The hypocrisy of neoliberalism
The values of the modern neoliberal world are contradictory to what is and what was put into practice by all major western nations. Neoliberalism is normally defined as an economic philosophy which advocates for freer market and globalisation, and the resurgence of 19th century classical liberal ideas. For the purpose of this paper the concept of neoliberalism will be analysed solely through political lenses, rather than economic. Therefore key concepts such as Individual liberties, Consent of the Governed, freedom of belief and choice as well as human rights will be drawn onto the table, and we will see through logic and reason, which of these have been practiced and/or abused.
A clear and inherent contradiction arises whenever any form of lethal or nonlethal coercion is used to force liberal concepts onto people who do not agree with them, such as democracy. For the sake of an example, picture a farmer who lived all his life in a country which has completely different values from neoliberalism, and he agrees with them and is happy to live under the government which is upholding those values. However, due to a fabricated claim made against his government (false flag justification), and with the guise of spreading these neoliberal ideals onto his nation, the paragon of the neoliberal world decides to invade and “liberalise” his country. The farmer picks up weapons to defend his nation and because he is no longer considered a “harmless citizen”, he is shot and killed by the neoliberal army. The argument being put forward here is that the moment the bullet passes through the farmer’s body and is dead or wounded as a result, the concept of freedom of belief and democracy has crumbled because it just contradicted itself. Now multiply this scenario by a million, and this is enough to summarise the way liberalism and neoliberalism was being spread from the 19th century all the way to this very day.
The concept of neoliberalism through coercion is still undeniably being practiced in the 21st century by the United States. From outright invasions such as in Afghanistan (which failed miserably) and Iraq, to bombings such as in Libya , to funding violent groups such as in the Saudi-Yemen war and Syria, all the way down to brutal embargoes such as in Cuba, the United States has been having an absolute roll in just 20 years. A very common argument made by apologists is that the United States does not “represent” the modern neoliberal system. All we have to do is look at a country like Sweden or Switzerland, who are also undeniably liberal, and then we would automatically come to the conclusion that neoliberalism is not in fact necessarily coercive is it? There are two factors that refute this argument (excluding the fact that Sweden and Switzerland also have their fair share of supporting coercion in indirect ways). The first is that the relationship between the United States and Western Europe is not a relationship between two totally different entities. Throughout the 20th century the US has increased its grip economically and militarily over Europe, to the point where any decisions made by the United States were basically agreed with if not mirrored by the Western European nations. NATO is a shining example of this European dependence on the United States, as the American deputy of defence stated; “the United states military is currently deployed to more countries than it has been throughout history”. The second factor, as Slavoj Zizek said, “Sometimes doing nothing is the most violent thing to do.” Although it’s true that Western European nations have, at times, been vocal about how certain invasions or actions done by the United States are “wrong”, it is very clear that no real action has ever been made against the United States for committing these actions.
Using “democracy” or some false notions of individual freedom as justification for slinging the gun is unacceptable. I believe in a communal rather than individualistic society, where the rule of law and objective state policy determines what is best for people. War and expansion of values through coercion by means of law is allowed, as long as the war is justified and fought fairly. Supporting violence one day and then acting like a pacifist who believes in “human rights” and “freedom of belief” is BS.
Neoliberalism and liberalism as a political system which is championed by the western world as “true” and “the best system we have”. Yet historically and currently the system cannot be implemented without contradicting itself in one way or another. This is because neoliberalism, just like communism and any other globalist ideology, will expand through military means. The more it tries to hide this fact through buttering it up, the more foolish and hypocritical the followers of this ideology look.
Article from r/Libertarian: For a Free Society