Spot the Neoliberal Chameleons

I have tended to support left wing parties, gravitating towards their ideas as regional and national politics played a growing part in my teen life. Seeking equality, eliminating poverty, helping the downtrodden and the marginalised, and defeating a self-interested elite have remained leftist constants, but the vehicle of these ideas for me has changed over time. Anarcho-communism was appealing in my early teens, then was Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party. While Jeremy was never going to abolish the state, he might have brought about greater equality or alleviated austerity-driven poverty. 

Later on, at university, “One Nation” conservatism appealed, although even then it seemed more like a slogan. I delved into my studies, looking at the plumbing of the economy, and seeking practical solutions to fix poverty, inequality, and marginalisation. 

Since then, I have been fortunate enough to meet people from all backgrounds, classes, and cultures. Many vulnerable and in poverty, many the complete opposite. I learnt that no single party, institution, policy, or ideology can achieve the general goals I support. It does not matter which of the aforementioned achieves them; only that they are achieved. 

Everywhere I have been, there is a pervasive, almost invisible, notion that something is not quite right with society. In previous columns, I have used terms like “power-elite” and “neoliberalism” to diagnose that notion. If we were doctors, the corollary would be that we cure society by removing the “neoliberalism”. 

Yet everyone has their own unique life challenges, motivations, and ideas. It seems unfair to blame an amorphous set of “neoliberals” for our ills, but fair to examine what the label “neoliberalism” is trying to explain.  

“Neoliberalism” as a theory emphasises strong negative liberty for individuals and families, private property rights, the ability of private businesses to set prices and enter contracts as they see fit (free markets), epistemic humility on the part of the public sector, limited parliamentary democracy, and adequate welfare and public goods provision. 

Some of these pillars are praiseworthy; epistemic humility is always admirable, as is adequate welfare and public goods provision, private property rights, and freedom from interference by others. Some are not – absolutely free markets for example – but at least this aspect could be discussed or opened to interpretation with neoliberal thinkers. 

The problem lies not so much with these tenets of neoliberalism. The theory has many good concepts and admirable qualities. The problem comes with how neoliberalism has become grotesquely corrupted, used to justify real-world social ills by a pernicious group of “Neoliberal Chameleons”. 

Those “Chameleons” engage in a particular form of authoritarianism – rather than overtly behaving as authoritarians of yesteryears, they cherry-pick tenets of neoliberalism and distort them in isolation, falsely appealing to authority to silence policy opposition. 

Reform UK seek to remove Net Zero, because it is a case of government overreach with free markets. The Alliance Defending Freedom UK is funding lobbying efforts to reduce buffer zones around abortion clinics, claiming state violations of individual liberty. Liz Kendall as the Minister for DWP sought to cut and limit welfare benefits as they exceeded what could be considered adequate funding, and were hampering the economy. 

In each of these cases we know the motive was not because of a genuine concern for violations of neoliberalism. Reform UK is funded by oil companies seeking to monopolise on fossil fuel resources in the UK. The Alliance Defending Freedom UK is a vehicle for aggressive US Christian Nationalists. Whoever advised Liz Kendall saw benefits cuts as an easy fix to the “more important” issue of solving a budget deficit.  

After some reflection, I must confess to having concluded that neoliberalism itself is not a threat to our national interest. Some parts of neoliberal thought even broadly intersect with British values – support for democracy, the rule of law, and the protection of individual liberty to name a few. The real threat to our national interest comes from the “Neoliberal Chameleons”. 

As a former Corbyn supporter “reaching across the aisle” to genuine neoliberals – I do not think we need be rid of neoliberalism. It has some useful ideas with goals that are respectable and reasonable. Instead, I say beware; chameleons are shrewd animals. They can get into the most unexpected of places and will try to use your perceptions for their own ends. As a genuine neoliberal you now have to work out; are you the insect they are hoping to eat, their desired mate, or the silent owl hunting them for dinner?

Image: Flickr/Gage Skidmore

Licence.

No image changes made.