The Economist and The Left, The Greeks,and Neo-Liberal ‘Reform’: a comment by Almost Marx

Is it any surprise that this editorial at The Economist begins with Left Wing hysteria mongering? This as the West finds itself covered in the soot of the Neo-Liberal delusion that turned to ash? The failure of Neo-Liberalism demands further Neo-Liberal ‘reforms’, so goes the Party Line of the apologists for that exhausted,demonstrably failed political/economic mirage. See Philip Mirowski’s Never Let A Serious Crisis Go To Waste for the dismal history of  the Neo-Liberal Thought Collective’s mendacious ascendency and staying power:

http://www.versobooks.com/books/1613-never-let-a-serious-crisis-go-to-waste
For an alternative view to this Economist editorial see Jillian Tett’s essay at the Financial Times on debt forgiveness and the Germans, from an address by Benjamin Friedman, aptly titled A Predictable Pathology.
A link to Ms. Tett’s essay:
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/927efd1e-9c32-11e4-b9f8-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=intl#axzz3Rqy6UMA0
A link to Mr. Friedman’s essay:

Click to access friedman.pdf

The fact that the Germans were bailed out four times in the 20th Century 1924, 1929, 1932 and 1953. What bearing might that have on the Left Wing hysteria mongering at the Economist, and the issue of the Greeks and debt forgiveness? And/or a range of other options, open to EU technocrats, in alliance with the Greeks, to first and foremost alleviate the suffering of Greek citizens, as the primary issue, not the rescue of the Neo-Liberal delusion in it’s various iterations!  But the alleviation of the suffering of the Greeks is utterly antithetical to the whole of the Neo-Liberal Project:  civic good is in direct opposition to the argued ‘value’ of Markets and Market Discipline!

Almost Marx

About stephenkmacksd

Rootless cosmopolitan,down at heels intellectual;would be writer. 'Polemic is a discourse of conflict, whose effect depends on a delicate balance between the requirements of truth and the enticements of anger, the duty to argue and the zest to inflame. Its rhetoric allows, even enforces, a certain figurative licence. Like epitaphs in Johnson’s adage, it is not under oath.' https://www.lrb.co.uk/v15/n20/perry-anderson/diary
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.