新自由主義( 1 )

Ⅰ 自由主義のルネサンス　(1) 自由主義の没落　(2) 新自由主義の諸系譜　(3) 自由の将来　Ⅱ 反集産主義としての新自由主義　(1) 市場の擁護　(2) 中央管理経済か，市場経済か　(3) ミーゼス，ハイエク，オイケン， レプ

Teachers as the Gravediggers of Neoliberalism: Promoting Dialectical Individualism from the Ruins of the Neoliberal State

Neoliberalism will not die naturally, it must be killed through relentless criticism. However, as criticism of neoliberalism expands, scholars must not reify the term. Scholars must begin to disentangle the historical antecedents that comprise neoliberalism in order to expose it for the sham that it is. Perhaps the biggest sham of neoliberalism is its call for individual freedom. Specifically, by paying attention to the more revolutionary conceptions of individualism contained in some strands of Eighteenth century liberalism, the contradictions of neoliberalism can be exposed. If education, and society in general, is to move past neoliberalism, neoliberalism cannot simply be discarded or wished away, rather, it must be dialectically negated by superseding its unjust elements and retaining and transforming any of its more revolutionary elements to lay a new foundation for education in a post-neoliberal world. Drawing off this dialectical negation of neoliberalism, this paper argues for a new conception of individualism called dialectical individualism. This is not a return to some idealized form of liberalism however, but a new phase in human history with a new conception of individualism. The dialectical movement should not be seen as the product of some otherworldly force, but rather, it should be viewed as centered in the individual and driven by volunteerism in the context of the historical situation. Students can be taught to be dialectical in their actual school work, by writing challenging papers, by writing vision statements, and by partaking in collaborative assignments, and through their understanding of history and the present.Educatio

Did somebody say Neoliberalism? On the uses and limitations of a critical concept in media and communication studies

This paper explores the political-economic basis and ideological effects of talk about neoliberalism with respect to media and communication studies. In response to the supposed ascendancy of the neoliberal order since the 1980s, many media and communication scholars have redirected their critical attentions from capitalism to neoliberalism. This paper tries to clarify the significance of the relatively new emphasis on neoliberalism in the discourse of media and communication studies, with particular reference to the 2011 phone hacking scandal at The News of the World. Questioning whether the discursive substitution of ‘neoliberalism’ for ‘capitalism’ offers any advances in critical purchase or explanatory power to critics of capitalist society and its media, the paper proposes that critics substitute a Marxist class analysis in place of the neoliberalism-versus-democracy framework that currently dominates in the field

'Alive after five' : constructing the neoliberal night in Newcastle upon Tyne.

The development of the ‘night-time economy’ in the UK through the 1990s has been associated with neoliberal urban governance. Academics have, however, begun to question the use and the scope of the concept ‘neoliberalism’. In this paper, I identify two common approaches to studying neoliberalism, one exploring neoliberalism as a series of policy networks, the other exploring neoliberalism as the governance of subjectivities. I argue that to understand the urban night, we need to explore both these senses of ‘neoliberalism’. As a case study, I take the ‘Alive After Five’ project, organised by the Business Improvement District in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, which sought to extend shopping hours in order to encourage more people to use the city at night. Drawing from Actor-Network-Theory, I explore the planning, the translation, and the practice of this new project. In doing so, I explore the on-going nature and influence of neoliberal policy on the urban night in the UK

Is Europe Cascading into Fascism?: Addressing Key Concepts including Gender and Violence

Is Europe cascading into fascism? The answer to this question matters for understanding the opposition to gender equality projects in Europe. The article addresses some of the key concepts needed to answer this question. Is ‘fascism’ or ‘authoritarian neoliberalism’ or just ‘neoliberalism’ the most appropriate concept to capture the turn to the right? The article compares the extent to which these concepts encompass ‘violence’ and ‘gender’. ‘Fascism’ is an important benchmarkfrom European history, but Europe has not yet reached its levels of violence. The qualifier ‘authoritarian’ is not needed for ‘neoliberalism’ since it generates a trajectory towards violence. Some conceptual work is required in order to develop ‘neoliberalism’ to encompass ‘gender’ and ‘violence’, but there are bodies of work that support such a development. Including gender in analyses of the macro level changes occurring in Europe requires the concept of ‘varieties of gender regime’, which enables the conceptualisation of neoliberalism as gendered

Place ratings, shifting neoliberalism and quality of life in communities

The publication of place ratings on the basis of their competitive attractiveness and quality of life has been one element of place marketing and promotion agenda associated with the onset of neoliberalism. The Places Rated Almanac in the US has epitomised and led the development of such guides, and after a quarter of a century appears on the basis of sales to continue to offer currency and utility. This paper explores the relevance of this particular almanac and its offsprings within the context of recent accounts of the periodisation of neoliberalism. In particular it considers the extent to which such guides have continued to have resonance through the shift from economic-focussed roll back neoliberalism to more socially-oriented roll out neoliberalism

Individual and regulatory ethics: an economic-ethical and theoretical-historical analysis of ordoliberalism

Based on Foucault’s analysis of German Neoliberalism and his thesis of ambiguity, the following paper draws a two-level distinction between individual and regulatory ethics. The individual ethics level – which has received surprisingly little attention – contains the Christian foundation of values and the liberal-Kantian heritage of so called Ordoliberalism – as one variety of neoliberalism. The regulatory or formal-institutional ethics level on the contrary refers to the ordoliberal framework of a socio-economic order. By differentiating these two levels of ethics incorporated in German Neoliberalism, it is feasible to distinguish dissimilar varieties of neoliberalism and to link Ordoliberalism to modern economic ethics. Furthermore, it allows a revision of the dominant reception of Ordoliberalism which focuses solely on the formal-institutional level while mainly neglecting the individual ethics level

Thinking beyond the hybrid:“actually-existing” cities “after neoliberalism” in Boyle <i>et al.</i>

In their article, ‘The spatialities of actually existing neoliberalism in Glasgow, 1977 to present’, Mark Boyle, Christopher McWilliams and Gareth Rice (2008) usefully problematise our current understanding of neoliberal urbanism. Our response is aimed at developing a sympathetic but critical approach to Boyle et al's understanding of neoliberal urbanism as illustrated by the Glasgow example. In particular, the counterposing by Boyle et al of a 'hybrid, mutant' model to a 'pure' model of neoliberalism for us misrepresents existing models of neoliberalism as a perfectly finished object rather than a roughly mottled process. That they do not identify any ‘pure’ model leads them to create a straw construct against which they can claim a more sophisticated, refined approach to the messiness of neoliberal urbanism. In contrast, we view neoliberalism as a contested and unstable response to accumulation crises at various scales of analysis

Neoliberal Imperialism and Pan-African Resistance

Neoliberalism has in the past three decades had a tremendous impact on both thought and practice throughout most of the world, and has dominated international development since the early 1980s. Although neoliberalism presents itself as modern and progressive, it is argued that the underlying ideologies and power agendas have their origins in the political debates of the eighteenth century and earlier. Through an analysis of neoliberalism from a world-historical and global perspective, indications are seen that the international development agenda has more to do with political and economic interests than with benevolent pro-poor development. This leads to the debate about redistribution of resources and State-led Development versus Free-market Development, which is inextricable from the discussion of Liberal Democratic Peace Theory versus Realism. From this perspective it is argued that the notion of democratic peace is used as a popular seductive rhetoric, to legitimize western military interventions and the imposition of economic policies in the name of democracy, human rights and free market economy. In this context, it is argued that neoliberalism cannot be analysed without also considering inherent links to imperialism and neo-colonialism, which is being resisted by pan-African movements

Nations and neoliberalism

This paper examines nations and neoliberalism