Question

In what ways can Neoliberalism be criticized for?

Answer 1

Neoliberalism be criticized for Contrary to the received wisdom, neoliberalism not destroy democracy in Latin America, the available evidence suggests that it actually helped to guarantee the maintenance of democracy. The competitive civilian rule in most cases survives the enactment of drastic, costly, and risky market reforms. The most crucial reason for democracy surprising resilience was that most Latin American countries enacted neoliberalism only when they faced dramatic crises and the population was therefore prepared to swallow the bitter pill of tough stabilization. The structural adjustment often a last-ditch response to hyperinflation, a price rises above 50 percent per month.

The great costs of exploding inflation commonly induce large segments of the population to support tough, risky stabilization plans that hold the uncertain prospect of overcoming the crisis. Facing the danger of a catastrophe many people willing to shoulder considerable short term losses in the hope of receiving payoffs from restored stability and renewed growth in the medium and long run. In crisis situations people do not dig in their heels and strenuously defend their immediate material well being and instead they are willing to make sacrifices and trust their leaders plans for straightening out the economy. They willing to accept substantial risks by supporting adjustment plans that promise to turn the country around, but that for economic and especially, political reasons have uncertain prospects of success. People's economic calculations much more complicated and sophisticated and more susceptible to persuasion and leadership than the literature used to assume. As a result governments combated profound crises often managed to muster sufficient political backing to enact bold, painful market reforms under democracy.

Democracy therefore survived neoliberalism in many Latin American countries, such as Argentina, Brazil, and Bolivia, that had unstable civilian regimes when they initiated market reform. Even in Peru, government governed in an autocratic fashion, these deviations from democratic norms and principles were not directly caused by or required for the enactment of neoliberalism. The longstanding postponement of determined adjustment, combined with large-scale guerrilla insurgencies and terrorism, had discredited the country's political class and government took advantage of this opportunity to concentrate power and disrespect liberal democratic safeguards and the market reform as such did not destroy democracy in Latin America.