What went wrong with the neoliberals

 This might be a thought dump.

Neoliberalism made a lot of sense in the 80s and 90s. Liberalism had spawned some crappy outcomes, such as huge welfare rolls. There was also a huge increase in crime, though it wasn't clear that liberalism caused it. Liberalism might have been abetting it. 

Liberalism was anti-war, and also anti-military, sometimes to the point of advocating that the US get rid of nuclear weapons and greatly reduce the military. Liberalism was pro-union, and some of the unions were driving uncompetitive pay and benefits. Some liberalism bordered on communism, with the profits being vilified.

So it made sense to have a different flavor of liberalism where a strong military helped the US and the rest of world. Where unions shouldn't go crazy. Where free trade was better than protectionist tariffs. Where profits were good as long as workers shared in the benefits. Where welfare should be reformed and work emphasized. Where crime was an individual choice and was damaging to society and therefore should be prevented and punished. In many ways, neoliberalism was a better fit for the US, which is a fairly conservative country. I'm not sure why the US is such a conservative country, but it has been that way for quite a long time, maybe throughout our history. 

Yes, neoliberalism made sense. I was very much a neoliberal. But it failed to address some huge issues, though, to be fair, no other political ideology handled the issues either. The big issue was the hollowing out of American manufacturing. This affected jobs everywhere, but most strongly in the cities, where urban populations were left without decent sources of income. 

Maybe even more so, no one has found an answer to the worsening income inequality, which makes all sorts of economic situations worse. The opportunities to work hard and better oneself are diminished for all but the most entrepreneurial and risk-hardy. Job security becomes less and less, and that also means that people don't have security in their health insurance and healthcare. The middle class has been getting more and more insecure. The lower class have always been insecure, with even less chance for improvement. 

So on fundamental issue of economic well-being, neoliberals have failed the US, as has everyone. 

If I'm right and the fundamental issue is economic well-being, what should the policy plans be? That's the topic of a different post. 

Image: marketwatch.com

Extras. I found a relevant article after I wrote this. It's more historical than mine. It also fails to have an alternative. 

The sprawl of the welfare state

I was reading a political blog and read this not-atypical comment:

"... a  few partisan leftists rolled their eyes at conservatives who think death panels are a feature of socialized medicine...

"All that said, the reason this stuff is so much more offensive on the right is because the nation has basically drifted leftward, in some respects rapidly, over the past several years. Who would have thought, even 15 years ago, that opposition to gay marriage would be basically fringe in the US? Or that we would reach a point where the viability of political candidates is largely, perhaps mostly, predicated on how well they avoid taking stuff away from key constituents? It is, practically, an increasingly liberal country and world." -- A plainblog commenter

I started to write a comment arguing against this viewpoint. It's easy to defeat the idea that avoiding "taking stuff away from key constituents" is only a problem for the left. I can point to some juicy benefits for the wealthy and medical corporations during the Bush administration to show that the GOP does constituent service the same as the Democrats, but do I really need to?

It's so easy to talk about marriage for same-sex partners as being mixed lefty and conservative, since marriage is a traditional, conservative sort of institution.

However, it was a lot harder to argue that the country hasn't drifted leftward over the past several years, or maybe I should say four decades. I wanted to make the argument that, in terms of social acceptance, there has been definite leftward shifts, but not on fiscal issues.

Yet when I tried to find examples of conservative ideals becoming more prevalent in society and government, I could think of only one example--the welfare reform of the 1990's. Most government policy has expanded government's role, responsibilities, and expenditures. But remember that not all government spending is "liberal" spending. Increased defense spending, which we've had, has more of a conservative constituency. Increased spending on Medicare had bipartisan support when it was voted on in Congress, so it's not exactly fair to label it "liberal" now. If the country is in a rightward shift now, as shown in the GOP/Tea Party gains in the 2010 election, it hasn't penetrated spending or policy yet.

For movement in a fiscal conservative direction, you may have to look to business. Many are pushing back on healthcare with co-pays and higher employee contributions. They're also offering 401K retirement plans instead of fixed pensions.

Whether you think the leftward direction is good or bad depends on your political viewpoint. I'm afraid (or glad) you'll have to make up your own mind about that.

Basically blue