Neo- Liberalism: Social Democracy

Does social democracy present viable alternatives to neoliberal capitalism? 

Introduction:

Social democracy can be defined as a state, in which people are provided with security and equality, and to promote social justice within the economy, to safeguard the interest of the people and the bargaining arrangements include a policy regime. It also measures how the income is redistributed and the regulations made in the general interest and state provisions. Social democracy is a political, social and economic ideology (Chaturvedi, 2016).  Social democracy is different from the democratic and socialist though have identical names somehow. In today’s time, the social democracy believes in maintaining the capital system.  Social democracy is totally different from the democratic socialism and the soviet model of the centralized socialism (Belfrage, 2015). Whereas, democratic socialism leads to have a socialist economy in which the production are socially and collectively own or controlled by the politically democratic system of government.

Liberalism means referring to the free economy in which there are no rules and regulations. They have eliminated rules and the barriers which restrict a person what people can do.  This has been taken from the principles of the neoclassical economies in which  government reduces the  deficit spending ,  limit the policy of imposing duties or quotas on imports , in order to protect homes or industries and there is an open market for trading . It also seeks to scrap fixed exchange rates and allows the private property and the private businesses run by the state (Tokar, 2008).

Social Democracy and Neo-Liberalism

Various forms of social democracy are national, political and ideological forms.  They all have a common feature which is based on manual working class, regulation of capitalism and ownership has the power to extend. To make the society more equal, efficient and in the interest of majority was the main objective of the social democracy. Interfering directly or indirectly in the economy is termed as reforming capitalism (Belfrage, 2015). Some kind of limited improvements is made in the social welfare which implies improvements in social welfare and public expenditure and taxation policies. Adverse reactions would be expected from the big business example- the flight of the capital from the country which can destroy the government or can make them weak. But if the reforms of fear of annoying the bosses are avoided by the democratic ministers the parliamentary democracy turns out to be incapable of moderating the built-in equality of capitalism (Heywood, 2004).

The radical form of liberalism is to meet the desire to subject people  to an ethical ideal regarded as universal and the universal binding- it is the mother of all the crimes also known as the crime which contains all the crime for it amounts to the cruel imposition on one’s view towards other and this is the root cause of civil disorder (Bell, 2014). That’s the main reason behind the liberals claim if anybody wants to establish the civil peace and tolerance the first condition would get rid of any moral temptation is to get rid of moral ideas and to provide realistic taking, people as they are to determine their true nature, and not the moral pressure.

An economy which is free from rules and regulations are referred to as liberalism. The society which is self-managing society is known as democratically planned economy in which directly elected workplace takes place and  the councils took the responsibility of their own affairs and linked together to make decisions for the welfare of the society. These reforms of the organisation were created when to link through to make the decision for the society at large (Hogg, 2016). The key insight that Marx has during the Paris commune of 1871 during these reforms were about to developed the new society with the process of fighting with the old society. The same methods were used for self-organisation whose basis was self-managing society are needed by the exploited to keep and to remove the capital itself (Runciman, 2013.). 

Alternate to Neo-Liberalism

Neoliberal capitalism is a form in which there is no economic and social-political ideology is perfect and there are alternatives including social democracy. Though neo liberalism is has a widespread and universally practiced that it faces the serious flaws in its implementation which includes the disparity between the wealthy and the making poor as we as a heightening of inequality in the different countries. Various alternatives have to be made for these limitations  in which social democracy and Marxism provide these ideologies  all the social and economic theories needs to be balanced on what is the most beneficial to the citizens and state and economies should not be bound by the limitations (Meeropol, 2015). The only neo liberalism lies in the power of the interest that sustains it.

The concept of neoliberal capitalism has prevailed in the worldwide economic system which is practiced in the many of the democratic countries in all over the world such as in Australia neo liberalism is a part of capitalism. Although it has many problems which are seen in the events such as 2007 global financial crises by which there was a huge loss of legitimacy of the previously regaining dominant free market ideology as well as also affected the inequality and poverty. The principles of neo liberalism are based on the idea that market and people should be liberated and should be made free from the interference of government it (Vandenberghe, 2008). It promotes the reality and safeguards the interest of the human rights and according to them there should be no foundations to the citizens if there are it should be removed. It also advocates the minimising of government interference and the bureaucracy and maintains a small government. This type of capitalism is widely practised including in modern day by Australia the various changes have been made by the in the final three decades of the twentieth century in which political-economic framework underwent a far-reaching transformation. (Hogg, 2016) It also encounters the transformation from a state-centric to neoliberal form. Neoliberal also encounters the serious consequences factors such as an increase in wealth divides, economic instability, and heightened inequality.

The examples are shown of democratic parties held in Sweden and Germany will brief about the social democracy, does not offer an alternative to neo-liberalism. structural  pressure is related to the decline of the world economy  and the preventions of enactment of traditional and policies of social democratic made by the globalisation  were predicted by the specific circumstances that no longer exist. The only model of government which is available is neo-liberalism (Shibata, 2015).  Neo-liberalism is not at all challenged at the level of elite politics; this is not accepted in the wider society. Intellectual critiques of global capitalism and parliamentary democracy were accompanied in the 1990s by the so-called ‘anti- globalisation movement’ in the late.  Acceptance of free market vacated by the social democracies is also the signs of political parties those want to emerge with them (Kelly, 2008).

Neo-liberalism in opposition is stood by the political parties in the social democratic situation. In developing country, the impoverished, as well as the heightening of inequality and flaws in its implementation,  includes the widening of disparity, has a wide spread of universally practised (LaMothe, 2015).

All the economic theories and sociopolitical theories need to be balanced and among them what is the most beneficial to the state and the citizens that would be most effective on the global economic scale. There should be no limitations for the singular and collective societies and there are alternatives for the shortcomings imposed by the neo-liberalism(Abc.net.au, 2012). The tide of revolt against neo-liberalism continues to the rising, in Europe and this is more apparent in France. The two stunning defeats have been faced by the neo-liberal first was the victory of  the left, no in the public vote on the European constitution, then second was the social violent attempt  to take government against the CPE law which was aimed towards the rights of young workers (Kriesler and Nevile, n.d.).  Neo-liberalism has a question of alternative by the victories pose.

To address this challenge some efforts were made to the movement example- following the French referendum, activities  involved in the another world has started a project to make a charter of principles of the other Europe as neo-liberal constitutional treaty. A seminar was also devoted to the subject at the recent European social forum in Athens.

The drafts which were made were uncontroversial.  They only concentrate towards the rights of the human and also gave the definition of common social rights, for example, to protect the public services to safeguard the interest of the human beings and their rights to protect them from the policy of privatisation (Kriesler and Nevile, n.d.).

The charter belongs to the ideological world of post-war social democracy. The concept of citizenship is extended by the past two centuries from civil rights to social rights.  Neo-liberal is also trying to roll the process in the widening citizenship back, by taking away the social rights represented by the post-war welfare state.

Defending against these rights is very essential. Rejecting this also requires the introduction of the different social logic but they are silent on this what it could be. Many of the leading democracies are fighting because of the long and difficult wars that even they don’t know how to win or exist successfully (LaMothe, 2015). Most of the democracies in the western part are heavily in debt. These parts of wars are thankful but they played an important role to come close to default and it has a fear that America may be legend same way.   To bear with climate is the most difficult thing democracies have found.  And they have seen the mixture of the retirement and the fear of the apparently unstoppable rise of china.  War, public threat, environmental threat, and the existence of a plausible competitor are the four fundamentals challenges a system of government can face. Whether any of them is doing well has not been established in the democracies meeting (Scheuerman, 2013).

So there is confusion. History reveals that democracy can cope up with whatever is thrown at them. The most successful democracies are also struggling to survive. According to the historical record of democracy, it suggests there is nothing as bad it seems to be.  That is the main reason behind the difficulties to know how seriously to take current crises of democracy (Owen, 1994).

Few factors which make democracy work successfully and the factors cause democracies to go wrong are – the flexibility, the variety, the responsiveness of the democratic societies.

Historical myopia and short-termism are produced by them. The democracies with drift into disaster and blind spots have also faced. The success of the democracy from the past hundred years has not resulted in more mature, far-sighted and self-aware democratic society. Democracy has a victory but has not given up.  Democratic policies are as childish as it has ever been: we argument, we cry we distress. This is one of the most difficult we find ourselves in.  All the historical evidence that we have gathered about the advantages of the democracy has apparently left us none the stage about how to make the best use of those advantages (Mraovi?, 2011).  Same mistakes are repeated by us. However , the  halfway ups and downs, there can be little doubt about that democracy  was overall winning during the past century, to the point where it was possible to give reasons, as Francis Fukuyama did more than two decades ago. This liberal policy is the only answer to the fundamental problems of the human history.

To support the advance of democracy is the ultimately the best strategy to ensure our security and to build a durable peace. Democratization has been called the ‘third pillar’ of his foreign policy by the Clinton. Liberal democracies are those in which liberal presence is present and in which regular competitive elections of the officials empowered to declare the war (Murphy, 2014). Liberal ideology and institutions work in tandem to bring out the democratic peace which is argued.  According to liberals they believe that democracies seek the attention of their citizens and true interests is provided and thus by definition they are pacific and trustworthy.  It can be dangerous to the non-democracies because they seek other ends, such as defeat or fleece. Liberals also holds the interest calls for the accommodation of companion democracies, but sometimes calls for war with the non-democracies (Pilbeam, 2003).

When the government is run by the liberals, relations with the fellow democracies are pleasant sounding. When liberals govern, relation may be stony. In case if war is threatened with the state that the liberal opposition considers a fellow democracy, liberals ruffle to prevent bitterness using the free speech allowed them by law. Liberal leaders are unable to rally the public to fight, and fear that an unpopular war would lead to the ouster at the next election. In case if the crises with in a state believed to be non-democracy, the leaders may be pushed towards war (Ratner, 2009). Many forms can be taken by the social ownerships. Cooperative ownership is highly favoured.  Employees do not own their machines and enterprises, which would be regarded as in the form of employee capitalism enterprises, have the rights to draw or use income from their assets and investment agencies own the capital and management strategic decision are taken. But there is a democratic form for each enterprise and employees control is one of them.

The main reason behind the lack of public responsibility is companies which are failing in public and it is the consequence of market socialist policy. By the capital framework economic policies could be a framework to restore the growth and employment. It would allow forms of indicative planning to be introduced which would further enhance public control.

The American economist James jumper has developed the line of reasoning. He tells how the pragmatic market socialism reduces the inequality while preserving the current consumer culture.

Conclusion:

The both political and economic thinking is currently dominated by the ideology of economic and in the mature capitalist societies public consciousness has become the weakness of socialism. Public ownership is blend by the market socialism which is a practical political course and it also involves a gradual reversion to public ownership, mutualisation, and indicative planning. Various flaws are also there in market socialism which is a step away from neoliberal policy and movement towards the social democracy (Scheuerman, 2013). Various market situations are created for the financial failures which also include the respect to the equality and employment. Economic and political leaders are generated by the electoral democracy. It has also included that there is an advantage of the strengthening democracy but also moving towards the direction of socialism within the capital market societies. There would be positive achievements in terms of allocation of capital and distribution of income.  Sceptical of planning and state management is also appealed.  It would be reverse financialization and install public ownership over the failures of the companies.  By this, it would be extended the much social value and there would be good democracy in form of cooperative and control of employees.

References

Abc.net.au. (2012). Liberalism and its discontents – Opinion – ABC Religion & Ethics (Australian Broadcasting Corporation). [online] Available at: http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2012/10/26/3619378.htm [Accessed 22 Sep. 2016].

Belfrage, C. (2015). The unintended consequences of financialisation: Social democracy hamstrung? The pensions dilemma. Economic and Industrial Democracy.

Bell, D. (2014). What Is Liberalism?. Political Theory, 42(6), pp.682-715.

Chaturvedi, S. (2016). Book Review: Neera Chandhoke, Democracy and Revolutionary Politics.Political Studies Review, 14(3), pp.415-416.

Heywood, A. (2004). Political theory. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hogg, R. (2016). Left Realism and Social Democratic Renewal. Int J for Crime, Justice & Social Democracy, 5(3), p.66.

Kelly, R. (2008). No ‘return to the state’: dependency and developmentalism against neo-liberalism.Development in Practice, 18(3), pp.319-332.

Kriesler, P. and Nevile, J. (n.d.). The Collapse of Neoliberal Capitalism: Causes and Cures: A Review Article. SSRN Electronic Journal.

LaMothe, R. (2015). The Colonizing Realities of Neoliberal Capitalism. Pastoral Psychology, 65(1), pp.23-40.

Meeropol, M. (2015). The Rise and Fall of Neoliberal Capitalism. Challenge, 58(4), pp.372-379.

Mraovi?, B. (2011). A free market capitalism or a speculative market capitalism?. Social Responsibility Journal, 7(4), pp.578-591.

Murphy, J. (2014). Book Review: It's class war, stupid! Structures, actors and resistance in global neoliberal capitalism. Organization, 21(4), pp.581-588.

Owen, J. (1994). How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace. International Security, 19(2), p.87.

Pilbeam, B. (2003). What Ever Happened to Economic Liberalism?. Politics, 23(2), pp.82-88.

Runciman, D. (2013). The confidence trap.

Ratner, C. (2009). Cooperativism: A Social, Economic, and Political Alternative to Capitalism.Capitalism Nature Socialism, 20(2), pp.44-73.

Scheuerman, W. (2013). Capitalism, Law, and Social Criticism*. Constellations, 20(4), pp.571-586.

Shibata, S. (2015). Resisting Japan's Neoliberal Model of Capitalism: Intensification and Change in Contemporary Patterns of Class Struggle. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 54(3), pp.496-521.

Tokar, B. (2008). On Bookchin's Social Ecology and its Contributions to Social Movements. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 19(1), pp.51-66.

Vandenberghe, F. (2008). Deleuzian capitalism. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 34(8), pp.877-903.

 

MyAssignmenthelp.co.uk believes that years of experience and high success rates have become the main reasons why students prefer our essay help services over others. It’s been a decade now that we have been helping students by providing the best quality essay writing services. Thousands of students have got benefitted from our essay writing help services. Each of them appreciates the quality of the paper they receive as well as the prices of our services. No other essay help provider can offer high-quality at such low price.