Posts Tagged ‘Neo-liberalism’


June 22, 2016

queasy 1. inclined to or feeling nausea. 2. causing nausea; nauseating. 3. uneasy; uncomfortable. 4. squeamish; fastidious.
Loathsome doesn’t begin to describe the response most have to the presidential election of 2016. How about those not finding it loathsome but rather exciting, its opportunity to participate in the making of history, or reclaim America? Analysis can’t help but notice a certain queasiness pervasive in this arena of engaged, informed and passionate electorate. The possibility of the opponent actually winning out, the loss of any sense of inevitability or righteousness, contribute to that unease. Analysis finds all this quite curious in that in all these electoral contests, stark contrasts are usually delineated in order to define one candidate as being completely different from the other. Nausea usually sets in with the realization that “it makes no difference. It is all unpalatable.” Could that actually be the case? The presumed Democratic candidate for president recently spoke in central Ohio at the Fort Hayes educational facility. She lambasted her opponent on many levels, primarily for the disingenuous way her opponent enriched and enriches himself. Why, the line of suits he markets is made in Mexico. Analysis reveals a breakdown of these economic talking points acts out enrichment through the practice of neo-liberal policies, aspirations and agendas. This is the very neo-liberalism that was threatened by the Scandinavian Socialism promoted as “difference“ by the self-same speaker’s primary opponent. The presumptive Republican presidential candidate prides himself, nay, runs on the very basis of his qualifications, his ability to enrich himself by his mastery of the workings of the neo-liberal global economy – be it trade, the mobility of capital and financing, or the mobility of labor. Analogous to service providers, be they Google, Apple, Amazon or AT&T (etc. etc. etc.), it is all about choice, and more and greater individual choices implying more and greater freedom (the very core of neo-liberalism). Of course the regimen constantly changes and is in need of updating, upgrading, but the promise of better is always there, always the marketing incentive. The ultimate and greatest benefits enrich those at the top, the service providers, while those “being served” gain more and more freedoms. The analogy with neo-liberalism is complete by each and every new and additional freedom incurring an additional charge or fee. Is it any wonder that the Clintons attended the last Trump wedding and spend the winter holidays at the Kissinger estate in Florida? The queasiness sets in when Democrats realize that maybe, just maybe, the neo-liberal charade will be exposed for precisely what it is – a Victor Kiam Remington shaver ad promoting a ridiculously affordable electric shaver that eventually continuously requires expensive replacement cutter heads. “Progress” won’t be progress anymore but just another part of global marketing strategy. The queasiness on the part of Republicans is realizing that their “conservatism” orbits around a tacit acceptance of the neo-liberalism their forebears helped implement and is currently represented by a caricature spouting “See, I learned how to play by the rules of neo-liberalism, and enriched myself. We can do that self-same to make America great again.” Locally we find this with the recent unemployment statistics for Licking County in May, the lowest they’ve been since pre-911, when the bloom of the dot com bubble hadn’t yet burst. The championing of neo-liberalism’s greater freedom and choice through the inclusion of more in the market (employment as labor for business) elides the mushrooming of children’s summer nutrition programs to help feed those who, for some mysterious reason, aren’t being benefitted by these global marketing aspirations, policies and agendas. Queasiness sets in when “liberal” Democrats realize that conservatives have embraced neo-liberalism as status quo in order to thrive, and “conservative” Republicans realize they have to continuously change to play by the rules of global economic neo-liberalism.