Political Science Essay: Neoliberalism in the UK

The coining of the term neoliberalism was at a conference in Paris in 1938. Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig Von Mises were amongst the delegates who defined this ideology. The two were expatriates from Austria and viewed the social democracy as the expression of socialism occupying a similar continuum as the communism and Nazism. For over twenty years, the term neoliberalism is becoming a subject of debate both politically and academically. Neoliberalism refers to a theory of the economic practices suggesting that the human well-being advanced best through the maximization of the entrepreneurial liberties within the institutional framework described by individual property, private belongings rights, free trade, and unencumbered markets Miller 2010, p.364). The nations role is to build as well as maintain a recognized framework suitable for such practices. A state must consider the quality as well as the integrity of money. It has to set up the police, military, defense, as well as the juridical functions necessary for safe, private possessions rights, and encourage liberally functioning markets.

What is Neoliberalism?

Many authors use the term neoliberalism pejoratively to describe a lamentable spread of the global capitalism along with consumerism, and an equally unacceptable destruction of a proactive in a state (Davidson 2013, p.176). The concept of neoliberalism has its definition meaning the re-establishment of liberalism. The description proposes that that liberalism, a political thought has been missing in the policy-making and legislative decisions for some time, emerging in the recent times in a revived form.

Neoliberalism might be a distinctive ideology, originating from, however not the same as the liberalism proper. According to Diamond (1995, p. 4), neoliberalism is a philosophy of the growing Trans-national Capitalism Class that planned as well as constructed the architecture of the global governance to respond to national capital threats, for example, the Euroscepticism in the United Kingdom, or from the neoconservatives. Neoliberalism is all over, however, at the same period, nowhere. It represents the dominant as well as the universal economic dogma agenda of the current period, a powerful as well as an extensive political plan of class supremacy and exploitation, an indicator of the capital revival. Neoliberalism is the most significant favorable ideology in the worlds history.

The Neoliberal Era In British

Ever since the 1980s, there has been a different expansion in the usage of the concept of neoliberalism regarding both absolute incidences as well as in the theoretical and the disciplinary settings, both as adopted and adapted. Neoliberalism has stood as a victim of its triumph. Many writers do not clarify what it represents and this call for a rising tide of the conceptual critique where many ask whether it implies a reduction of the nations vis-a-vis the market, or merely a diverse type of state that encourages and operates at the will of markets. Others ask whether neoliberalism is a depoliticized and a technocratic fetishization of a market, or political plan of class statute and the neo-colonial supremacy. Some also ask if neoliberalism is an absolute last stage of existence or a relative category that describes a travel direction, or a paradigmatic, or a radical departure (Cave and Rowell 2014, p.134).

The global economy encountered four regular crises from the beginning of the capitalism as a worldwide system. The years that marked the origins of the first three crises were 1873, 1929, and 1973. Every one of these shakings presented the creation of a different social order, profoundly altering the international relations. States like the U.S and Britain all through the developed world have had high commitments to neoliberalism (Davidson 2013, p.193). Neoliberalism is nowadays the hegemonic approach of discourse and has pervasive implications on the ways of thought, as well as the political-economic practices thus incorporating it to the way we operate around the world.

Effects of Neoliberalism

The crucial parts of the neoliberal economic policy are increasing the inequalities as well as risking the growth of the economy throughout the globe (Greig, Hulme, and Turner 2007, p.121). Neoliberalism, the prevailing economic ideology from the 1980s advocates for the approach of a free market in making policies: encouraging measures like deregulation, public spending cuts, and privatization. It is mostly antipathetic to the government sector and holds that the private sector needs to perform a superior role in the states economy. Instead of producing growth, some liberal strategies lead to amplified inequality which in turn jeopardizes the durable expansion (Hemerijck 2012, p.41). Even though the trade liberalization assisted lift individuals from poverty in the developed countries, along with some privatizations raising efficiency, the other facets of the policy misfired seriously.

Neoliberalism has numerous impacts across the globe like an immense tidal upsurge of discursive change and institutional reform. The neoliberal system caused the destruction both to the past institutional structures and powers, as well as to the divisions of labor, welfare provisions, social relations, ways of living, technological mixes, ways of thinking, and peoples attachment to their land. The impacts of neoliberalism range from long-term to short-term. During the time of incomparable growth connected with the 1950s and 1960s significant boom, three signs of progress happened in the global economy leading to the establishment of a foundation for future happenings (Klak 2000, p. 73). There was an unprecedented expansion of the international trade.

However, while the markets of the leading nations became highly dependent on the exports and imports and less on the internal dealings, the conditional variances between the costs of production across the borders gained great significance than before when there was territorially self-contained the trade bulk. Again, there was a rise in the cross-border production with an aim to achieve the economies of scale in the multinational market. Moving capital from one area to another was difficult. The result was strengthening of the multinational corporations position and weakening that of nations in relative to one another.

There was also an increase in foreign direct investment, a creation of an offshore banking, along with the unlimited money capital flows by the national boundaries that made the government policies most susceptible to attack since people saw them as acting contrary to the interest of capital. In spite of all these developments, none of them made the nation entirely powerless in the face of the markets. Neoliberalism characterized a choice, very challenging to evade as long as the objective was the expansion and preservation of the capitalism at all costs. The economic crisis resumption in 1973 was also a dramatic development.

According to Klak (2000, p. 73), Globalization is proximate explanations for the rise of neoliberalism, the end of the post-war boom an ultimate one. It forced some states to lower the prices where the costs of production were unchanged and resulted in increased pressure on profit rates. Neoliberalism, therefore, was the answer to the structural crisis of capitalism. Neoliberalism aimed at ending the post-war explosion but in the altered circumstances that the boom created. In the public assertions, neoliberalism gave lesser emphasis on profit restoration and more on the reduction of expenditures of the state, as well as controlling the inflation.

Corruption

The question that many people ask relates to the factor behind the main ongoing wave of outrages and misconduct in Britain. One government organization after the other is encountering low level of corruption, dishonesty, as well as criminal and ethical misdemeanors exposed in the media, to the police, houses of the parliament, banks, and various other institutions. Majority of the corruption and scandals in British are a result of the long-standing corruption in the public life of British, not merely accidental, but as the result of the developments in technology, or the improbable anticipations among the public, or the hyper-adversarialism of the news of the media (Miller 2015, p.379). It is a product of the neoliberal uprising.

The advocates of neoliberalism did not forecast all the consequences, and it is clear that all that happened was deliberate with extremely probable consequences. Neoliberalism signifies the principle that the market exchange is in itself an ethic that can guide all human action. Neoliberalism is not a form of society but rather a doctrine. The primary outcome of the quest of the neoliberal system is institutional corruption mired in the society affecting private and public sectors. However, the impact of corruption in the private sector was not as that in the public sector.

Many see corruption in an institution as failings of individuals, but this could be problematic since individuals assume that the organization became corrupt than in the beginning. It habitually exemplifies in the institutional purpose, and the regulatory agencies have a constraint to act contrary to in the interest of the public and obliged to serve the benefit of the market. Corruption is a form of pathology. The British political scientists Smith, Richards, and Hay, pose a question concerning the malaise present in public life whether a connection exists between the many crises they record.

The pathology here is that the political class must function in a self-regulating ground to guard against outside, possible undemocratic impact. The result was a secretive and closed government system facing elitism, the lack of accountability as well as transparency, in addition to a separate group from the ruled. The modern society is an advanced post-democratic capitalist where corruption is pervasive for impeccably comprehensible and not the unintentional reasons (Miller 2004, p.375). British society is corrupt institutionally and that the neoliberal theories of politics and economics, notably the public choice theory aided its introduction.

Racism and Ethnicity in Britain

Britain is experiencing an unusual political crisis. The crisis brings an international monetary meltdown along with the growth of the conventional liberal democratic union, which forms an account for the furthermost radical, extreme reaching as well as a permanent neo-liberal revolution. The long walk of the revolution remained to make a substantial development from the 1970s along with by some similarly significant changes in the ethnic and racial landscape of the United Kingdom. Today, as it proclaims an end of the public services, the welfare state, as well as the termination of the state-led communal engineering, it declares the culmination of march as well (Miller 2010, p.321). In aiming at specific areas, the neoliberal movement along with its vicious cuts wrought destruction on progress in the ethnic and racial equality. The close of the race today sits together with the series of cruel statutory programmes over which that termination, if always in sight progressively unraveled.

The UK has well-encountered hostility towards the new aliens, the asylum seekers as well as the economic immigrants signified by a growing securitization of the borders. Following the urban discontent in towns in the northern UK in 2001, the 9/11 attacks along with the London bombings of 2005 shifted the country and the rest of Europe far from the celebrations of diversity to a persistence on citizenship, Britishness, as well as community cohesion. An emphasis on the jeopardized national identity exhumed the past disc...