Constant rambling

Neoliberal is no liberal.

In the times of Adam Smith, ‘liberal’ meant favorable to exchange. In its widest sense.

It never meant freedom of over-exploitation of the human race and of natural resources.

Never.

It never meant that brutal competition would blindly overrule democracy.

Never.

‘Neoliberal’, is a neologism that does not mean ‘liberal’. It is a neologism that filters some of its sense and extracts the dimensions of interest to the group using it. Where ‘liberal’ is bijective -a common reciprocal interest is at stake- neo-liberal is not. In fact, neo-liberal is only a rhetorical exercise masking another less easy to communicate concept: greed or cupidity. Greed is not bijective and is self-centered. It is not politically correct. Neo-liberal is.

Capitalism as a system needs greed as its traction. Generalized cupidity is the blind condition for capitalism to function. Even children know that by now.

The fusion of cupidity and capitalism, i call cupitalism. It has been the indisputable ideology of our times up until the wake up call of autumn 2008.

‘Neo-liberal’, does not mean ‘liberal’. It means cupitalism.

If ideologues were so proud of their invention -generalized cupidity-, why were they constantly hiding their noble findings behind a misleading terminology of ‘neo-liberal’ ? Why not calling ‘cupidity’, ‘cupidity’ ? If capitalism needs cupidity as its fuel, why not stating it ? If generalized cupidity is so clever and brilliant a finding, why never mention it ? Why being so shy and discrete about cupidity being the central concept of capitalism ? WHY ? If capitalism is the optimum model of mankind, why hiding half of its mechanics under the carpet ? WHY ?

‘Liberal’ and ‘cupidity’ have very little in common. Nevertheless, the neologism ‘neo-liberal’ is confusing us: it labels ‘cupidity’ under the appearance of a ‘liberal’ terminology. It activates cupidity while talking about ‘liberal’. Hiding a concept with another, reminds us the prestidigitation of the red scarf at a corrida. Intentional false labeling is nothing but ideological manipulation.

Will our respectable leaders wake up to this fact ?

Author :
Print