Originally Posted by roachboy

it's funny, loquitor, reading the press accounts of this farce and noticing the rhetoric, which is about storms and about schumpeter and about anything and everything that preserves a sense of continuity---which is in a sense about avoiding material and ideological problems by pushing them into some imaginary continuum that extends into a future just the same as the past.

neoliberalism is in serious serious trouble---but because it is the dominant ideology, and because the press speaks largely through that ideology in part because it is responsible for its dissemination and in part because in the states---and ***nowhere*** else, neoliberalism is a lingua franca on matters pertaining to the economy. that is what being a dominant ideology entails. the problem that ideological crisis generates is that it undercuts the frame of reference that shapes how this information is organized. in the soft authoritarian political context that is the american, this is an obstacle to being able to articulate the collapse of the ideology. it's a circle, and not an interesting one. intellectual monocultures run into it alot. neoliberalism is to this soft-authoritarian context what dialectical materialism was to stalinism. hard to articulate problems for the frame itself when the frame is understood as necessary.

that'll pass, i expect.
but implosion of neoliberalism probably wont pass, though.
you'll just have to figure out a different set of fables to believe in, sooner or later.


neo- generally implies redux but with alterations. i didn't make the term up.