists to describe crony fascism and socialism.
The problem would be that they’re blaming the current crisis on those who essentially predicted the crisis (e.g. Hayek, possibly Friedman).
As far as I’ve been able to tell, neoliberalism is like neoconservatism with more focus on the economy. I believe they favour subsidies to politically connected multinational corporations, rather than tariffs, and bears little in common with the classical liberals of old, like LvM. There is a local party here in New Zealand called the ACT Party that seems to follow this ideology.
Basically, it’s confusing crony capitalism and socialism-for-the-rich with actual, laissez faire capitalism. It’s akin to confusing Meet the Spartans with the real 300, or a bottle of water filled up with red dye with a vintage wine.
One of its hallmarks is that it supposedly treats the nation as a firm the aim of which is to maximise wealth. I.e. neo-mercantilism.
The guy made two mistakes after watching the video:
-
He assumed that when Ron Paul said “fee market”, Ron Paul meant “free market neoliberalism”
-
He assumed I favored a “neoliberal free market”
This the same guy who thinks I am a Republican/McCain supporter for having called Obama a communist and comparing Obama to Castro.
Which is why its good to preempt the false left / right accusation.
Try attack both, at the same time. lol
I haven’t found much intelligence via YT. I think it is a cesspool of free riders.
I do appreciate that they pick up the hosting bill for many videos I like. But the social networking aspect is overblown, this is why I was never on MySpace or Facebook. That is generally why I am here. While I don’t agree with everyone (or anyone?) absolutely, the quality of discourse is much higher. I don’t have to explain what socialism is to anyone here. I don’t have to explain the ABCT or origin of money. I don’t feel compelled to defend minarchism.
there could be a whole conversation on the words people use in order to vent their emotions. this one is so funny. i laughed. dumb butt…lol
The other day I heard some guy’s haircut called a “Neo Karl Childers” (ya know Billy-Bob Thornton’s character in Slingblade). I started cracking up.
I wonder what these haircuts signify about the economy.
I know the person personally. But yeah, the youtubez are horrible. The discussions on the official Mises Facebook discussion boards are pretty good.