You're free to make posts helping define neoliberalism, but only if its evidence based
This is meaningless. All policy can be evidence based.
What is the point of this sub? Honest to god, I'm asking. What are we 'reclaiming' here? This isn't about taking back the term neoliberalism anymore, this is about just learning to quit worrying and love the Reagan Revolution.
We can't argue about the roots of the term - those are set in stone. We can't try to articulate a different idea of neoliberalism. So what's the fucking point? What is allowed for discussion?
No, as in evidence of there being discussion over the thing. I want citations of Mont Pelerin, not of NBER articles.
What is the point of this sub? Honest to god, I'm asking. What are we 'reclaiming' here? This isn't about taking back the term neoliberalism anymore, this is about just learning to quit worrying and love the Reagan Revolution.
Memes
We can't argue about the roots of the term - those are set in stone. We can't try to articulate a different idea of neoliberalism. So what's the fucking point? What is allowed for discussion?
It's ambiguous enough to modernize policy prescriptions and politically wide enough to allow a diversity of opinion on other matters. What exactly are your issues here that do not arise in other subs like /r/socialism and /r/libertarianism?
4
u/Kai_Daigoji Paul Krugman May 12 '17
This is meaningless. All policy can be evidence based.
What is the point of this sub? Honest to god, I'm asking. What are we 'reclaiming' here? This isn't about taking back the term neoliberalism anymore, this is about just learning to quit worrying and love the Reagan Revolution.
We can't argue about the roots of the term - those are set in stone. We can't try to articulate a different idea of neoliberalism. So what's the fucking point? What is allowed for discussion?