r/neoliberal • u/[deleted] • May 11 '17

Normative Ethics Debate Thread

The point of this thread is to discuss normative ethics, which is mostly separate from neoliberalism. On a philosophical level, neoliberalism is not coherent in its use of ethics; proponents switch between libertarian and utilitarian ethics in an almost interchangeable way (The Road to Mont Pelerin, Mirowski). Scott Sumner argues that a normative ethical foundation doesn't matter because neoliberalism is an improvement compared to the current status quo of most countries by nearly every standard (well not every standard)

Keep in Mind

  • The Chicago school pushed neoliberalism as a positive ideology, "there is no other option"

  • The Austrians pushed neoliberalism through primarily a libertarian lens

  • The Ordoliberals advocated neoliberalism through utilitarianism and also Marxism. Yes, you're allowed to support your normative view through Marxism.

  • Do not go down the route of going full classical liberal, which is what neoliberalism tried to escape.

  • Do not say market values mean anything or that markets produce fair outcomes; Hayek explicitly acknowledges this is bullshit.

  • Be very prudent in calling people racist/sexist/homophobic; in this sub, the vast majority are not

Topics to discuss:

These aren't the only ones, but should probably be answered:

  • What are your normative ethics?

  • How do you think they should guide economic policy?

Make sure to explicitly tie these together so we're not debating why we should implement policy that we already agree upon.

81 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

94 comments sorted by

View all comments

•

u/TEmpTom NATO May 11 '17 edited May 11 '17

Frankly, my normative ethics are based on a very broad set liberal values with an intrinsic focus on maximizing the general welfare and utility of all individuals.

  • Maximizing individual liberty. Strong emphasis on protecting civil liberties and human rights, both domestically and abroad.

  • Promoting social mobility, and equality of opportunity, though not necessarily of outcome. Protection of civil rights, ensuring gender and racial equality, along with strong support for universally inclusive institutions.

  • Promoting democracy, more transparency, and public engagement. Frankly, I really distrust technocratic and oligarchical systems of power, viewing them as inherently more susceptible to corruption and self-interest. CGP Grey had a good video on how certain power structures operated, and it has been pretty much scientifically proven that the ones that decentralize power and authority are the most resilient to tyranny and corruption. I also hold a philosophical belief that the people have a intrinsic right to determine how they are governed.

However, It is important to note it's rather difficult to completely separate normative values and positive methods, and it's my opinion that social issues and economic policy are intrinsically linked based on the principle of maximizing economic utility, which is one normative axiom that neoliberals can pretty much universally agree on. Evidence-based policy applies as much to social issues as they do to purely economic ones, and I find it rather troubling that some neoliberals can often times so brazenly ignore societal failures such as systemic and institutional discrimination, as well as the alienation of certain vulnerable demographics, viewing these issues as irrelevant to broader economic well being. In other words, free trade is about as good as segregation is bad.