In A Brief History of Neoliberalism by David Harvey we see an author tear down the
foundations of one of the western worlds most sacrosanct ideals about freedom. Harvey
carefully and methodically deconstructs the version of neoliberalism that has been sold to the
public versus the actual elements that are core to the ideals of the philosophy. Harvey exposes
neoliberalism as nothing more than a sham, a fanciful idea of a utopia that has never truly
existed and most likely will never truly exist. Harvey warns us that behind the façade of
freedom lies corporate greed and an insatiable appetite for profit and power.
Harvey begins by setting the stage for how neoliberalism came to be the dominant
form of economic thought in most of the world and certainly the western world today. One of
the ways we can see how neoliberalism began to percolate is by looking at what precipitated
it’s rise and eventual stranglehold. This takes us back to immediately following WWII when
the US and much of the rest of the world was still reeling from the horrors of war and new
systems were being put in place to ensure economic prosperity, the prevailing view of the
next few decades would be that of Keynesianism named after John Maynard Keynes. (Harvey
2005, 10) This was also known as embedded liberalism. The policies of Keynesianism
created an enormous amount of economic growth and prosperity for western developed
countries for the better part of two decades, the 1950’s and 60’s were a period of sustained
prosperity for the US and the western world. (Harvey 2005, 11) Unfortunately this prosperity
would not last indefinitely and beginning in the 1970’s the economic fortunes of the US
economy and that of the world economy began to sag. Leading to something that came to be
known as stagflation. (Harvey 2005, 12) This economic collapse allowed for the proliferation
of alternative schools of thought to the dominate Keynesian model, and as we know from
history, the idea that took hold in the west and eventually most of the globe, was
neoliberalism. (Harvey 2005, 13) For much of the 1970’s the world’s economy was sagging,
and so radical ideas were proposed to combat this, one such proponent of these ideas was
Margaret Thatcher, who in 1979 was elected as prime minister in the UK and began a series
of radical shifts in economic policy. She began privatizing as many industries as possible and
decreasing taxes to create an environment for entrepreneurs. (Harvey 2005, 23) The 1980
election result in the US was what ultimately vaulted a true neoliberal believer to the top of
the pyramid in western countries. Ronald Reagan won the election and went about further
privatizing, deregulating industries, and fighting with unions. (Harvey 2005, 25) Here we see
the beginning of the end for Keynesian policies in the US and abroad as the US is able to flex
its financial muscle to root out Keynesianism from the IMF. (Harvey 2005, 29) This turns the
IMF into a chief ally of the US in propagating neoliberal ideals as it begins to tie its lending
policies to neoliberal reforms. (Harvey 2005, 29) Finally, with the new freedom from
deregulation we see the financial services sector begin to run wild and become the dominant
economic force in the west, overtaking manufacturing. As Harvey put it “In the event of a
conflict between Main Street and Wall Street, the latter was favoured.” (Harvey 2005, 33)
Now that we see how neoliberalism was able to take hold in the US and how the US
was then able to use its considerable resources to turn much of the rest of the world towards
neoliberal thinking, we must analyse what the reason was behind these events. Was it simply
an economic policy shift, meant to save the US and world economy, or was something else
really happening? Thankfully Harvey does not leave us wondering, in fact he has the figures
to back it up. Neoliberalism was really a tool for economic suppression of the working class
and to re-establish class dominance of the economic elite. (Harvey 2005, 16) Essentially what
happened after WWII was the economic elite accepted a smaller percentage of wealth to
achieve stability and while the economy was doing well that was fine for them. However,
once we enter the 1970’s and the economy begins to sag, one of the things that takes a major
hit are stocks and other high end luxury goods, things that the economic elite have a lot of
their wealth invested in. As the economy continues to sag, they believe they are faced with
two prospects, ruthlessness or extinction. History shows us, they chose the former. (Harvey
2005, 15) Neoliberalism is nothing but a sham on behalf of the economic elites to hold onto
and expand their wealth to maintain class dominance. As neoliberal policies take hold, we
start to see in numbers how the wealthy benefit from things like massive tax breaks. (Harvey
2005, 26) We also see how the masses have been lied to and that real wages actually begin to
rapidly fall after these new neoliberal policies are put in place. (Harvey 2005, 25) Harvey
clearly demonstrates that neoliberalism was not simply a new economic system meant to lift
the world out of a recession, in fact it was a sinister plan by the economic elites who feared
for their very existence. This plan was enacted over the course of a decade and a half and is in
fact still happening to this day, because seemingly no amount of wealth is enough.
We can clearly see how this relates back to issues in anthropology today and issues
and theories we have discussed in class, namely globalization. Harvey himself even states
that in today’s modern economy that economic elites only support the state so long as it suits
their economic needs. (Harvey 2005, 35) The economic elites are their own class of people
regardless of nationality, and while they don’t directly conspire together, they do collectively
work to help their own interests regardless of borders. (Harvey 2005, 36) This era of
globalization as allowed an unprecedented amount of wealth to flow from country to country
mostly unregulated and out of the hands of any one state authority. Even in our modern age it
sometimes becomes difficult to differentiate between the state and economic elites. When
members of congress in the US are able to make millions off of insider knowledge that the
Covid pandemic was about to happen, is there really a difference between the state apparatus
and the economic elite? The western world has created a feedback loop where the state
supports the economic elite, and the economic elite supports the state. And the ones who get
left in the dust are the workers, especially the workers of the global south. Take for instance
the workers of the maquiladoras in Mexico. They serve a system where all the money is
funnelled to the top of the pyramid, and they see but a pittance of that. Barely enough to
survive in some cases. Neoliberalism has created a global economic pyramid scheme and
they’ve convinced us that it’s a good thing.
While Harvey does an exemplary job of showing us exactly how much of a sham
neoliberalism is there are two key things I take issue with. While it may not have been the
intention of the paper, Harvey clearly shows us the failings of neoliberalism without showing
us an alternative plan that could’ve taken root in the 1970’s. Clearly Keynesianism was
failing at that point, but it’s never explicitly stated why. And because we are never told why
it's difficult to know what could have been done instead. Again, I don’t believe it was
Harvey’s intention to leave the reader in the dark like that but while he mentions a few other
ideas that people had ruminated on we are still left wanting for an answer as to what went
wrong with Keynesianism. (Harvey 2005, 12) In addition, while Harvey posits the question
as to why we have all accepted neoliberalism as sacred dogma, an answer is never given as to
why that is the case. Now perhaps Harvey goes into that later in his book, however, this piece
leaves us wanting.
In conclusion Harvey does an exceptional job of carefully dissecting neoliberalism ad
it’s various failings. Taking us from the beginnings of the idea to its eventually stranglehold
on global economic policy. We can clearly see from the many tables and figures that this was
no slight economic disagreement, but a radical shift in wealth from the working class to the
economic elite. Harvey shows us in clear detail that neoliberalism is fraught with greed,
corruption and unchecked power and influence. And now we can only wonder, like Harvey
quoting Polyani “Neoliberalism confers right and freedoms on those ‘whose income, leisure
and security need no enhancing’, leaving a pittance for the rest of us. How is it then, that ‘the
rest of us’ have so easily acquiesced in this state of affairs?” (Harvey 2005, 38)
Unfortunately, that answer is not easily forthcoming, and the economic elites are happy about
that.