Neoliberalism and the Decline in Diversity

I want to return today to an old theme, the global economic problems.  I came across an article, A last chance, in an old edition of the New Statesman, dated 10 November 2008.  The article, by Paul Mason, was written in anticipation of a meeting of the G20 leaders on 15 November 2008.  He argues that the issue facing the G20 was not a simple debate about neoliberalism's rights and wrongs, matters have gone beyond that - neoliberalism has 'brought the world to the brink of an economic nuclear winter'.  This is not an accident but a flaw in its central mechanism. 

He quotes President Sarkozy (called Monsieur Thatcher by the French left) who said:

The idea that markets were always right was mad... The present crisis must incite us to re-found capitalism on the basis of ethics and work...  Laissez-faire is finished.  The all-powerful market that always knows best is finished.

OK - here's a quick course in monetarism, a drastic summary of some of the article.  What is it?  'The principle of rational self-interest was elevated to replace regulation and the state'.  Neoliberalism is best known for this elevation of selfishness over everything else, but it has other characteristics:

1. The market as only guarantee of prosperity and democracy
2. futility of state intervention in pursuit of social justice
3. creative destruction of cherished institutions and stable communities
4. minimise the state to regulatory functions only.

Obviously it has failed but it did have some successes and it is these that mean it is not as simple as returning to where we were before:

1. Stability and growth across the OECD countries and beyond, although lower than growth during the postwar boom years.
2. Marked fall in absolute poverty
3. huge movement of humanity from farm to factory
4. access to finance has brought rising liquidity in home ownership and overdrafts
5. removal of cultural and institutional barriers, with the decline of dependency and paternalism in social life

It is the last of these that has made neoliberalism particularly attractive in the west.  The fall in absolute poverty is something most people would wish to preserve.  I find the rest somewhat unconvincing although I can see how they might be counted as positive changes by some.  Here is a summary of negative outcomes of following what has become known as the Anglo-Saxon model:

1. rising inequality; between 1947 and 1973 the income of the poorest fifth rose by 116%, between 1974 and 2004 by 2.8%.
2. replacement of high wages by high debt
3. redistribution of profits from non-financial institutions to the finance sector, that is a move from making things to making money.
4. growth of personal and financial insecurity, destruction of social capital and the rise of crime. 
5. relentless commercialisation of all forms of human life

As I read this article I was reminded of a short passage in Kim's book, Christ's Body in Corinth, (page 97), where he quotes the work of various theologians on the story of the Tower of Babel (Gen 9).  It seems we read this story the wrong way around.  Normally we see a unified humanity separated by a jealous God.

But what if it is a story of God's mercy?  Building the tower might imply enforced unity and conformity.  This could be a story of the defeat of imperialism, and people strengthened by diverse cultures. 

We read this story and lament the loss of unity.  Perhaps we should rejoice in the gain in diversity.  One thing is clear, neoliberalism removes diversity.  Perhaps the need to find a new economy will reinforce human diversity, as a bulwark against exploitation and imperialism.