ABSTRACT
The chapters in this part propose alternatives to the current neoliberal economic order by reframing poverty as a consequence of the values and practices of market fundamentalism, where all aspects of human life are reduced to exchange value and competitive individualism reigns supreme. David Harvey writes: “Neoliberalism is a theory of political economic practice, that proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedom and skills within an institutional framework characterized by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade” (2005:3). Like so, the neoliberal state’s function is not to intervene in markets but to create markets and guarantee their proper functioning, which according to Harvey is to promote the “process of neoliberalization.” This is a process that, says Harvey, entails much “‘creative destruction,’ not only of prior institutional frameworks and powers but also of the division of labour, social relations, welfare provisions, technological mixtures, ways of life and thought, reproductive activities, attachments to the land and habits of heart” (2005:3). The values driving neoliberalism are market-driven ethics or, as Harvey points out, “neoliberalism values market exchange as an ethics in itself, capable of acting as a guide to all human action” (2005:3). Neoliberalization diminishes all human value to market exchange value, replacing previously held ethical beliefs and social relation with the contractual relations of the marketplace (2005:3). Harvey states, for example, that “[neoliberalization] holds that the social good will be maximized by maximizing the reach and frequency of market transactions, and it seeks to bring all human action into the domain of the market” (2005:3). In doing so, the market-driven ethics of neoliberalism undercut the nature of social obligation in civil society. The neoliberal embedding of the market in everything, including the political power of the state, endorses a disregard for a wide array of human security concerns that span environmental, economic, political, and physical spheres, as a necessary condition for economic growth and material prosperity. The market ethics driving neoliberalism therefore promotes the view that, “the common good depends entirely on the uncontrolled egoism of the individual and especially, on the prosperity of transnational corporations” (Von Werlhof, 2008:96). Claudia Von Werlhof in this regard writes: “The allegedly necessary ‘freedom’ of the economy-which, paradoxically, only means the freedom of corporations-hence consists of a freedom from responsibility and commitment to society” (2008:96). But growth under neoliberalism, and especially during its periods of economic crisis, as illustrated by the 2008 Great Recession in the United States, has come to mean record profits
for corporations, increased poverty, inequality between the rich and non-rich, and vulnerability for everyone else, including the middle class. In reaction to the growing vulnerability experienced by the majority of U.S. citizens, the authors in this part propose alternatives to the prevailing economic dominance of neoliberal market fundamentalism. In Chapter 53, “Creating a Sustainable Society: Human Rights in the U.S. Welfare State,” Phyllis Jeroslow shows that in spite of the hegemonic dominance of neoliberal market fundamentalism most U.S. citizens continue to support “universal policies [e.g., Social Security and Medicare] that simultaneously improve well-being and enrich democratic freedoms.” Part of what Jeroslow argues is that “[Western] capitalism cannot function without welfare state interventions.” Jeroslow writes:
[H]istory provides ample evidence of devastating episodes of market failure that necessitated state intervention in order to ensure human survival and revive the economy. The birth of the Western welfare state in the late nineteenth century is attributed to such a moment, charged with balancing economic growth with human need. As witnessed in the previous and current centuries, market failures continue to occur, requiring innovations in state intervention and new conceptions of social rights in order to sustain economic and social stability.
