Home | About | Donate

Trumping It Up: Neoliberalism on Steroids


Trumping It Up: Neoliberalism on Steroids

Catherine Rottenberg

During his presidential campaign, Donald Trump (in)famously declared that he would build a wall between Mexico and the United States (and make Mexico pay for it) to keep the criminals and "rapists" out.

Promising to protect the American worker, he also insisted that he was going to void the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a 12-country free trade agreement that aims to make it easier for big corporations to ship jobs overseas.


This is a good article. If a majority of Americans were familiar with the concept of neoliberalism, if they had a basic definition in their heads, we might some day effectively fight it & maybe overcome it.

Maybe we should all set a goal to each day explain to one person what neoliberalism is.


Sounds like a concern here could be that Trump could end up being successful and have a true popular-vote-winning reelection in 2020. I have been thinking that exceedingly unlikely but may need to rethink.


Seeing Dubya win the popular vote in 2004 after losing it in 2000 confirms that the same thing could easily happen with Trump.


"Consequently, when Trump 'gave them a choice between an ersatz multiracial democracy in which they are increasingly disadvantaged' or a vote for white privilege and supremacy, they voted for the latter. Well, they probably did not vote for neoliberalism, but neoliberalism is precisely what they are going to get.

Under neoliberalism as a regime of truth, inequality is legitimate because there are, simply and shamelessly, winners and losers."

That is well stated. I think we will watch this roll out.

However, I think people who thought they would be "winner's" will find themselves losers.

I do not know if this will be a point of mobilization because I look for Trump to grow his iron-fisted control as he institutes other measures.

Disagreeing with "him" will be made illegal.

That will be the most dangerous part.



It's obvious that the losers will vastly outnumber the winners, but perhaps Trump's Architecture of Illusion will be irresistible to the consciousness of our nation, so everyone will be too afraid to notice the newly expanded poverty and great impotence of our people.

"Il Duce ha sempre raggione!" (Mussolini is always right!)



It's so painful. He's a charlatan and anyone who spent a moment looking, knows it. BUT con men often get by with it.


The vast majority of Americans have no idea of what "Neoliberalism" is. The same can be said for universal healthcare, guaranteed income and a host of other political jargon. This is precisely why we are in the predicament we're in now. Americans are much more savvy about sports, celebrity gossip and the latest consumer fads than about the inner workings of a functional democracy. The result is well heeled corporations can pretty much write whatever legislation they want and their political appointees will make it happen.
Trump voters thought that they were voting against the Establishment in which Clinton was a poster woman for the status quo. Instead they got someone who will expand corporate control over our government while making a profit at it at the same time. There is no possible way that this can play out advantageously for the 99%, but I do agree that corporations will increase their bottom line thereby instructing the media to trumpet their financial success with phrases like 'strong stock markets' and 'a higher GNP'.
The real question is whether we can educate Americans politically before its too late for America as will as the fate of the human species.


Trump and the Republicans are hard right conservatives. They don't care about government, except to ensure it is dysfunctional. If it is to do something, it is to protect the interests of the Republican wealthy donor class. Nothing more, nothing less. "Neoliberalism" has no meaning anymore except to make progressives sound smart about privatizing public goods.


Thank you to the progressives who just will not vote for anyone but the perfect candidate!
We no longer are looking at neoliberalism, we are looking at the brand of fascism which allies government authority with unbridled capitalism. We are in deep shit: Good job intransigent folks, you voted for Trump by getting in a snit. Way to go.


yep, ethics and integrity are expensive


If you can tell me the fiscal difference between a neoliberal and a Republican then perhaps you have something to talk about but they come off as blue dog Democrats. The only difference between the three is the spelling.


Don't forget circular reasoning, and the martyr complex.:smirk:


Nobody demanded "the perfect candidate" at any point in the 2016 election cycle. They simply demanded fair competition against a candidate who has more baggage than any Democratic Party or GOP POTUS candidate since Barry Goldwater.

Note that many Trump voters never voted for a Republican prior to 2016.

Nip the fake news now before it takes on a life of its own.


Especially if the Democrats decide to bank on another corporatism candidate, which they likely will.


With a possible false flag event, if we carry out the logic. What might be useful to them?


What Goldwater baggage are you referring to?


He very well might just because Democratic officialdom is apt to serve up another may serve up another softball candidate instead of releasing control of the party to someone closer to its rank and file membership.


Could happen. Of course, that candidate may very well win, as HRC nearly did. A candidate with policies like Sanders, who I voted for, might also win. I don't think Sanders was likely to win, however, simply because of his socialist tag. It is not yet time in this country, IMO. Maybe in a few elections, but not likely in 2020.


I think this is the real reason Bernie Sanders mattered (and perhaps still does) -- it wasn't even a matter so much of what he might have or might have not accomplished, but just simply the fact that he communicated these issues in a way that cut through the Republican/Democratic false dichotomy. Here was someone who was talking about issues that matter but that previously the vast majority of Americans had no way of actually articulating in a rational way. It wasn't really that he presented any new information to anyone but rather he framed the conversation in ways that people understood and which mattered. This framing of the issues is simply unheard of in this day and age. If there is any viable political future for the US, Sanders stylistic approach (as well as substance) is the way to go.

Significantly, during the Dem primaries, I knew people of far more conservative dispositions who, upon hearing Sanders address actual issues in meaningful ways, surprisingly became strong supporters of his campaign. The reason why was HOW he communicated -- saying things that people didn't even know how to begin saying. This is the most important thing Sanders has done -- not just WHAT he's saying but his virtually Socratic "political midwifery."

It's also for that very reason the DNC wanted so desperately to ditch him. It is in the best interests of "liberals" and conservatives to obfuscate the economic scam we call "capitalism." The names Marx and Satan are virtually synonymous for Americans after decades of demonization -- addressing economic issues that affect the great majority of Americans has long been off-limits in US political discourse -- no wonder Americans are so confused and bamboozled by snake oil salesmen -- they don't even have a vocabulary to begin talking about it.