Ordoliberalism and Neoliberalization: Governing through Order or Disorder

Abstract

Although both promote a free market and strong state, ordoliberalism is usefully contrasted with neoliberalization. Ordoliberals aim to achieve this goal by creating a juridico-political institutional fix that provides a stable framework for accumulation. Promoters of neoliberal regime shifts pursue it through strategies of destabilization that exploit resulting crises. Ordoliberalism governs through order, neoliberalization through disorder. Further, ordoliberalism corresponds more to an accumulation regime and mode of régulation-cum-governance based on a productivist concept of capital, reflecting the dominance of profit-producing capital in coordinated market economies. But it also has limited conditions of possibility and is relatively rare. In contrast, neoliberalization corresponds more to what Weber described as politically oriented capitalism, especially a finance-dominated accumulation regime, which is aligned with interest-bearing capital. It occurs in many more varieties of capitalism.

Neoliberalism and eurochristianity

“…The rise of neoliberalism since the early seventies is partly an effect of the globalizing that Ramos describes. In neoliberalism, this accounts for the emphasis on strategic destabilizing and disruption in order to exploit crises, as opposed to German ordoliberalism, for example, which seeks to employ the State to maintain balance (Jessup 2019). Ramos's rejection of the Huntington thesis follows Olivier Roy's Holy Ignorance, arguing that "religion" and "culture" have gone their separate ways.…”

Targets and overwork: Neoliberalism and the maximisation of profitability from the workplace

“…As capital's attempts to erode industrial employees' working conditions -such as wages -were often halted by collective resistance and demands for better pay, economic inequality dwindled for the first time in history (Streeck, 2016;Winlow & Hall 2013). This period resuscitated capitalism; however, it was unable to address its structural issues in the 1970s (Fine & Saad-Filho 2017;Jessop, 2019). The evolution of neoliberalism in the late twentieth century enabled capital to further enhance its power and control over workers (Jessop 2019).…”

“…This period resuscitated capitalism; however, it was unable to address its structural issues in the 1970s (Fine & Saad-Filho 2017; Jessop 2019). The evolution of neoliberalism in the late 20th century enabled capital to further enhance its power and control over workers (Jessop 2019).…”

“…Likewise, Mercille and Murphy (2019) claim neoliberalism utilises both market mechanisms and non-market instruments–such as state actors–to facilitate corporate wealth, power and profit maximisation. Others argue that it is inadequate to view neoliberalism in dualistic terms–state vs market–rather, governments play an active role in both facilitating profit production and intervening to protect capital and therefore ensuring neoliberalism’s hegemony (Fine & Saad-Filho 2017; Jessop 2019).…”

“…Therefore, this paper adds to a range of scholarly literature that links overwork to neoliberalism (for example: This article is organised as follows. First, in order to understand the primacy to maximising profitability amongst firms in the current labour market, we briefly explore the shift from postwar Keynesian welfare state capitalism to embedded neoliberalism with a focus on literature from the global north (Fine & Saad-Filho 2017;Jessop, 2019;Streeck, 2016). Next, the paper outlines the literature on management practices such as targets and pressure to overwork.…”