scholarly journals “fascismo de mercado” ao fascismo sem máscaras

Author(s):  
António José Avelãs Nunes

Na década de 1970 esfumaram-se os chamados “trinta anos gloriosos” e eclipsou-se o ‘milagre’ da revolução keynesiana. Aproveitando o desnorte do ‘inimigo’, os neoliberais, comandados por Friedrich Hayek e Milton Friedman, passaram ao ataque, colocando no banco dos réus o estado keynesiano e as políticas keynesianas, culpados de todos os males do mundo. Na sequência de uma operação relâmpago de propaganda ideológica sem paralelo (“uma experiência muito corruptora”, confessou Hayek), o “ideological monetarism” afirmou-se como a ideologia do império e do pensamento único. As experiências corruptoras como a de Hayek multiplicaram-se ao longo dos anos, alimentadas pelos mesmos actores, ao serviço dos mesmos interesses. E mantêm-se até hoje, com o recurso às técnicas mais sofisticadas de manipulação ideológica e de corrupção intelectual, que transformaram o neoliberalismo numa espécie de ‘religião’, para cuja “única fé verdadeira” se diz que não há alternativa (o famoso argumento TINA da Srª Tatcher: There Is No Alternative). Desta neutralidade da política económica passou-se, quase sem solução de continuidade, à defesa da morte da política económica, porque esta seria desnecessária e prejudicial. É o regresso ao velho mito liberal da separação estado/economia e estado/sociedade: a economia seria tarefa exclusiva dos privados (da sociedade civil, da sociedade económica), cabendo ao estado simplesmente garantir a liberdade individual, que proporcionaria igualdade de oportunidades para todos.

Just Property ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 58-80
Author(s):  
Christopher Pierson

This chapter begins with a brief discussion of what we mean by libertarianism. I explore the ways in which the forerunners of contemporary libertarianism came to justify a regime of minimally constrained individual private property, (often) grounded in natural rights and instantiating the maximum of personal freedom. Key thinkers in this respect are Herbert Spencer, Ludwig von Mises, Milton Friedman, and Friedrich Hayek. Murray Rothbard is a figure who belongs more unambiguously to modern libertarianism. The chapter ends with a substantial discussion of the debate that has surrounded the work of Robert Nozick in Anarchy, State and Utopia. I suggest that Nozick is a much more ambivalent figure for libertarianism than is usually supposed.


1999 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 372-396
Author(s):  
Hideo Otake

THE DECADE FROM THE LATE 1970s TO THE LATE 1980S, WHICH BEGAN with the birth of the Thatcher and Reagan administrations and concluded with the fall of communist regimes throughout Russia and Eastern Europe, and the concurrent rise of the Asian NIES states, was the renaissance era of laissez-faire economic liberalism or neoliberalism. ‘Privatization’, ‘deregulation’, and ‘small government’ became popular slogans globally, borrowed heavily from the policy proposals of neoliberal economists such as Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek. It was best manifested in the world-wide trend towards privatization, involving more than one hundred countries.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
TOM McDOWELL

Abstract This article conceptualizes recent momentum for basic income in the context of the legitimization crisis of neoliberalism and the dissolution of the ‘progressive neoliberal’ governing bloc that secured its hegemony for more than two decades. Through an assessment of the ideas of Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman, it argues that basic income is one of the few policy solutions in the mainstream discourse that improves social welfare and income security, while also remaining consistent with neoliberalism’s inner logic. Accordingly, it holds the potential to temporarily stabilize neoliberalism’s political crisis by offering a consensus issue around which a new centrist coalition could emerge. Although much of the basic income literature has focused on grassroots coalitions and synergies between left and right, it has largely overlooked the emergence of the historical forces that have pushed it onto the mainstream policy agenda.


2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Romualdo Luiz Portela de Oliveira ◽  
Luciane Muniz Ribeiro Barbosa

Resumo Este artigo tem como objetivo analisar o neoliberalismo como um dos fundamentos da educação domiciliar, fenômeno de interesse crescente no Brasil, dada a tentativa de regulamentá-lo no país. Para tanto, foram tomados como referência três autorizados representantes do neoliberalismo: Friedrich Hayek; Milton Friedman e Ludwig von Mises e a reiterada preocupação destes com as liberdades, sobretudo as individuais. O artigo argumenta que o neoliberalismo se apresenta como uma das correntes teóricas que também dá suporte ao homeschooling, tendo como ponto crucial de sua fundamentação a rejeição da compulsoriedade da educação escolar, o que gera fortes implicações para o debate educacional, principalmente como desafios à escola pública compulsória.


2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 34-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Lister

This paper compares Joseph Heath’s critique of the just deserts rationale for markets with an earlier critique due to Frank Knight, Milton Friedman, and Friedrich Hayek. Heath shares their emphasis upon the role of luck in prices based on supply and demand. Yet he avoids their claim that the inheritance of human capital is on a moral par with the inheritance of ordinary capital, as a basis for unequal shares of the social product. Heath prefers to argue that markets do not tend to reward talent as such. The paper raises some doubts about this factual claim, and argues that sweeping the issue of talent under the rug threatens to make our theory of justice less egalitarian than it would otherwise be. The paper also addresses the objection that claims of unfairness based on the arbitrariness of the distribution of innate abilities will undermine self-respect.


Author(s):  
Benjamin L. McKean

This chapter substantiates the author’s interpretation of the neoliberal theory of political legitimacy through a reconstruction of the views of Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman, whose works were key to popularizing neoliberalism and its attendant orientation. The task for those who want to resist neoliberalism is to provide people in such circumstances with another way of attending to their situation. Neoliberal theory divides the world up into the economic realm of freedom and the political realm of coercion, but in order to get people to see the world this way, it relies on the techniques of power that Michel Foucault dubbed “governmentality,” which escape this neat dichotomy. Neoliberalism’s tacit acknowledgment of its reliance on these forms of power, which preserve freedom of choice but nevertheless reliably guide people to particular perceptions and actions, lays the groundwork for an emancipatory reorientation that recognizes the political nature inherent to the economic realm.


2016 ◽  
Vol 134 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-115
Author(s):  
Brian Hurley

As a graduate student at the University of Chicago in the mid-1950s, Edwin McClellan (1925–2009) translated into English the most famous novel of modern Japan, Kokoro (1914), by Natsume Sōseki. This essay tells the story of how the translation emerged from and appealed to a nascent neoliberal movement that was led by Friedrich Hayek (1899–1992), the Austrian economist who had been McClellan’s dissertation advisor.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document