Neoliberalism K—UMich 2013 neg 1NCs 1NC: Generic
Download 1.47 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- AT: No Root Cause
- Neoliberalism coopts and appropriates resistance movements—coexistence is impossible
- Capitalism is doomed to fail—rejection is key to avoid rampant exceptional violence
- Anti-neoliberal resistance requires removing foreign neoliberal engagement—they cannot coexist
- Perm fails--The revolution is coopted by institutional politics and any capitalist involvement
- AT: Perm (Venezuela)
AT: SustainableNeoliberalism is on the path to failure—cannot be permanently resurrectedBirch and Mykhenko, Assistant Professor in theDepartment of Social Science at York University and Lecturer in Human Geography, Urban Adaptation, and ResilienceSchool of Geography,Univeristy of Birmingham respectively, 10 (Kean and Vlad, “The Rise and Fall of Neoliberalism: The Collapse of an Economic Order?”, Zed Books, 8/31/10, University of Michigan Libraries)//AS The rapid action by the major governments worldwide in a bid to save giant transnational corporations from the financial meltdown has ultimately shattered the ideological disguise carefully constructed by the twentieth-century neoliberal doctrinaires. In a startling admission, a leading ideologist of neoliberalism has confirmed: "Another ideological god has failed. The world of the past three decades has gone' (Wolf 2009b). At the time when editorials of the Financial Times, the world's major financial capitalist newspaper, regularly condemn "˜the system's structural failure' (Editorial 2009a; Editorial 2009b; Editorial 2009c1), and the IMF (2009c;} sings various governments' praises for "wide-ranging, coordinated public intervention' that has supported demand and rescued financial markets from themselves: it seems all too clear that the neoliberal economic ideology is finished, And with the hopes of a swift recovery dashed by every new release of depressing employment data {`Groom 2009b; Hughes and Rappeport 2009; IMF 2009d; Rappeport 2009; Rappeport et al. 2009), many more years of pain to come ought to undermine the remaining support for the political creed which has so spectacularly crashed. AT: No Root CauseNeoliberal policies are the root cause of violence, oppression, warming, and instability– the price to pay is too highGreenberg, Ph.D in Anthropology at University of Michigan, 2012 (James B., Thomas Weaver (Ph.D. in Anthropology at University of California at Berkeley), Anne Browning-Aiken (Ph.D. in Anthropology at University of Arizona), William L. Alexander (Professor of Anthropology at University of Arizona), “The Neoliberal Transformation of Mexico,” Neoliberalism and Commodity Production in Mexico, University Press of Colorado, pp 334-335)//SG Neoliberalism also underlies the growing problems of crime and violence affecting Mexico more broadly. The policies that ruined smallholder agriculture also made the country receptive to growing marijuana and poppies, thereby open- ing spaces into which drug cartels moved (see the chapter by Emanuel and chapter 9 by Weaver, this volume). The money from the drug trade has had a pernicious effect on Mexican society, creating extensive problems of corruption and increas- ing levels of violence (Campbell 2009).Neoliberal policies have driven millions of Mexicans into economic exile and helped turn Mexico into a major source of drugs. Both drugs and victims of structural violence spill across the border, as does the violence that too often accompanies them, reminding us that we live in a global society and thatneoliberalism in Mexico also has direct consequences for the United States.As we have seen with the near collapse of global financial mar- kets, problems are contagious in an increasingly integrated global economy. Just as the consequences of neoliberal policies in Mexico spill over into the United States, the impacts of US applications of neoliberalism reverberate in Mexico. As the popular saying goes, “When the United States catches a cold, Mexico catches pneumonia.” Tight credit affects commodity chains, so the consequences of the neoliberal debacle in US financial markets are felt strongly in Mexico. In sum, our major area of unease regarding neoliberalism is that, as an eco- nomic framework, the lopsided version of development it delivers comes at too high a price.While neoliberalism may further global capitalism’s frantic drive for expansion and increased profit, it has not resolved intra- and inter-nation prob- lems of inequality, environmental degradation, unequal distribution of resources and gains, global warming, lack of healthcare, instability of pension funds, cor- ruption, and clientelism. Instead, it has increased violence and oppression and generally worsened working and living conditions. AT: PermNeoliberalism coopts and appropriates resistance movements—coexistence is impossibleClarke, Professor of Social Policy at the Open University 08 (John, “Living with/in and without neo-liberalism”, Focaal 51, 2008, http://oro.open.ac.uk/18127/1/10_Clarke.pdf)//AS By cohabitation I mean to identify the problem of how neo-liberalism lives with “others” in the world. As a political–cultural project it must find ways of engaging with other projects, seeking to displace, subordinate, or appropriate them. Most attention has been focused on the work of displacement—the exclusion, marginalization, or residualization of other projects, discourses, and ways of imagining the world and life within it. There are also the processes of subordination and appropriation. Each of these terms accounts for the continued place of alternative political– cultural projects in a neo-liberal dominated or directed assemblage. Subordination points to the allocation of secondary or subsidiary roles for other institutions, practices, and discourses: allowed to function but in more confined spaces, with narrowed scope (residual versions of the “social” or “welfarism,” perhaps; Clarke, 2007). Appropriation points to a more active process that some have described as cooption or incorporation. For example, Kothari (2005), writing about the politics of development, argues that the neo-liberal agenda “co-opted the ‘alternative’ critical discourses” of development. As a consequence: Forms of alternative development become institutionalized and less distinct from conventional, mainstream development discourse and practice. … This strategy of appropriation reduced spaces of critique and dissent, since the inclusion and appropriation of ostensibly radical discourses limited the potential for challenge from outside the mainstream to orthodox development planning and practice… .As these approaches were adopted they were embedded within a neoliberal discourse … and became increasingly technicalised, subject to regimes of professionalisation which institutionalized forms of knowledge, analytical skills, tools, techniques and frameworks. (Kothari 2005: 438–9) This view of co-optation hints at the discursive and political work of articulation—taking existing discourses, projects, practices, and imaginaries and reworking them within a framing neoliberal conception of development and its place in the world. Just as Kothari points to the incorporation of alternative/critical approaches to development, and work on “difference” points to the reworking of radical politics of difference into a normalized model of the individual consumer citizen (Richardson 2005), so other wouldbe transformative political projects have been appropriated and reworked through a neo-liberal frame. Dagnino (2006), writing about struggles over citizenship in Brazil, points to the “perverse confluence” between key organizing ideas and principles of social movements and neoliberal politics, especially those of “participation” and citizenship, which were centrally articulated by radical movements: Living with/in and without neo-liberalism | 139 s10_fcl510110 4/9/08 9:27 PM Page 139There is thus a perverse confluence between, on the one hand, participation as part of a project constructed around the extension of citizenship and the deepening of democracy, and on the other hand, participation associated with the project of a minimal state that requires the shrinking of its social responsibilities and its progressive exemption from the role of guarantor of rights. The perversity of this confluence reflects the fact that, although pointing to opposite and even antagonistic directions, both projects require an active, proactive civil society… A particularly important aspect of the perverse confluence is precisely the notion of citizenship, which is now being redefined through a series of discursive shifts to make it suitable for use by neo-liberal forces. This new redefinition, part of the struggle between different political projects, attests to the symbolic power of citizenship and the mobilizing capacity it has demonstrated in organizing subaltern sectors around democratizing projects. The need to neutralize these features of citizenship, while trying to retain its symbolical power, has made its appropriation by neo-liberal forces necessary (Dagnino 2006: 158f.; emphasis in original). Dagnino talks about the political frustration and confusion resulting from the “apparently shared discourse” (2006: 162) in ways that are echoed by Bondi and Laurie’s observations about the “sense of uncertainty, ambivalence and perplexity about the politics of the processes we were observing and analyzing” (2005: 394). This “confusion” emerges precisely at the point of appropriation, articulation, and transformation exercised by the neo-liberal re-framing of existing radical and alternative discourses. Neo-liberalism is marked by a capacity to bend these words (and the political and cultural imaginaries they carry) to new purposes. Capitalism is doomed to fail—rejection is key to avoid rampant exceptional violenceSpringer,assistant Professor in the Department of Geography at the University of Victoria12 (Simon, “Neoliberalising violence: of the exceptional and the exemplary in coalescing moments”, Area 44:2, Royal Geographical Society, 2012, Wiley Online)//AS The point of our critiques should not be to temper neoliberalism with concessions and niceties, as capitalism of any sort is doomed to fail. The logics of creative destruction, uneven development and unlimited expansion – which stoke the fires of conflict and contradict the finite limitations of the earth – are capitalism’s undoing regardless of the form it takes (Harvey 2007). Hence, what instead needs to be occurring in our scholarship on neoliberalism is a more thorough radicalisation of our agenda, where the purpose becomes to consign neoliberalism and all other forms of capitalism to the waste bin of history, so that the ‘exceptional’ and ‘exemplary’ violence of this maligned chapter of human existence become disturbing abominations from our past, not enduring realities of our present, or conceded inevitabilities of our future. What I mean by exceptional violence is that violence which appears to fall outside of the rule, usually by being so profound in its manifestation. Exceptional violence forces those who bear witness to its implications to recognise its malevolence precisely because of the sheer shock and horror that is unleashed. Consequently, exceptional violence is jarring and elicits a deep emotional response. Yet, exceptional violence is only exceptional in the reaction it provokes and, as the proverb ‘the exception proves the rule’ hints, exceptional violence is not beyond the bounds of the normative, but instead actually always exists in a co-constitutive relationship with exemplary violence, or that violence which forms the rule. Anti-neoliberal resistance requires removing foreign neoliberal engagement—they cannot coexistAlbo, Department of Political Science, York University, 06 (Gregory, “The Unexpected Revolution: Venezuela Confronts Neoliberalism”, Presentation at the University of Alberta, International Development Week, 1/06, http://socialistproject.ca/theory/venezuela_praksis.pdf)//AS There has been a traditional view on the Left on the steps for undertaking an anti-capitalist transformation: seize the commanding heights of the economy; close-off financial speculation and bring the banks into the public fold; seal-off international private capital flows; impose central production mandates on industry and point the state bureaucracy toward new public goals; develop forms of workers' governance and rights in workplaces; and form any number of commissions to address pressing social needs. These are, indeed, tasks that in some senses cannot be avoided: the challenge has been partly in the timing, specifying the new means of administration and co- ordination, and fostering the extension of popular and democratic capacities. The presumption has been of a disciplined party acting at the centre of the state could work with cadres and workers across a decentralized base to allow the unleashing of an inherent anti-capitalist logic. In historical social revolutions, this vision has proven fraught in both theory and practice. These tasks are all aligned, moreover, quite differently when there has not been a singular political rupture breaking the old regime. In the case of Venezuela the initial agenda involved consolidating the political base for the Chavez regime and fostering the organizational formation of new social forces. This has meant - to the extent a temporal ordering can be discerned at all- developing an anti-neoliberal programme as the foundation from which to deepen the processes of socialization and nationalization. In other words, the project has been to develop a new co- operative, participatory and solidaristic logic that could consolidate against the logic of private property and capital accumulation to break the material and visionary constraints of neoliberalism. With such an overarching objective of opening new political spaces, it is not easy to catalogue all the new initiatives of the Bolivarian programme. Some of the key policy fronts for deepening the class struggle can, however, be highlighted. Perm fails--The revolution is coopted by institutional politics and any capitalist involvementKatz, economist, researcher at the National Council of Science and Technology (CNCT), professor of economics at the University of Buenos Aires 07-- (Claudio, “Socialist Strategies in Latin America”, Monthly Review 59:4, 9/07, ProQuest)//AS The Latin American left is once again discussing the paths to socialism. The correlation of forces has changed through popular action, the crisis of neoliberalism, and U.S. imperialism's loss of offensive capability. lt is no longer relevant to juxtapose a revolutionary political period of the past with a conservative present. The social weakness of the industrial working class does not impede anti-capitalist progress, which depends on the exploited and the oppressed uniting in common struggle. What is crucial is the level of popular consciousness. The latter has forged new anti-liberal and anti-imperialist convictions, but an anti- capitalist link, which an open debate about twenty-first century socialism could foster, is still missing. The constitutional framework that replaced the dictatorships does not impede the left's development. But the left must avoid institutional co-optation without turning its back on the electoral process. Electoral participation can be made compatible with the promotion of people's power. Movements and parties fulfill a complementary function since social struggle is not self-sufficient and partisan organization is neces- sary. Yet it is essential to avoid sectarian posturing and to include im mediate improvements as part of the revolutionary agenda. This principle governs all socialist strategy. AT: Perm (Venezuela)Any US involvement in Venezuela corrupts antineoliberal movementsAlbo, Department of Political Science, York University, 06 (Gregory, “The Unexpected Revolution: Venezuela Confronts Neoliberalism”, Presentation at the University of Alberta, International Development Week, 1/06, http://socialistproject.ca/theory/venezuela_praksis.pdf)//AS Economic and political isolation are, therefore, a crucial question for the international balance of forces Venezuela faces. Strengthening the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, and attempts at new ties with China, have been one set of intemational efforts. These diplomatic manoeuvres, on the one hand, strengthen the economic capacity of Venezuela and its diplomatic leverage, and, on the other hand, attempt to lessen the degree of dependence on oil exports to the US. Yet, as important as these steps are, they do little to create an alternate sphere of influence to the US or an anti-neoliberal agenda contesting the world market. The critical question remains, irrevocably, developments across Latin America. But apart from Cuba, other Latin American states have provided, at best, fleeting political support. Cuba has, moreover, been critical to the material and administrative capacities of the Chavez regime to improve health care (through thousands of doctors implicitly paid for by oil shipments at favourable prices) and also, to a degree, other areas of social policy. Cuba has also provided crucial diplomatic and economic advice, but it is not so clear what the latter amounts to in terms of deepening Venezuelan planning capacities given the economic straits that Cuba itself is in and its own difficulty of formulating a post-Soviet development model. The stark reality is the fact that no other Latin American state - and most notably the big powers of Brazil and Argentina with Centre-Left governments - has yet to attempt their own departure from neoliberalism. This has meant that external economic conditions for Venezuela apart from the oil sector remain unfavourable: for exports due to fiscal austerity and cheap currency policies across the continent and for regional efforts to foster internal development and diversification due to neoliberal export-oriented policies insisted upon by IMF conditionalitiesChavez's Bolivarian project of a more politically integrated Latin America has kept him attuned to continental political initiatives (which regionally still look like little more than conventional neoliberal free trade agreements),'6 and won him a wide audience amongst the poor and Left in Latin America as the only "˜fighter' and "˜patriot' in the current panoply of leaders. But the project has little in the way of concrete measures yet to speak of that would support and generalizl an alternate economic model. Oil export dependence on the U.S. market thus remains a central parameter in all economic and political calculations. Download 1.47 Mb. Share with your friends:
|