Neoliberalism — system first, ideology changeable
Paul Mason

Interesting how many ‘free-marketeers’ ignore the reality that corporations exist purely because the state gives them license to exist — they are not natural phenomena like gravity or wind. They also receive the state sanctioned ‘exorbitant privilege’ of limited liability for shareholders and executives, a major benefit without which the ‘free markets’ would look very different, yet the anti-regulation crowd never mention the simple fact that the very existence of corporations depends on this state-endowed largesse. And only when capitalism properly accounts for so-called ‘externalities’ (the costs of business borne by the general public rather than the shareholders and executives of the corporations incurring said costs — a truly massive sum since 2007/8) will the markets approach any sort of ‘efficiency’. Basic truths, yet ignored by the elitist mythology that drives the economic fundamentalist groupthink you correctly identify as ‘neo-liberalism’. Is there a better term for this? How about ‘corrosive-capitalism’?

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.