Neoliberalism: A Very Short Introduction

Very Short Introductions #222

by Manfred B. Steger, Ravi K. Roy

Anchored in the principles of the free-market economics, "neoliberalism" has been associated with such different political leaders as Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Augusto Pinochet, and Junichiro Koizumi. In its heyday during the late 1990s, neoliberalism emerged
as the world's dominant economic paradigm, stretching from the Anglo-American heartlands of capitalism to the former communist bloc all the way to the developing regions of the global South. Today, however, neoliberalism has been discredited as the global economy, built on its principles, has been
shaken to its core by the worst financial calamity since the 1930s. Is neoliberalism doomed or will it regain its former status? Will the new U.S. President Barack Obama embrace or reject the neoliberal agenda of his predecessors in the White House? And how will his decision impact the current
global economic order? Is there a viable alternative to neoliberalism? Exploring the origins, core claims, and various forms of neoliberalism, this Very Short Introduction offers a concise and accessible introduction to one of the most debated "isms" of our time.

Genres: Politics, Economics, Nonfiction, History, Philosophy, Political Science, Ebooks

168 pages, Paperback

First published January 21, 2010

About the author

Manfred B. Steger (born 1961) is Professor at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. He was also Professor of Global Studies and Director of the Globalism Research Centre at RMIT University in Australia until 2013. Steger's research and teaching spans globalization, ideology, and non-violence.

Steger's won the 2003 Michael Harrington Award with his study on Globalism: The New Market Ideology.

Reviews

[Bojan Tunguz · Rating 4 out of 5]

The "Neoliberalism" is a term that denotes several political and economic policies that have strongly shaped the global economy over the past thirty years. It has its intellectual roots in the in classical liberalism and the opposition to Keynesian economics. However, as a governing policy it is most closely associated with Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. These two figures had more or less managed to put into practice a political philosophy that had been almost completely relegated to the realm of obscure think-tank thinking. Their success in this regard has been so thorough that almost all economic and political institutions, from all sides of the political spectrum, have been operating within some form of neoliberal paradigm ever since. Neoliberalism is usually associated with the political right, but there are several more or less important aspects of it that distinguish it from other right-leaning philosophies, and this book does a very good job at explaining the differences between them. In particular, it contrasts neoliberalism with economic nationalism that time and time again resurfaces in it various manifestations in right-wing political movements throughout the World.

One of the book's strong points is that it provides a global context for neoliberalism. It shows how it has been implemented on all six continents, and it discusses particular local circumstances that give neoliberalism a distinct flavor in various countries. The book, however, is a bit too quick to point out all the limitations of the neoliberal policies, and I feel it sometimes uses unnecessarily harsh language to characterize certain political actions that are deemed contrary to neoliberal principles. The final chapter deals with the current global economic crisis. Here one almost gets a sense that the authors are engaging in a form of schadenfreude at the apparent failings of neoliberalism. Whether neoliberalism has really run its course or not, or whether it really is a sustainable political philosophy in a long run, the history will still have to decide.

Overall, this is a very interesting and informative book. It is great introduction to main salient points of what neoliberalism, and well worth the read.

[Emma Sea · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a book I think everyone should read. It clearly lays out the the origins and consequences of economic neoliberalism a.k.a. globalization a.k.a. the bit of a pickle we are all in now.

This takes a very dry topic and makes it readable, short, and easy to understand.

What it does not do (except in a passing paragraph or two) is discuss the broader aspects of neoliberalism, most importantly:

1) the propagation of fear in the populace to maintain support for neoliberalist policies
2) the reduction of everything to a dollar value.
3) the ideology of meritocracy

It's short. Read it to be a more informed global citizen.

[Sarah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ah.

*closes book*

*opens window*

*leaps out*

[Lee · Rating 2 out of 5]

Though there was some interesting information in the book, the authors did not seem up to the challenge that they took on, and they did a hack-handed job of it.

I was not a fan of this Very Short Introduction.

Most of the books from this series are good works by scholars speaking to a general audience, presented in an unbiased manner. But the authors of this work seemed particularly biased against Neoliberalism. It is fine to have that position, and it does allow them to offer some interesting critiques of the ideology, but overall, it detracts from what these books are supposed to do, give an introduction to the topic, not to advocate for or against it.

Beyond the authors’ apparent tendentiousness, the book also suffered from structural issues. The second and third chapters look at Neoliberalism’s historical development, looking at first the era of Reagan and Thatcher and then Clinton and Blair. However, Chapters Four and Five organized around neoliberalism in Asia, Latin America and Africa. In these chapters, the author’s narrate numerous countries that seem only tangentially related to neoliberalism, and are certainly not worth putting in a “Very Short Introduction” to the topic.

The final chapter of the book is even more of a poor fit. I get it, they wanted to plug neoliberalism into the 2008 crisis and contemporary stories of interest to today’s readers, topics they are reading about in the paper. However, events close to our present moment are always difficult to interpret. Even the best historical analysts will have trouble understanding the repercussions of something that happened yesterday, as we do not know all the implications, we have not seen the consequences play out. And Roy and Steger are not great historians. In the end, their observations on recent events seem strained.

Their discussion of Argentina focused on the ways they perceived neoliberalism had hurt Argentina under the Kirchners, while not mentioning the couple’s widely-recognized fiscal irresponsibility. They try to frame the 2019 Hong Kong protests as a more economic protest against neo-liberalism rather than a political protest, which is an irresponsible assertion. Of course, the reason they do this is because they are trying too hard to fit events within their anti-neoliberal position. It does not work, but it is particularly inappropriate for general introductions like this.

They also seem surprisingly uninformed about China, though that makes up an important component of their argument. They suggest that Chairman Hu Jintao advanced neoliberal reforms in some areas, though, my understanding, having read a bit about Chinese economics, is that the consensus is that Hu advocated few if any reforms. Rather, his rule is marked by a stalling of reforms. But this kind of mistake is not surprising, considering the simple mistakes the authors make.

They repeatedly refer to Chairman Xi Jinping as “Jinping,” apparently ignorant of the fact that his surname is Xi: “Indeed, President Jinping has openly expressed his desire to work with Prime Minister Modi in elevating the relationship between Asia’s economic giants to a new level. On the diplomatic front, Jinping was among the first international leaders to congratulate Prime Minister Modi on his sweeping 2019 electoral victory. Marking a new era in Sino-Indian military cooperation, Beijing has since signaled that it intends to begin working with India on developing a new strategic partnership in order to advance their mutual security interests in the Indian Ocean. Jinping’ s promotion of Luo Zhaohui to…” Anyone regularly reading a newspaper would know that this is incorrect. Other mistakes about China were also glaring; they refer to the TPP as having China as a member. In fact, the TPP was conceived of in opposition to China. These kinds of mistakes suggest not only sorry editing on the part of Oxford, but also that Steger and Roy are writing about something that they know little about.

[Dan Cohen · Rating 2 out of 5]

A rare 2-out-of-5 review from me - I really didn't rate this book. There's a strong focus on globalisation and the role of neoliberalism in globalisation (perhaps because both of the authors are from the field of Global Studies). That wasn't really what I was looking for and was not hinted at by the title. Also, the book is extremely anti-neoliberalism - not a fault in and of itself but not useful when writing a Very Short Introduction. It reads as a tract arguing against neoliberalism, bemoaning the Washington Consensus and the effects of neoliberalism on income disparities and the negative effects on developing countries. Fair enough, but in doing so it completely fails to answer the question of why so many economists, politicians and voters found neoliberalism appealing. This reader was left wondering what the authors hadn't explained - if neoliberalism is as bad as they paint it, why was/is anyone a believer? I'm not saying that their opinion of neoliberalism is wrong, but I believe that a much better book could have been written by someone for whom neoliberalism has a strong appeal, even if such an author might reject the ideology and come to exactly the same conclusions as the authors of this book.

[Mohammad Sadegh Rasooli · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wish there was more explanation about the core ideology behind neoliberalism. This book mostly describes the historical background and what had happened to countries in the West, South, and Asia.

We can end by saying that while it would be premature to pronounce neoliberalism dead, it would be equally foolish to deny that a crisis-ridden world has begun to flirt once again with Keynesian principles.

[Glenn Wishnew III · Rating 4 out of 5]

Actually fascinating how this ideology masks a very particular ontology, which grips the imagination of my parents and many others in Naperville, Illinois.

[Dave Stone · Rating 4 out of 5]

Surprisingly well rounded, yet depressing
This is a quick little thing, about 4 hours audio. The surprise here is that this doesn't seem to lean for or against Neoliberalism, ole Manfred gives you the good with the bad ( oh there is a lot of bad here). So if you go into this wanting him to tell you what you already believe, there is something to bother everyone. (because he points out the only modern alternative is Authoritarian ethno-nationalism like TRUMP and Boris Johnson and those other creeps)
Neoliberalism is one of those words you hear all your life and kinda think you know what it means but don't wanna look it up right now. Today was my day to find out and I can't say I liked what I learned.
This has next to nothing to do with liberalism at all, this is just Neoconservatism repackaged for people who aren't into guns.
A bummer thing about this new knowledge I've just gained is that it takes a big dump on any differences between Regan / Clinton / Bush / Obama. These were all diametrically opposed leaders in my mind before I read this. I don't want to think like this, now I feel cynical and I hate that.

[Emma · Rating 3 out of 5]

Neoliberalism, belief in privatization, individual rights and freedoms, free markets and trade, less government interference etc.
Explains the history of neoliberalism, and across geographies.

[Claire]

that was so boring im so glad im done (had to read for class)

[Hayden · Rating 3 out of 5]

Surely the neoliberal revolution is one of the greatest threats to democracy. As if the power vested in those nominally representing us doesn't often seem distant and untouchable enough, without it being further diminished through its transferal to private hands. Certainly this seems one of the most convenient and presumptuous ideologies implemented, given the surplus of benefits it offered to the elite few tasked with its nurturance. Neoliberalism’s nature can be no better exemplified than in Thatcher’s forceful, anti-democratic, elitist and authoritarian suppression of dissenting workforces opposed to its ominous emergence in the early 1980s.
As for the ideology’s further repercussions, as concentrated in Latin America, Asia, and Africa, it beggars belief that the spectre of democracy can be invoked in association with a creed unendorsed by any global majority; one no less destined not only to global imposition, in both the West and the East, the latter via coercive ‘structural adjustment programmes,’ but insulated from all criticism, protected against the slightest reform, as demonstrated in the post-2007 refusal to alter the economic status quo following its spectacular implosion.
The dogma and devastation forever linked with 20th-century communist and socialist experiments seems to have only been reborn in neoliberalism, the significant difference being simply that this time its success is guaranteed, by virtue of it's amenability to its administrators.

[Peter Rollins · Rating 4 out of 5]

Almost no one understands the actual definition of Neoliberalism, because almost no one agrees on the definition. These days it’s mostly used as a pejorative, and mostly against people that don’t agree that they even are Neoliberals, or if they do they don’t generally agree with the definition of Neoliberalism their critics are using. So just shut up and read this short and easily digestible book before you make yourself look stupid...

[Ali Khosravi · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an essential and incredibly accessible starting point in understanding the ideology which has dominated our world.

The authors distinguish First wave neoliberalism lead by Thatcher and Reagan developed in the context of cold, the battle of ideas between the Western and the Eastern bloc and second wave Neoliberals in the 'roaring nineties' who sought to complement their belief in the market with a certain sense of 'social conscience'.

Even within the first wave, the book diligently highlights and explains the subtle differences between Thatcherism and Reaganomics. Though these early neoliberals drew inspiration from the classical liberals of the 18th and 19th century, they were ultimately the products of their own age and sought to address the problems of their own time (stagflation, the ever growing public expenditure) rather than merely based on ideological grounds. Despite stressing the need to curb inflation through Monaterism, Supply-side reforms and a stringent fiscal policy, it must be said that they almost had a blind spot when it came to excessive military spending, which could be understood through the lens of cold war.

The ideology was a developed as a sort of reaction and challenge to the hegemony of Keynesian economics which had dominated the western world since WWII with its orthodoxies. However, the Neoliberal DLP fomula (deregulation of the economy, liberalisation of trade and privatisation of state owned enterprises) became dogmas and orthodoxies in themselves. Like any other revolutionary idea, they became the very thing which they sought to get rid of.

According to the authors, the second wave neoliberals (exemplified by Clinton and Blair) continued the process of deregulation of the banking system and tried to introduce market imperatives into the public services which they saw as 'social enterprises' but also they shared a certain belief in the ability of free trade to preserve world peace and to democratise outdated institutions in the global south. They even flirted with the neoconservative notions of military intervention if it met the Christian conditions for 'Just War'.

The book's description of the way the neoliberal interntional institutions such as the IMF, the World Bank have treated the heavily indebted poor countries by imposing Structural Adjustment Plans (SAPs) in exchange desperately needed loans and sapping the potential of such countries would be utterly shocking to the 'Global North' reader.

Overal, the book provides some interesting case studies, explains events using a fascinating set of graphs, tables and data but also (and perhaps most importantly) asks some really pertinent questions. For example, to what extent can the financial crisis of 2008 be associated with the earlier deregulation of the banking sector or whether neoliberalism would survive the coming decades of the 21st century in order to produce a third wave of neoliberal leaders, perhaps even more socially conscious than the second wave. Or if the ideology is dead and buried altogether like its early advocates.

[Simon Fox · Rating 2 out of 5]

Discourse on neoliberalism tend to have a real hard time with definitions- this book is no exception.

Steger and Roy recognize that neoliberal has been used to describe just about everybody since Reagan. They also acknowledge that some people view the term as more of a political swear word rather than a cohesive ideology. Unfortunately, they do nothing to clarify what it means. Their basic definition is that neoliberalism differs widely depending on its context, but generally holds to a faith in free market forces. This absurd over generalization facilitates the books structure of focusing on random states recent economic history.

To properly understand neoliberalism there needs to be a breakdown of the development of the term, this is briefly covered, but then the implications are never considered. I understand how short this book is, I would just appreciate a little more depth rather than breadth.

On that, the book only focuses on states notable for their early adoption of “neoliberalism”, or for the botched imposition of neoliberalism. The book discusses The US, UK, China, Japan, Ghana, Argentina, and Chile in depth. The US and UK pieces are ok, the Chinese piece doesn’t seem to understand China, and the other pieces read like a hit piece on the IMF and World Bank.

There are obviously major problems with Neoliberalism, however you define in. But if you only talk about its failures you are unable to fully comprehend its strengths and weaknesses. There was no discussion of the former Warsaw pact states, Greece was only mentioned as far as its debt crisis, and other “success stories” such as Panama, were completely ignored.

This book isn’t worthless. This is a bit of a rant, but I did get a lot out of it. It helped clarify some of my slowly ossifying opinions. It also helped me appreciate that things like economic philosophy matters less than regime stability, meritocracy, institutional health, and so on. Once basic governance is figured out, there are several pathways to middle income status. Once middle income status is achieved, I would argue that there are some narrow institutional requirements such as some level of representative governance, but Keynesian and Neoliberal approaches can both still work depending on implementation.

This book will make you think, it will tell you aboht economic discourse in a selection of countries in an unbalanced way, it will not tell you what neoliberalism is.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really like the Very Short Introduction series. It's nice to have a place to start on a topic that is new to me. I like having access to experts in their field, in a relatively short text intended as an introduction for general audiences. That's my understanding of the series. Some are more successful than others. Some dive into the deep end right from the start, and forget that they are explaining the topic to the general audience. I've posted on more than one of these that I read the book and still don't have an idea how to define the topic.

It is such a pleasure to say that this book did not have any of those weaknesses! The authors gave numerous descriptions and definitions, some with bullet points, of basic components of neoliberalism. There are also extensive examples from recent US presidencies, to countries in most areas of the world. I really appreciated the sections on Latin America and Africa as those are harder for me to research on my own. One thing that seemed very relevant that the author pointed out, is that not all economies operate exactly like that of the United States. What a tragedy the imposition of neoliberal economic policies on these countries has been. I appreciate how neutral the author remained. He was able to critique Obama without making me feel it was an attack by a biased author.

Given the limit on numbers of pages, this book does a fantastic job of covering the breadth of this topic. Lately, everything has been coming back to Trump for me. I want to understand how this happened in the US twice. This book definitely contributes to that inquiry for me, and looks at how Trump fits and does not fit into the neoliberal system.

5 stars from me, and I added it to my "Favorites to reread" shelf. Rare for a non-fiction book. This book is the very best that the Very Short Introduction series has to offer, and I'm so glad I read it! Make sure to get the 2nd edition from 2021, as it is updated for current political conditions in the world. I wasn't expecting this book to be one that I recommended, but it covers so much recent US and world history in an engaging manner. I highly suggest!

[Gowtham · Rating 4 out of 5]

"No power can stop an idea whose time has come" - Victor Hugo

இந்த 21 ஆம் நூற்றாண்டு "Neo- லிபரலிசத்தின்" நூற்றாண்டு எ‌ன்றே சொல்ல வேண்டும். ஒரு சித்தாந்தமாக இது மேலும் தொடரவே செய்யும். Thatchar சொன்னதை போல் "There is no alternative". நவ தாராளவாதம் தான் Dominant roleஐ தக்க வைத்து கொள்ள போகிறது. பிற இடதுசாரி (பொருளாதார) தத்துவங்கள் எல்லாம் Resistive roleஐ தான் மேற்கொண்டாக வேண்டும். center-left, left, Left Extremist என அனைத்து சித்தாந்தங்களும் மக்களிடம் இருந்து அந்நியப் பட்டு போய் கொண்டிருக்கின்றன என்பது வெளிப்படை.(உலகம் முழுவதும் இதே நிலை தான்)

நவ தாராளவாதத்தை நடைமுறை படுத்துவதில் பல்வேறு சிக்கல்களை அரசுகள் சந்தி்த்து வந்துள்ளன. இந்தியா, சீனா, ஜப்பான் போன்ற நாடுகளுக்கு அது சில நன்மைகளை செய்துள்ளது(Employment and GDP) . அதே போல் லத்தின் அமெரிக்க நாடுகளிலும் ஆப்பிரிக்க நாடுகளிலும் இந்த தத்துவம் ஏற்ப்படுத்திய தீமைகள் ஏராளம்(Dictatorship and poverty).

one side fits all என்பது Neoliberalismத்துக்கும் பொருந்தாது. மண்ணுக்கேத்க "Neo-Liberalism" தேவை படுகிறது. 😜

2008ல் நடந்த பொருளாதார வீழ்ச்சியில் இருந்து மீண்டு, பின்னர் COVID-19 இடம் சிக்கி, உலகம் முழுக்க பல்வேறு விமர்சனங்களை சந்தி்த்து தன்னை தகவமைத்துக் கொண்டே இருக்கிறது இந்த தத்துவம்.

அரசின் குறுக்கீடு வேண்டாம் என்றாலும், அந்தந்த பொருளாதார சூழலுக்கு ஏற்றார் போல் இந்த தத்துவத்தை வளைத்து கொள்ளலாம். முக்கியமான துறைகளை அரசே யேற்று நடத்தலாம் (Health).

Wealth inequality, Poverty, Taxation போன்ற சிக்கல்களை அரசு தலையீடு இல்லாமல் தீர்க்க முடியாது. பல விமர்சனம் இருந்தாலும் முன்பே சொன்னது போல் Democracy and Neo-Liberalism can coexist. அதனால் தான் இதை நூற்றாண்டின் தத்துவம் எங்கிறேன்.

மற்றும் ஒரு உலக போர் உருவாகாத வரை Neo-Liberalism தான் நூற்றாண்டின் தத்துவம். 🙊

Neo-Liberalism பற்றிய அடிப்படைகளை புரிந்து கொள்ள இந்நூல் அவசியம் உதவும். வாய்ப்புள்ள நண்பர்கள் வாசிக்கவும்.

😉

[Jay Booth · Rating 5 out of 5]

Main Takeaways
Economics is extremely complex and confusing. I found this book to have a somewhat anti-neoliberal tilt, but even so was left mind boggled at the prospect of trying to analyze outcomes of policies and what new policies should look like amidst a cacophony of global changes and events. The book was more historical than a pro-con list, and was extremely thought-provoking
Regan was small govt, small spending for innovation, paradoxically also wanted big military (kind of meta-neoliberal? allowing us to stand up for ourselves as a country)
Clinton was pro-globalization, corresponded with huge 90s boom. Believed that liberalism was intimately tied with democracy and benefited people wherever it spread
General pattern is that countries would resist globalizing, nationalistic sentiments would eventually fail, then IMF would lend money countries with SAPs (structural adjustment programs) that had neoliberal policy and conditions attached (ex. India, South America)
Pinochet in Chile overthrown by CIA coup, hoped to lead to freedom and democracy (+ $$). Instead caused dictatorial corporatism similar to Argentina
Market growth tends to help everyone materially, but also increases inequality
2008 crash caused by easing glass steagle regulations on loans created out of great depression speculation
The general consensus today is that markets are not self-regulating and that pure neoliberalism wouldn't work

[Morten Greve · Rating 2 out of 5]

The topic of this book is endlessly fascinating - to me at least.

If you share this interest, but are new to the issues and need a quick overview of the emergence of neoliberalism as a political-economic paradigm this book is an ok choice. Sections on the first wave (Thatcher and Reagan) and the second wave (Clinton and Blair). And shorter sections on the global spread (Asia, Latin America and Africa). Who were the key figures? Which were the key policies?

It fails quite badly, though, by not really providing a solid answer to the burning question: what does the 'neo' signify? What is the difference between classical liberalism and the neo version - if there is one? Some will say that "neoliberalism" is just a pejorative label cooked up by leftists to put on their political opponents (in fact, they will probably see this book as biased - as an example of this very tendency). There is some truth to this, but in my view the term is still justified on the basis of objective differences in political practice.

Steger and Roy hint at this by saying that state-phobic neoliberalist politicians, paradoxically, have proved awfully happy with certain kinds of strong state action (e.g. when a union needs to be busted or a backward country needs to be hammered) but this is not enough.

My take is that neoliberalism is the opportunistic perversion of classical liberalism by the richest ten percent (and in particular the richest one percent) in any given country. This explains, e.g., its acceptance of too-big-to-fail financial supermarkets and bailouts of these; acceptance of spectacular tech monopolies, predatory Big Pharma, Big Agro etc.; acceptance, nay, promotion of absurd, relentlessly rising inequalities of income and wealth. I'm not a fan of Adam Smith but I think he would have disapproved of all of these policies.

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

interesting and concise, (and admitted by the author entirely) simplistic description of neoliberalism... and excellent primer-introduction for the novice (and probably defeats reading David Harvey's "A Brief History of Neoliberalism, as they cover mostly the same ground, and in short shrift)... i enjoyed having an encapsulation of the concept, as i find proponents and detractors tend to over-complexify neoliberalism for their own purposes... this book makes it easy to understand and directs you to further reading, if desired... anyone who reads this and doesn't see the parallels between Reagan and Trump is blind... or benefiting from their policies... for me, neoliberalism is historically wealthy white males building a system to continue their practice of owning the world's people, resources, wealth, and power... oversimple? maybe... but truly think: who wins in "free trade", "unregulated financial markets", "globalization", "small government", "BIG military" - those already in power (read: wealthy white males)... but as long as "the rest of us" stay slaves to consumerism, cheap products, and easy credit those in power will surely stay there...

[Jayan Luharia · Rating 4 out of 5]

The final chapter alone is substantial to make this book worthy of five stars. This book provides an effective account of the parasitic growth of the neoliberal ideology from its roots in the Washington Consensus to its infection of the international institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF. It also charts how the neoliberal ideology has adapted over time from a more nationalistic approach with Reagan and Thatcher to the preaches of market globalism espoused by Clinton and Blair. Furthermore, it provides chilling accounts of how the neoliberal ideology has severely tampered with the development of countries in South and Latin America, Africa and Asia, portraying the neoliberal hegemony as capable and effective in creating a radical disparity in the wealth of nations. It additionally provides a good telling of neoliberalism meeting its match due to the capacity for individual greed and excessive deregulation in events such as the GFC, and how such financial turmoil has provided a foundation for economic nationalism to arise to the fore.

In conclusion, this is a superb introduction to neoliberalism and has encouraged me to read more on the subject.

[rohola zandie · Rating 2 out of 5]

First of all, the book title is misleading, it's better to be named the history of neoliberalism. Start smoothly but never dive deep into the details of neoliberalism and its tenets. I thought the book give me a broader view of term in economic point of view rather than just mentioning a bunch of historical facts.
Second in the book you never find any definition or details on for example what is regulation is or how that change the Economy. In short this book never explains the mechanisms of global Economy.
The only pros of book is the historical events and how it connects to 30s recession and finally up to 2007 recession.

[Maik Arnold · Rating 4 out of 5]

I very much enjoyed reading this very short introduction, as it gives an informed overview on one of the most frequently criticised paradigm; not only in politics but also in academia. The book introduces to the principles of 'neoliberalism' which is a flexible concept that can is highly correlated to free-market economics in the so-called Western world, but it also found fertile ground in the Asian-Pacific region (chapter 3) but also in Latin America and Africa (chapter 4) where different kinds of variations developed. There is much more to discover in the book which I would recommend for readers who want to better understand the political background, the origins and claims.

[Kanavi · Rating 3 out of 5]

To be honest, I am not that well versed in economics so I found some passages hard to grasp (too many financial terms I was not familiar with, plus the writing style of the authors does not help); nonetheless, this book has been useful to understand the principles of neoliberalism and its development and spread across the world. The first two chapters were a bit dense in my opinion, but the last ones turned to be quite enjoyable. All in all, I would recommend that you should seize the basics of finance before you tackle this text.

[Ron Scrogham · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is very good historical survey of neoliberalism and its convergence with neoconservatism. It was published within a couple of years of the Great Recession of 2008-2009, when neoliberalism was heavily criticized and moderated. The recent coronavirus pandemic has further challenged the basic tenets of neoliberalism: Deregulation, Liberalization, and Privatization. The economic response to the pandemic, which entails massive government spending, might issue a resurgence of Keynesian economics, when the neoliberals had thought it finally to be relegated to the dustbin of history.

[Nick · Rating 2 out of 5]

Through all chapters of this book, I had the feeling as if I was reading a short introduction to evolution theory written by a creationist. Perhaps Thomas Sowell could have written a neoliberalism gospel in clear and convincing language.
To add insult to injury, the freest economies of the world, Hong Kong and Singapore are not examined, nor are presented Eastern European countries, but there are too many boring details about the US and UK.

[Abdul Alhazred · Rating 4 out of 5]

There's a challenge in writing these introductions in finding the exact ratio of historical context, differing interpretation and relating it to current events and this hits that spot. Just enough history to contextualize neoliberalism, followed by multiple historical implementations with varying outcomes, covers the goals of the pro-neoliberals as well as the critique and challenges faced into very recent history (as of 2023). Just right.

[Ray · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm a fan of the Very Short Introduction series, and this book seems to be slightly below average for the series.

The book goes through the history of neoliberal policies in a tedious way at times, reciting events without making connections or having deep insights. The content was good, but I felt the presentation was lacking.

The best chapter was the last, where these policies are finally examined and contrasted with current ideas.

[Isaac]

“At the moment, it seems that neoliberalism has finally found its match in national populism. But it is entirely conceivable that new strands of neoliberalism - the two leading candidates being authoritarian neoliberalism and digital neoliberalism - will rise to dominance in our 21st-century world that faces serious global problems such as global climate change, new pandemics, and escalating inequality.”

[Erica · Rating 3 out of 5]

Really enjoyed the global perspective of this rather than the standard focus on the west. However there was a lot about the what but not much about the why - if (as this book suggests) neoliberalism doesn't work why are we still using it? Maybe it's because I've come to this off the back of Very Short Introductions on Critical Theory and Poststructuralism but I'd like to know more about who actually benefits from all this nonsense.

[Cian Pearce · Rating 3 out of 5]

A classic Oxford VSI; informative but dense. The approach of neoliberalism here is more of a geopolitical aspect of it ina ction, rather than the foundation of the economic theory through Mises, Hayek, and Friedman. Instead, it guides you through Thatcher and Regan economics and the subsequent neoliberal policies to the GFC.