Die politische Theorie des Neoliberalismus

Currencies: New Thinking for Financial Times

by Thomas Biebricher

»Neoliberalismus« wird heute meist einfach mit ungebremstem Kapitalismus gleichgesetzt. Thomas Biebricher weist dagegen auf der Grundlage einer historischen Rekonstruktion nach, dass neoliberales Denken sich nicht nur mit ökonomischen, sondern auch mit politischen Fragen auseinandersetzt. Dieses Denken unterzieht er sodann einer kritischen Analyse und führt vor, welche Rolle die politischen Vorstellungen des Neoliberalismus im heutigen krisengeschüttelten Europa spielen.

Genres: Economics, Politics, Philosophy, Nonfiction, History

345 pages, Paperback

Published January 18, 2021

Reviews

[Nils · Rating 4 out of 5]

An intellectual history of the political ideas of Ropke, Eugene, Rustow, Hayek, Friedman, and Buchanan, focused especially on the differences between them and the antinomies within each. Concludes with a discussion of how the European Union represents the fullest realization of the ordoliberal vision, thus tacitly making the case for Lexit.

[Carli 🐞 · Rating 4 out of 5]

guter überblick über die wichtigsten denker der neo- und ordoliberalen Denkschule, die kritisch eingeordnet werden
insbesondere gefallen hat mir der zweite Teil des Buches, in dem Biebricher aufzeigt inwieweit die EU ein ordoliberales Projekt darstellt. hier wird ganz klar mit welchem zynismus deutschland in der eurozonenkrise agiert hat

[Eric Susak · Rating 2 out of 5]

Got halfway through and had to put it down. Approach this book only if you have studied quite a bit of political theory before and if you have a high degree of patience for hyper-referential priming before getting to the meat.

[Karolis Jonutis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Author gives good amount of neoliberalism history and theoretical framework, but I recommend it especially to those who are interested in current trends of neoliberalisation in EU policy.

[Peter · Rating 5 out of 5]

German scholar Thomas Biebricher lays out the “neoliberal problematic” in this work of intellectual history and political theory, both abstract and applied. In the first two thirds of the book, he discusses six neoliberal thinkers, three German (Röpke, Eucken, and Rüstow), two American (Friedman and Buchanan) and one Anglo-Austrian (Hayek). He positions them in various configurations depending on their ideas on the state, on democracy, on science, etc., rather than discussing each in turn. It produces the impression of a sort of quadrille (sextille?) as they line up differently on the various issues. There’s a general trend line, though, between the German ordoliberals and the Anglo-American libertarian types. All of them placed a lot of chips on constitutional design in order to encase the market order away from political influence. But where the ordoliberals trusted centralizing institutions to do this, the libertarians (my distinction- Biebricher doesn’t make it) were more skeptical and believed in distributing power to bodies like states. The ordoliberals were worried (like Hannah Arendt!) about “mass man,” and wanted to find ways to de-massify by emphasizing institutions like churches and associations, where the Anglo-Americans didn’t go in as much for that kind of thing. In general, it leaves with the impression that the ordoliberals are understudied in English. I also wonder what this would have looked like if Von Mises and Rothbard were added to the mix, but Biebricher and other recent scholars of neoliberalism like Quinn Slobodian and Melinda. Cooper emphasize neoliberal approaches to government so strongly one wonders if those closer to anarcho-capitalism would count.

I don’t want to go into all the different ways the varying thinkers contrast each other, both because it’s a lot and because I read it a while ago (i.e. pre-pandemic), but there’s a lot of food for thought there. Biebricher then tries to apply what he’s laid out in the first two thirds to the crisis of the Eurozone, which to tell the truth I had a hard time following because fiscal politics just makes my eyes glaze over. Not a very responsible position, I know, but not a voluntary one either. All in all, a worthy addition to the literature on neoliberalism. ****’