Neoliberalism K—UMich 2013 neg 1NCs 1NC: Generic
Download 1.47 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Neoliberalist governments have already been overthrown in several Latin American countries.
AT: InevNotions of inevitable neoliberalism are products of repressive neoliberal ideology—resistance to the dominant discourse of the aff is keyHursh and Henderson, associate professor of education at the University of Rochester and PhD at the Warner Graduate School of Education and Human Development 11 (David and Joseph, “ Contesting global neoliberalism and creating alternative futures”, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 32:2, May 2011, Routledge)//AS So far we have described some of the forces that led to the rise of neoliberalism, its principal features, and suggested that while neoliberalism is presented as beneficial to all, it has generally benefited the already privileged while harming most everyone else. In this section, we want to raise the question of how it is that neoliberal economic and political policies have come to be so widely accepted, often to the total exclusion of other viewpoints. To answer that question, we show how proponents of neoliberalism have described neoliberal policies as the inevitable outcome of capitalist development where decisions are market-based, and, therefore, businesses should have few or no regulations, as in the recent deregulation of energy and transportation industries, and repeal of sections of the Glass-Steagall Act regulating the finance industry in the USA. Moreover, it assumes that government should play a smaller role in improving social welfare through spending on education, housing, or other social services. Furthermore, we use concepts from critical geography to conduct a spatial analysis of cities and countries as both contingent and particular (Harvey, 2009, p. 166), and situated within networks and hierarchies. It is important, as we imply above, that we examine cities, such as Chicago, as part of a competitive global network of cities. It is similarly important to understand countries, such as Mexico, within the context of US policies, including the NAFTA and immigration laws, and in relationship to transnational corporations. Similarly, Nigeria’s oil war can be understood in terms of the relationship between the politically powerful who benefit from the oil royalties, the government, the poor whose land is fouled by the oil, and the oil industries themselves (see Maas, 2009). Therefore, we begin by suggesting that we need to critique neoliberal policies for the way in which they attempt to limit public discourse, what can be said and thought. In particular, neoliberalism is often promoted as inevitable so that governing bodies in cities, provinces, and countries are portrayed as having no choice but to adopt neoliberal policies. Moreover, neoliberalism supports discourses that marginalize particular groups of people and where they live. This occurs, for example, when urban neighbourhoods, as in Chicago, are described as blighted, dangerous, and therefore, needing to be demolished, or nations are portrayed, such as in Africa, ‘as a land of failed states, uncontrollable violence, horrific disease, and unending poverty’ (Ferguson, 2006, p. 10). Lastly, neoliberal discourses often reduce notions of social justice to access to markets, ignoring differences in access to monetary, legal and social resources. Such an approach also eliminates the need to discuss different conceptions of social justice or the purpose of society, asserting that economic and technical responses to political questions are sufficient. “Inevitable neoliberalism” is due to self-perpetuating politics that kill political resistance—contesting this is criticalHay, Professor of Political Analysis at the University of Sheffield04 (Colin, “The normalizing role of rationalist assumptions in the institutional embedding of neoliberalism”, Economy and Society 33:4, 2004, Taylor and Francis)//AS Once again, the justification for policy is presented not in its own terms, but as a necessary accommodation to the ‘harsh realities’ of new economic timesin a (superficially) dispassionate, almost technocratic manner. Appeal is again made to processes beyond the control of political actors which must simply be accommodated _/ and hence to a dull logic of economic compulsion which is non-negotiable. The policy implications of such an account are painfully clear. As globalization serves to establish competitive selection mechanisms within the international economy, there is little choice but to cast all regulatory impediments to the efficient operation of the market on the bonfire of welfare institutions, regulatory controls and labour-market rigidities. Plausible, familiar and compelling though such a logic may well appear, it is important to isolate the parsimonious rationalist assumptions on which it is predicated. For it is these, rather than any inexorable process of globalization, which ultimately summon the necessity of an accommodation with neoliberal (supply-side) microeconomics. They are principally five-fold, and each can be challenged on both theoretical and empirical grounds (the empirical critique is elaborated in Hay (2005)) _/ see Table 3. Neoliberalist governments have already been overthrown in several Latin American countries.Buono and Bell Lara, Professors of Sociology and Senior Researcher in the FLACSO-Cuba Program, 2007(Richard A. Delloand José, “Neoliberalism and Resistance in Latin America,” 2007, http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/content/9789047410881)//CS In our view, the emerging scenario is anything but pessimistic. We believe that these real social consequences of neoliberalism have provided the fundamental basis for its own negation. The ideological monopoly of neoliberalism has without doubt been fractured, and if indeed the anti-neoliberal turn of the masses has not managed to totally sweep away those policies, it has put them in check while opening up new spaces for other possible development strategies.Various Latin American governments have been brought down over recent years as a result of mass street actions, including the spectacular cases of Peru (2000), Argentina (2001), Bolivia (2003 and 2005), and Ecuador (2000 and 2005), the latter case of which in a certain sense is paradigmatic. The common pattern in these processes of mass popular mobilisation directed at their governments has been one of “emergency response.” Under certain socialconditions, mass action has proven able to sweep away those regimes thatattempted at all costs to impose the most extreme varieties of neoliberalpolicies. Download 1.47 Mb. Share with your friends:
|