Explanation to why Neo liberalism - has failed.

I hope this proves both helpful and encouraging to people who are in 'any' doubt as to the nature or level of success of the prevailing American economic model known as - Neo Liberalism.


Explanation to - why Neo liberalism - ‘Free market capitalism’ has failed.

Reviewing the neo liberal experience for quarter of a century, a study of the center for economic and policy research shows that it has been accompanied by much slower rates of growth and reduced progress on social indicators for counties in every quintile , rich to poor. There are exeptions to the general tendancy: high growth rates where recorded among severe side effects in CHINA and INDIA. The overall growth pattern is unambiguous; economist Robert Pollin found in detailed analysis: ‘there is a sharp DECLINE in growth in the neo liberal era RELATIVE to the developmental STATE PERIOD that preceded it, a decline of over half,a trend that ‘is even more dramatic’ when measured PER CAPITA, with INCREASE in Inequality and LITTLE OR NO REDUCTION IN POVERTY and in-country and between inequality when China (which reject the policies) is removed and REALISTIC poverty measures are used. The FACTS are sometimes OBSCURED by the observation that conditions have generally improved under the Neo Liberal regime (as they almost invariably do under time under any economic regime) or by resort to a concept of ‘globalization’ that MUDDLES EXPORT ORIENTATION with NEOLIBERALISM, so that if a billion Chinese experience a high growth rate under export - oriented policies that RADICLY VIOLATE NEO-LIBERAL principals, the increase in average global groth rates can be hailed AS A TRIUMPH OF THE PRINCIPALS THAT ARE VIOLATED . It is difficult to ignore the fact that that strong and harmful tendencies associated with Neo Liberal policies are quite consistant with economic history over much longer term, FACTS WELL KNOWN BY ECONOMIC HISTORIANS.



This is an extract from the book Failed States by Noam Chomsky

Emy wrote:

Excellent article on Noam Chomsky, the failed anarchite

A bunch of mislead hacks critisizing Noam Chomsky ? The man is genious full stop. He understands that the US needs to be exposed before anything can be done. Change cannot occur the majority is educated and unified.

They write an article about him when he cannot reply - you think those halfwit friends of yours would last 5 mins in a debate with him ?

Agree with him or not, hes arguably done more damage to the credibility of American neo liberalism than any man alive today.

- the pen is mightier that the sword

Noam Chomsky is a liberal idealist who thinks that we can have pure democracy if we just cooperate with the United Nations.

Emy wrote:

Noam Chomsky is a liberal idealist who thinks that we can have pure democracy if we just cooperate with the United Nations.

Noam Chomsky is a Libertarian socialist - like me

You obviously have no idea what your talking about.

I do know what I'm talking about. Noam Chomsky is a liberal reformist. So are you. Call it what you want but in any case it's idealism.

Emy wrote:

I do know what I'm talking about. Noam Chomsky is a liberal reformist. So are you. Call it what you want but in any case it's idealism.

I think revolution is fine 'provided it has a realistic chance of success'.
This won't happen until people are unified and the correct conditions exist -
You wont accomplish anything crying for blood in the streets - we need to educate people.

You dont think I support realistic revolution and educating the poele? I do. That's what the vanguard is for. And the conditions for revolution will come, and revolutin is inevitable, as Marx proved.

Emy wrote:

You dont think I support realistic revolution and educating the poele? I do. That's what the vanguard is for. And the conditions for revolution will come, and revolutin is inevitable, as Marx proved.

I know you support rev, just don't assume that other people don't support it.

Are you implying that you support cause I know you are a reformite.

Emy wrote:

Are you implying that you support cause I know you are a reformite.

You need to quite telling people what they are.

I'm just telling him what he told me. He has said before he is a reformite, what's so bad about repeating to him what he told me. Usually soc dems aren't revolutionaries.

Comrade Emy wrote:

I'm just telling him what he told me. He has said before he is a reformite, what's so bad about repeating to him what he told me. Usually soc dems aren't revolutionaries.

I support reform or revolution depending on circumstance, only a complete idiot would support one or the other.

Revolution is an unrealistic option given the political and economic climate of the developed world at this point.



Your delusional if you you think revolution can occur in the US at this point in time - Child revolutionaries who play to many comp games , cute:D

Of course it will not happen now. That is obvious. It will happen though.

Comrade Emy wrote:

Of course it will not happen now. That is obvious. It will happen though.

I dont know any reformist who are against the revolution

...