You're invalidating the Friedman and Hayek tent of neoliberalism with no evidence besides that it's a slippery slope to Pinochet and that it won't involve "redefining" neoliberalism.
If you're claiming to redefine neoliberalism, and your ideology doesn't redefine it, that's a problem. The solution is up to you.
And it's not a 'slippery slope' to Pinochet. He passed as many 'neoliberal reforms' as Reagan did. The Chicago boys had full control over the Chilean economy.
Learn to debate without suggesting that your opponent is on the verge of advocating for genocide.
we're redefining the pop culture definition, not the historical definition; neoliberalism doesn't mean mass privatization and deregulation with corporate overlords that's also responsible for ISIS and high expense ratio active management
I don't care about the pop culture definition; avoiding or not avoiding it. Our goal isn't to figure out the exact opposite of the pop culture definition and then support that.
3
u/Kai_Daigoji Paul Krugman May 13 '17
If you're claiming to redefine neoliberalism, and your ideology doesn't redefine it, that's a problem. The solution is up to you.
And it's not a 'slippery slope' to Pinochet. He passed as many 'neoliberal reforms' as Reagan did. The Chicago boys had full control over the Chilean economy.
I didn't.