I shit you not exactly this happened to me today in the grass touching place, I was listening to a guy take down neoliberalism, impeccably in my view, and was nodding along (yes, YES) and then he hit me with the: “I’m just angry that real good liberalism has been supplanted with neoliberalism.” (paraphrase) WHAT THE FUCK (at this juncture Losurdo seemless co-existance of liberalism and slavery, founding fathers etc.)
Some of these people are so often allergic to the implications of their sometimes quite admirable critical thinking.
Makes you want to shake them and shout “don’t you see how the one lays the groundwork for the other??” Follow through for fuck’s sake. So frustrating
But I did get a good introduction what an exceptionally twisted piece of shit hayek actually was so eh
But isn’t so much journalism nowadays characterised by unsubstantiated speculation? (i.e. propaganda, if not simply clickbait filler pretending analysis)
It seems to me your criticism amounts essentially to your dislike of the thesis of this piece. This can be legitimate, but not what you’ve argued here.
Isn’t this piece an example of precisely the supposed promise of the internet, in the sense that journalism becomes democratised and anyone can publish and disseminate analysis, which can be evaluated on its merits rather than institutional validation and inertia based on opaque criteria? (I would of course argue the aggregated needs of capital, but I won’t force that in)