The intention is always probably to raise profits. But the practice, or the core of the practice, seems _usually_ to focus on some particular barrier. The Neoliberal assault began with a revolt against Regulation -- i.e., against "government interference in business." And if you check much of the ideological (propaganda) focus of the early stages of that attack (middle or late '60s to '75 or so), it was a revolt against "intolerable" restraints on the "freedom of business" to operate. Unions do (usually) raise wages & reduce profits -- but often the reaction seems to be not so much "pragmatic" as just management resentment at not having a free hand. (This runs through early '70s attacks on "too much democracy.")
So, what I should have said I guess instead of "drive down wages" was "eliminate restraints on management freedom." The ultimate motive remains "raise profits," but it to an important extent took the form of Freedom of Business to Operate.
But whichever formula we take, I think my central point remains: The 'system' was and to too large an extent brilliantly successful. There was no flaw, fatal or otherwise. It workds.
Carrol
-----Original Message----- From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] On Behalf Of Doug Henwood Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 10:28 AM To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Neoliberal Triumph was ] More on BB ...
On Feb 11, 2012, at 11:17 AM, Carrol Cox wrote:
> What do you think the _purpose_ of the Neoliberal sytem was? I would say
> that it was to drive down, relentlessly, the living standards of the
world's
> working masses.
No, it was to raise profits. Similar effect, but the intention wasn't to immiserate the mass but to enrich the owners.
Doug ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk