 Well, talk about what neoliberalism is. I think that's how the cynical historian begins this, and we'll go from there. So I'll have a lot of commentary as we go through the video. You guys tell me, make sure that you can hear the sound and that the volume is right and everything is cool, otherwise we'll work on it. Okay, here we go. So, he's starting out by saying, look, we can't define like most moderns, they don't like definitions. We're not going to define neoliberalism. We're going to describe a few of its characteristics and neoliberalism has been, according to him, the dominant set of ideas, at least within the economic sphere in the United States over the last 40 years. It is the dominant set, so a lot has happened, he can't cover it all, and that makes sense. So who is this guy? He is the cynical historian. You can look him up, the cynical historian on YouTube. And rejection of groups, market liberalism. So that's not bad. So the first characteristic of neoliberalism is, and you probably heard neoliberalism a lot. People talk about it a lot. Neoliberalism is a kind of a catchall. It's been attacked. It's been defended, although it hasn't been defended much. It's not clear as neoliberalism on the left is neoliberalism on the right. It's probably more of a feature of what we call the mushy, hard to define. And I agree with him, neoliberalism is hard to define, because I don't think there is such a thing. But neoliberalism is this mushy center. So here he's trying to characterize what this is. Emphasis on individuality and rejection of groups. There's an essence to that, too. There is, so neoliberalism will get to what it describes, but it's liberalism. Liberalism comes from the idea of liberty. It's the idea of limited government. It's the idea that the government's job is to preserve the liberty of the individual. Liberalism, historically, classical liberalism, has been an ideology of the preservation of the individual. It's been an individualistic ideology, again, the classical liberal form and a rejection of groups. And neoliberalism picks on that a little bit. It's not overly individualistic, but it is true that it emphasizes the individual more than groups. It's not as collectivistic as let's say socialism or fascism or any of the other popular ideologies out there. It's definitely more about individual prosperity in economic terms and individual choices in economic terms. Not, I wouldn't say individualism and I wouldn't say individual freedom as we'll see, but certainly an emphasis on individual choices and individual wealth. It's about market liberalism, which means market freedom, market liberty and physical conservatism. It's not clear what physical conservatism means, but probably means not spending too much by the government. And market liberalism means a general tendency towards letting markets function, letting markets work, right? We'll see in a minute whether this is the history of the last 40 years. If he's going to go over the last 40 years, we'll see how good of an historian he is. And fiscal conservatism, which is kind of the same thing, privatization of public goods and infrastructure. Okay, so neoliberal regimes or governments will privatize a lot of the public goods, whatever public goods mean. Again, public goods are not a legitimate concept. Nothing is owned by the public. But the idea, public goods are typically things like healthcare, education, national parks, public lands. Those are quote, public goods, infrastructure, roads are considered public goods. Anything that conventionally people can't imagine how the private sector could deliver, they rope under the term public goods. But remember, goods production happens by private individuals. Ideally, everything would be private and good, right? Good is something that applies to an individual. Good, bad, goods to be consumed, goods to be enjoyed, applies to people as individuals, not as collectives. So it's not, not as a public, there's no such thing really as the public good. Deregulating government controls on corporate excess. Okay, so liberalism is about dereg, oh, notice, oh, we have to go back a second. Like, he doesn't say deregulating business. Not what, how, how he describes privatization of public goods and infrastructure. Deregulating government controls on corporate excess. Deregulating government controls on corporate excess. Note how he is injecting his views. What is corporate excess? How do you define corporate excess? Too much profit, behavior you don't like. What does corporate excess actually mean? Excess of what? So it's not enough to say deregulating corporations. That would be too neutral for him. He's already sneaking in his particular ideology, which is the ideology of the left, and not the center left, which he would define as neoliberal, but probably the more Bernie Sanders left, or, you know, I don't know, socialist left. It's not exactly what his ideology is just in this video, but it's clearly left of center. No, left of left of center, left of left of center. Okay, corporate excesses. Austerity measures against welfare. Austerity measures against welfare means shrinking welfare. And free trade agreements that allow for more rapid globalization. What's interesting is people who use the term neoliberals and accused and complain about neoliberalism are usually people who emphasize this issue of trade. They usually anti-trade people. Neoliberalism is now hated by both left and right. It is anti-populist and the primary thing people hate about neoliberalism. You know, I've noticed the term, this is the term used a lot in the UK. It's used a lot in Europe. The thing they most dislike is globalization. Globalization. Neoliberalism was the term used a lot during Brexit, but globalization is the enemy. So, neoliberalism is globalization. Now, what do I think neoliberalism is? If I had to define neoliberalism, neoliberalism is the mixed economy with a slight tilt towards markets. So, neoliberalism is the status quo we've had. Neoliberalism is what Fukuyama said basically won when the Berlin Wall came down. It's liberal democracy. It's, you know, democracy, limited democracy, so not pure, you know, unlimited democracy, limited democracy. But without the recognition of individual rights, there's no conception really of individual rights, which is just a general belief in the freedom of the individual, the political freedom of the individual. Economically, it's a system that allows some freedom, particularly of consumer choice, but that heavily regulates business, right? But regulates in a particular way, so it doesn't regulate prices, because we've learned from Hayek that's bad, so we don't regulate prices. It regulates, as he said, kind of corporate behavior, what they view as corporate accesses. So it tries to get the corporations to behave in what is a nice way, right? So it's regulation, but a different type of regulation historically, where prices were set and everything, all the conditions were set. Here it leaves the consumer to help set prices to supply and demand. It doesn't try to intervene too much in supply and demand, except with healthcare. But in other areas, it doesn't try that. It leaves the market to determine that and then overlays on to that control over behavior, right? Let's see what else. There is a certain level of emphasis on individuals as compared to what came before the particular mixed economy that we're talking about from the 1970s on, there's a little bit more emphasis on allowing markets to work while regulating them. Physical conservatism, if you look at government spending, particularly in the United States, I don't know where that physical conservatism comes from. Steady measures against welfare. Yeah, there's some criticism of welfare. Some are string regarding welfare, but there's no questioning of welfare. There's no challenging of welfare. There's no attempt to replace welfare. There's just a little tightening of the conditions like Bill Clinton's welfare reform that was passed. And then finally, free trade, yes, definitely free trade. So more free trade, more emphasis on free trade, although it's not free. Note that almost all trade agreements are not free trade agreements. They're what we'll call managed trade agreements. They are unfree trade agreements. I mean, free trade is easy. Just lower tariffs to zero. But these don't, they say, okay, Mexico will trade with you. Most things will have a tariff of zero, but some things will have a very high tariff. And other things we just can't import because they have to be licensed over here and your doctors can't work in the United States and your truckers can't drive in the United States. And so, oh, and by the way, if you want to export into the United States your goods, then your labor has to be treated in a particular way and wages have to be this and environmental. Things have to be that very, very controlled, very managed, but generally in a big picture, less restrictions moving towards what you would call less tariffs, less restrictions generally. And that's true. The last, since World War II, we have moved towards greater and greater and greater trade freedom. And I'd say with the exception of Trump, that path has been pretty steady, although there were bumps on the way, there were still tariffs during Reagan and there were some tariffs during Bush. I mean, every president does something, but the only one who was anti-trade was Trump. But generally a movement towards more of these agreements. So that's neoliberalism is the mixed economy with a little bit of emphasis more on markets. I'd say Scandinavia is basically a neoliberal. Most of Europe is neoliberal in this sense. And the United States is neoliberal as is, you know, places like Japan and Korea. They're not capitalist. They're not classical liberal. They're not either politically, philosophically or economically individualistic and free. But they, they're mixed, centrist and tilt towards markets. Even somebody like Bill Clinton, you would say centrist on market issues tilted a little bit towards markets. As again, as compared to Johnson, FDR or even Nixon, who I don't think was tilted towards market, tilted away from markets. That's what I think of neolibals. And there's a sense in which that ideology of a mixed economy with a slight tilt towards freedom has been dominant until Trump in the United States. And I'd say in most of Europe, since Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, really since Jimmy Carter, although not so much ideological more. So it's the status quo or the status quo seven years ago, status quo seven years ago. And, and, you know, Obama was mixed economy, tilted a little away from markets. But he wasn't an out and out socialist, you know, and obviously in health care, he titted quite a bit against markets. But it wasn't like Obama's period was massive regulations and massive controls and massive, you know, like, like Johnson or FDR. I mean, even Bush had sub in not sub in sub in Suxley. Yeah, sub in Suxley. Obama had got Frank. They all had their own big regulatory bills, but they almost did them apologetically. The market was still they focused. They still believe to some extent that markets work as long as they're controlled, as long as they regulate it. Whatever the hell that means, right? What does markets control? What are markets when they're controlled? Are they markets? Are they still markets? They like the semblance of it. They like they, they're like entrepreneurs can still start businesses. As long as they have a license and they got permission and they got all the stuff, everything to talk, particularly poor people. We don't want them starting too many businesses. And consumers can buy whatever they want, except for pharmaceuticals and except for illegal drugs and except for things that the government is deemed not safe and all that stuff. But generally within the scope of the thousands of millions of products we have available, we can go and choose what products we can buy. But it's obviously not free, not free markets. So this is neoliberalism. My interpretation, this is his, my version of it is my accurate version of what neoliberalism is, is what I've just discussed. Some politicians may not fit these precisely and that's why neoliberalism isn't just some specific ideology. It's the entire economic paradigm the US has been in since at least the Reagan administration. As you will see, there is no concrete definition nor even a starting point. Yeah, I mean, modern intellectuals don't believe in definitions and I really like starting points either. They like to be mushy, fuzzy, a little unclear. Now, neoliberalism granted is is is not a clear concept because I don't think anybody has a clear conception of what it is. I think what I gave is the closest you're going to get. And and I agree with them, this vague general notion started probably around Reagan in the United States, certainly with Margaret Thatcher in the UK, spread throughout Europe and much of the world during the 1980s and 1990s. Probably started in the US under Jimmy Carter. He'll mention that. It's hazy. If you have trouble with that ambiguity, well, that's just what good history is. Embrace the suck. I had to take an entire grad class oriented around these questions. So yeah, capitalism is not a static thing and neoliberalism is but a permutation of it. So here's the other thing that everybody does. Everybody does. They never define capitalism. Capitalism is even Vega more mushy than even neoliberalism in their mind. Capitalism in anything that has private property, even if the private property is controlled tax regulated. It's still capitalism. So for them, we live under capitalism today. We've always lived under capitalism, at least through the 19th century. And to today, it's all capitalism and capitalism could take forms of progressive capitalism and neoliberal capitalism and this kind of capitalism and that kind of capitalism and all these other kind of capitalists. And there is no such thing. Capitalism is one thing. It is free unregulated markets in which the government protects property rights and that's it and leaves the economy alone. It is the complete separation of economics from state. In that sense, we've barely had capitalism and we have very little of it today. And that's what I mean by mixed economy. We have some capitalism and some socialism, some controls or some fascism, some control, some redistribution and some markets. But we don't have capitalism. There are no forms of capitalism. This is why I don't like people using the term crony capitalism. No, cronyism is a feature of statism. I don't like people using the term conscious capitalism. Well, in a sense, all capitalism is conscious. It requires consciousness, but there is no some type of con capitalism. There's only one. And that is where the government leaves you free and where private property is owned by private people and all property is owned privately and where the government is separate from the economy. That's capitalism. You might hate it. That's fine. But let's just accept a definition. A definition of somebody provide a definition. So at what point if a little bit of private property counts as capitalism, at what point does it disappear? Then you get the wolf pseudo Marxist economist who claims that capitalism existed during the Egyptians when they built the pyramids. That was capitalism because I guess there was some private property, the king had private property. I don't know. So it becomes a meaningless concept. So it's important to be clear. It's important to define. Thank you for listening or watching the Iran book show. If you'd like to support the show, we make it as easy as possible for you to trade with me. You get value from listening. You get value from watching. Show your appreciation. You can do that by going to Iran book show dot com slash support. I go to Patreon, subscribe star locals and just making a appropriate contribution on any one of those, any one of those channels. Also, if you'd like to see the Iran book show grow, please consider sharing our content and of course subscribe. Press that little bell button right down there on YouTube so that you get an announcement when we go live. And for those of you who already subscribers and those of you who already supporters of the show, thank you. I very much appreciate it.