Drugi dom
Goodbye Washington Consensus, Hello Washington Confusion?
| 2. januar 2008 | Svet | Jure
Dani Rodrik:
So you reformed institutions in trade, property rights, and macro, but still did not grow? Well, it must be that you did not reform labor-market institutions. You did that too, but still did not grow? Well, the problem must be with lack of safety nets and inadequate social insurance. You reformed those, with little effect? Obviously the problem was that your political system was unable to generate sufficient credibility, lock-in, and legitimacy for the reforms. In the end, it is always the advisee who falls short, and never the advisor who is proved wrong. Celoten članek
(Še brez glasov)
Loading ...
Zgornji argument je zadnje pribežališče fanatikov. Omogoča jim namreč, da za vsak napredek zasluge pripišejo sebi (npr. Švedska in Čile rasteta zaradi liberalnih ukrepov), medtem ko krivdo za gospodarsko nazadovanje naložita premalo vestnemu izvajanju neoliberalnih receptov. Podobne neumnosti lahko prebereš tudi v Sloveniji. Gre za framing, kjer se debata uokviri tako, da lahko razpravljaš le o bolj ali manj vestnem sledenju nekaterim receptom, ne pa tudi o smiselnosti slednjih. Neoliberalizem se lahko pohvali z močnim ideološko-političnim aparatom, njegovi zagovorniki pa so tako dobro indoktirinirani, da ne morejo drugače, kot da ponavljajo dogmo o neideološkosti in nepolitičnosti neoliberalnih receptov.