Neoliberalismus: Über ein intellektuelles Missverständnis

Max Trecker
{"title":"Neoliberalismus: Über ein intellektuelles Missverständnis","authors":"Max Trecker","doi":"10.1515/jbwg-2023-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The term neoliberalism is a faithful companion of current public debates. It often serves as a proxy for what is allegedly wrong with society. The term is used to criticize a perceived commodification of spheres of human existence that used to be shielded from a purely economic logic. Recently, the term neoliberalism has become the object of historical research. Its roots have been traced back as far as 1947 or 1918. I argue in this paper that historians have taken a methodologically questionable approach, by departing from the blurry concept of neoliberalism as it is perceived today and trying to trace it back in time as far as possible. Such an approach leads to severe contradictions as economists labelled ex-post as neoliberals were often opposed to neoliberalism as it is currently defined. It is methodologically more sound and analytically more rewarding to start the conception of the term with the economists who self-identified as neoliberals. This approach leads to a more coherent concept of neoliberalism that is better suited for further research and provides a clearer understanding of the history of economic thought in the interwar period and the first postwar years.","PeriodicalId":195429,"journal":{"name":"Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte / Economic History Yearbook","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte / Economic History Yearbook","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbwg-2023-0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The term neoliberalism is a faithful companion of current public debates. It often serves as a proxy for what is allegedly wrong with society. The term is used to criticize a perceived commodification of spheres of human existence that used to be shielded from a purely economic logic. Recently, the term neoliberalism has become the object of historical research. Its roots have been traced back as far as 1947 or 1918. I argue in this paper that historians have taken a methodologically questionable approach, by departing from the blurry concept of neoliberalism as it is perceived today and trying to trace it back in time as far as possible. Such an approach leads to severe contradictions as economists labelled ex-post as neoliberals were often opposed to neoliberalism as it is currently defined. It is methodologically more sound and analytically more rewarding to start the conception of the term with the economists who self-identified as neoliberals. This approach leads to a more coherent concept of neoliberalism that is better suited for further research and provides a clearer understanding of the history of economic thought in the interwar period and the first postwar years.
新自由主义:关于思想上的误解
新自由主义一词是当前公共辩论的忠实伙伴。它经常被视为社会问题的代表。这个术语被用来批评过去被纯粹的经济逻辑所屏蔽的人类存在领域的感知商品化。最近,新自由主义一词成为历史研究的对象。它的根源可以追溯到1947年或1918年。我在这篇论文中认为,历史学家采取了一种方法论上有问题的方法,他们偏离了今天人们对新自由主义的模糊概念,并试图尽可能地追溯它的历史。这种方法导致了严重的矛盾,因为被贴上“前后自由主义者”标签的经济学家往往反对当前定义的新自由主义。从方法论上讲,从分析上讲,从那些自称为新自由主义者的经济学家开始这个术语的概念更合理,也更有益。这种方法引出了一个更连贯的新自由主义概念,更适合于进一步的研究,并为两次世界大战之间和战后最初几年的经济思想史提供了更清晰的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信