By Dr. Richard Paul, D.D.
Over the course of the Obama Administration, from the time he was elected onward, many critics of the Administration have cited that Obama's economic policies are from the Left Neoliberal Ideologies. They claim that the Health Care Mandate points to this as being factual in his economic philosophy. Is his the Truth, or a lie set forth by the neoliberals to make people accept the neoliberal ideologies? We'll discuss and view factual information about that in this post.
While some people may, falsely, accuse the President of wrongfully setting economic policies that they claim would negatively impact job growth and economic growth, the truth is more readily felt than what is accused. Those people whom claim that are mainly the true Left Neoliberals like Harold Ford, Jr., and other Democratic Leadership Council Members. They claim that his policies resemble the neoliberals on the far right, while at the same time accuse him of overreaching on domestic economic policies through spending increases for Social Programs and other infrastructure projects. The problem with their theory is that they are being double minded, and double tongued for that matter. They are saying one thing, and then saying another in the same sentence. For example, when the US was having the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act debate, those people claimed it was an intrusion into the free and open markets (code for the under controlled specific industries). To an extent, it was an abrasive intrusion into an industry that unregulated beforehand. Was it necessary? We can debate all day long as to the necessity of the PPACA, but what will not be debated was whether the industry had an unfair advantage over its consumers. Therefore, in debate style, since an argument can't be made towards the negative, the positive must be factual, or is a matter that is a given. This factual statement, or a given statement towards the necessity of health insurance reform proves that the economics that drive this presidency preclude neoliberalism at the core of the debate. That's the main reason that I use this argument whenever I debate someone with that set of ideas about the President's economic ideology. But that's not all of the reasons, nor the sum total of what I use for my argument against calling President Obama's Economic Policies Left Neoliberalism.
Another key element to my debate about Obama not being a Left Neoliberal is the fact of The Dodd-Frank Act. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ203/html/PLAW-111publ203.htm Here we see for ourselves that Obama has used anything but the unregulated free market principles demanded by neoliberalism. We can plainly see that with the Act it creates a Consumer Protection Agency. This itself is anti-neoliberal doctrine. This also shows the real course of his thought process away from the failed neoliberal policies.
We should, at this time, discuss what key factors towards effectively determining thought process I use, so that we can understand how to grade and debate pursuant to those thought processes. I, personally, use the theory of Free Association when determining a thought process. This is the same psychodynamic exercise that Sigmund Freud used and abandoned, but taken to the next logical step. Freud was right with the theory, but couldn't for some reason, take it to the next logical course. That course has lead me to better read people from their diction and Actions to help determine what they will say and do next.
So, what does this theory do in helping to determine a thought process? Let's use a hypothetical scenario. Let's say that I am in a chat room with about 500 other people. How, with that many people and ideologies, can you safely and logical answer and be motivated towards actually reading what they are saying, and do so with real meaning? Let's say a chatter named, for no other reason, surgicaldiva starts to chat, and she is talking about a dead cat in the road, but laughing about it. What determines when to start showing compassion and not just laugh with all the others in the chat? First, read what the words say. If they say something to the effect of, "lol, I saw a dead cat in the road today and ran over it again", then go ahead and laugh with her. If, however, she types something like, "lol I saw a dead cat in the road", some people rightly go, "OH NO!" and continue on in that course. How did one and not the other elicit the laughing while the other elicited an empathetic remark is determined by what was typed, and what was left out. It shows, through what wasn't said versus what was said, what reaction to give. This is the Logical Associative Theory in action. We all use it every day. The difference is, for me at least, I have honed my skills in this theory to foresee a longer insight than most people have. Of course, I gave you a basic of what I do because this isn't a post about that but about what Obama has accomplished and why he isn't a Neoliberal.
What does this mean for people in everyday life, and how can you personally use it towards your advantage? Start looking and reading, concentrating upon this theory while doing so, and you will perceive and grow in the skill. But, I digress.
So, after explaining the theory, and showing you how to use it effectively, we move on towards why the thought processes are not neoliberal, and not just through actions alone.
When considering Obama's speeches about the economy, he tells people he wants to do things in a fair and balanced approach, and that the upper income citizens should pay a little more. This goes contrary to Neoliberalism as a statement itself. The thought process, however, gives a broader insight into the Economic Theory that Obama uses most frequently. Since we have previous touched upon this subject in previous posts, http://hg.scimth.net/2012/09/26/reagan-and-his-flawed-presidency/, we aren't going to spend massive amounts of time utilizing the pages to talk about it. Simply put, Obama is not a Neoliberal, and has many important differences with that ideology. Obama's Ideology falls more in line with Neo-Keynesian Theories.
While we can argue about everything Obama has said, nothing he has said, when put into rational and fact based sense, can be taken as neoliberlistic. From his stances on fair pay to his demanding that the insurance companies that provide health insurance are properly regulated, his ideology falls squarely on Neo-Keynesian Ideology. This just isn't my opinion, but the opinion of any serious historian based upon the facts as presented.
Obama's Ideological Stance as compared to the neoliberals, like Romney's stances, are great; and when studied, comparatively diverse in function. The bourgeois state demands that Capitalism relies upon heavy economic growth patterns to retain its consistent leadership over other ideological importance. This key factor dictates that the US bourgeois state invests in the future rather cuts funding to those necessary programs directly responsible for prolonged economic growth patterns. This is the key fundamental difference between a Neo-Keynesian and a Neoliberal Ideology.
The choice is now left up to you, the voter, as to what economic ideology is best suited for our future.