Ideologies of Corporate Responsibility: From Neoliberalism to “Varieties of Liberalism”

Critical scholarship often presents corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a reflection or embodiment of neoliberalism. Against this sort of sweeping political characterization we argue that CSR can indeed be considered a liberal concept but that it embodies a “varieties of liberalism.” Building theoretically on the work of Michael Freeden on liberal languages, John Ruggie and Karl Polanyi on embedded forms of liberalism, and Michel Foucault on the distinction between classical liberalism and neoliberalism, we provide a conceptual treatment and mapping of the ideological positions that constitute the bulk of modern scholarly CSR debate. Thus, we distinguish between embedded liberalism, classical liberalism, neoliberalism, and re-embedded liberalism. We develop these four orientations in turn and show how they are engaged in “battles of ideas” over the meaning and scope of corporate responsibilities—and how they all remain relevant for an understanding of contemporary debates and developments in the field of CSR and corporate sustainability.

Freedom and inequality: On the problem of the history and philosophy of liberalism

The article is devoted to the study of the problem of the doctrinal identification of freedom and inequality by classical liberalism and neoliberalism. Identifying the features of the naturalistic and theological approaches to the manifestation of inequality in human communities, the author notes the philosophical justification of the legal argumentation of inequality in the theories of natural law and the social contract of modern thinkers. The appeal to the value dynamics reflected in the slogans of the French revolution of the 18th century allows the author to reveal the gradual displacement of the priorities of “Equality” and “Brotherhood”, which were put forward by the revolutionary democracy, by the liberal movements. The final statement of Locke’s version of the orientation of classical liberalism on the triad “Freedom. Property. Life”, according to the author, logically determines the identification of freedom with inequality, and equality with slavery by representatives of liberal circles. The development of the concepts of “social solidarity” by the theorists of neoliberalism, according to the author’s proof, does not change the liberal attitude to “freedom in inequality”. The analysis of the categories of freedom and inequality allows the author to formulate the contradictions of this provision. The article concludes that with the aggravation of the derived contradiction to the maximum, the risk of self-denial of liberalism increases.

The Advent of Neoliberal Capitalism Over The 20th Century

In this paper, I have attempted to trace the emergence of neoliberal capitalism as an economic system pertaining to the foundations of classical liberalism of the 18th century. The paper essentially draws a comparative analysis of the Keynesian theory of government intervention in economic activity as opposed to Hayek’s conceptualization of free-market capitalism, while tracing the advent, trajectory and scope of neoliberal capitalism in the global context.

Refutation of neoliberal educational policies based on Millian principles

This article attempts to start an in-depth consideration and analysis of modern neoliberal education policy through its philosophical roots. To achieve this, the article considers the ideology and philosophy of the classical liberal philosopher John Stuart Mill and the relationship of his philosophy with the modern-day neoliberalist education policy. The purpose of the article is to discuss the philosophical groundwork that drives Mill’s ideas on the establishment of education and compares it to the philosophical groundwork and implications present in modern neoliberal education policy, and through this begin to assert what neoliberalist education policy is. The paper asserts that while Mill’s version of classical liberalism holds similar views and forms of occurrence with modern neoliberalist policies, in many cases Mill’s philosophical groundwork seems to disagree fundamentally with that of neoliberalism. The study is based on literature detailing both the philosophical as well as polity aspects of both Mill’s ideas and modern neoliberalism from the viewpoint of education, and it presents considerations for the nature of neoliberal education policy and its future analysis.

Surfing ignorance: Covid-19 and the rise of fatalistic liberalism

How liberal governments manage knowledge, ignorance, prediction, and uncertainty has attracted increased attention in sociology. In this paper, we analyse the strategy of the UK Government during the Covid-19 pandemic to argue it entails a form of productive enrolment of ‘unknowns’ we label ‘surfing ignorance’. This strategy exploits inevitable limits to knowledge of any particular group of actors, and attempts to steer them to maintain political control. We argue this approach departs from the uses of knowledge and ignorance in both classical liberalism and neoliberalism, and theorize a new, hybrid form of governance which can be dubbed fatalistic liberalism. We discuss the relevance of this new form of governance for political futures of an increasingly volatile world. [NOTE: this paper is currently under review. It was first submitted for review in May 2020. Reviews were received in October 2020. The paper was resubmitted after revisions in February 2021. We have not yet heard an editorial decision].

Political Change in Liberalism: Carl Poper’s perspective as an example

Liberalism does not have one perspective on political changes. Classical liberalism places great emphasis on individual freedom and opposes state interference in the private affairs of individuals. From this standpoint, Liberalism accepts revolutionary movements against oppressive regimes that violate individuals’ freedom. The idea of freedom is central in neoliberalism, particularly in social welfares, to provide people decent conditions for pursuing a good life or for human flourishing and therefore the neoliberalism perspective opts for a limited interference by the state in the market. The different perspectives of neoliberalism can trace their roots back to classical liberalism’s arguments, which encourage individuals’ freedom and opt for limit state interference, while in terms of political change, they have conservative views and in this regard, Karl Poper is with the gradual changes of society and rejects the revolutionary mechanism because it threatens freedom and leads to tyranny