Excerpt (p.24) "In the Declaration of Philadelphia, the economy and finance are means to serve men This is the opposite perspective that governs the current process of globalization. Social justice goal was substituted for that of the free movement of capital and goods, and the hierarchy of means and ends has been reversed. (...) Instead of indexing the economy on the needs of man and finance on the needs of the economy, the economy is indexed on finance requirements and treated men as "human capital" in the service of the economy. "
Here, everything is said in this sentence and Alain Supiot seeks to demonstrate, brightly, in simple words, without resorting to emotional and non-aggressive, which is commendable.
The neo-liberal problem is that now (May 2010) they begin to be discovered. And their traditional weapons, manipulate opinions, manipulate language (social regression called "reform" and presented as an inevitable necessity for progress, to take one example) begin to stop working. Thanks to people like Alain Soupiot. It remains to try to discredit him: he is not an economist. The implication, he is not entitled to speak. He did not understand the dogma, it is not admitted to the neo-liberal clergy. That said it does not claim economist. He is a professor of law, and as such, human rights interest him. Version neoliberal: it is a conservative who wants to prevent the world to be enriched by the wealthy, wanting to defend the indefensible acquired because of another time (a roof, eat at an end, have a working precisely paid).
Would it be a bad economist? If the economy is not able to follow the only way that neoliberalism is trying to impose on us: it is necessary that the rich get richer to create wealth for all, it is clear, he did not understand and book deserves to be burned. Now if the economy (etymologically, the laws of the house ") is to define money as a medium of exchange and humanistic development, for sure it is a real economist.
Are explained in this book how the wealthiest benefit legislation and social rights which they derive a much better party than the weakest; the competition between states on the criterion of legislative constraints (the lowest bidder or less looking at is obviously the winner); personal enrichment related to privatization of public services, and above all why the former communists rallied so easily neoliberal dogmas, that M Thoreux in his review called "the alleged marriage of communism and ultra-liberalism". Except that they are not called, they are demonstrated. Thus we can see with new eyes the entrance forced march into the European Community of the number of countries of the former Eastern bloc, whose goal is far from humanist, contrary to what might think naively.
It is often said that history will judge. If, as I hope, this neoliberal interlude to a close, it's because making citizens aware of the face of social regression has helped put the record straight, and to send them in their goals tens of thousands of people who share the riches that would feed millions of insecure and poor. And this awareness is through reading books like this.
And I mean neoliberal parenthesis. Because contrary to what would have us believe his devotees, that this dogma is the only truth, and that applies to everyone, for ever and ever, amen, other worlds are possible. Other civilizations have lived without stock exchange, no CEO worth 300 times more than any other human being. Also known by the track they have left in history, thanks to their artistic, with their philosophers, their storytellers. Neoliberalism will be 2 pages in the history books (that has been given to final year science program) to describe the attempted takeover of egocentric and greedy greedy oligarchy, democracy, ie the right of peoples to live free and happy.
This book reads quickly, it's exciting, it is accessible to all (probably a big flaw for his detractors!)
Find your brain available: read it instead of spending 3 nights insipid front of your TV!
