Yeah but thats because it's a gradual process. I took years for Nixon to say f*** it and get off the gold standard, and years after that for the Volcker, it took years to kill organized labor, to fully globalize, etc etc.

Yeah and we know what the Bourgeoisie thought in places like Sweden when you look at their approach to taking on the unions and it wasn't "we gotta stop them boys before we become the next soviet republic" they were getting into meetings with thr union leaders and socdem politicians talking about how German steel is beating our ass and yall gonna have to take a paycut

But you're kinda glossing over the political conditions and how they changed over time, those weren't the same in Europe as in the US. There were no Communist parties or even social democratic parties blocking that change in the US like in Europe.

It's implicit though I didn't think I needed to mention it. Yes there was less resistance in the US as the left/unions were generally weaker but Unions and whatever was left of the New Deal type Democrats were still a factor unlike today

But that political resistance decreasing has a lot to do with the USSRs demise, it might not be as clear in the US, but in European countries it was really blatant when you had revolutionary communist parties turning into reformist socdem parties or merging with left-liberals overnight with the dissolution of the USSR.

Bro I've been agreeing with you that the USSR's fall weakened them for like 10 pages of course but the revolutionary left forces in the west were always marginal compared to reformers except in France and even then they lost clout after 68

You were kinda downplaying the importance of that earlier itt but aight we on the same page then

You will find no contradiction in everything I've said so far and, I'll reiterate the existence of the USSR was not the driving force for nordic social democracy and even though it's demise decreased political resistance to neoliberalism, it was kickstarted by the crisis of the 70s

Socdems parties started getting weaker in the 80s but it’s not until the fall of the ussr that they fell off completely and sold out to the bill clinton new democrats model

And the EU made it impossible to have a real social democracy on top of that

You didn't say it was kickstarted by the crisis earlier itt you said neoliberal policy was already being implemented in the west back in the 70s

It can't just be blamed on the crisis of the 70s, crises are nothing new to capitalism anyway, especially when the neoliberal reforms didn't take place until the demise of the USSR.

You gotta understand the political climate of the US and Europe was different. Neoliberalism as a concrete political project was initiated by the US, first implemented in Chile. But it didn't come to most European countries as early as it did in the US because they had political parties actively willing to resist it. Like I said earlier itt in the Netherlands there was a president who visited Chile under allende and condemned the coup in Chile, he wasn't a revolutionary. That same party is just another neoliberal party today and that change had a lot more to do with the ideological effects of the demise of the USSR than the crisis of the 70s.

The history of neoliberalism and its implementation in the US and western Europe are different.

Yes it was already being implemented in the 1970s... because of the 70s crisis. If I say I had to change my windshield I'm not contradicting myself by later saying "because it was shattered". When i say neoliberalism i mean the right wing reaction to the 70s crisis in general not just the specific neoliberalism the American political project was not a unique reaction to it, which the European governments reaction was similar to. I'm glad you mention Olof Palme because the rightward turn in the SSDP was under his tenure. Things like welfare cuts, benefit cuts, and the market liberalization that led to the infamous crash

Generally true but the first time they lost power was in 76 and they had already sold out by the time bill was in town

I didn't mention Olof Palme I was talking about Joop van den Uyl lmao, he was the most left-wing president the Netherlands has ever had and still revered to this day as one of the country's best presidents post-WW2, under his leadership the welfare state was actually expanded, there was no right wing response to the crisis, and there wasn't in most western countries.

And even in the case of Olof Palme, he also expanded the welfare state during his first presidency in the 70s, it's his second term where he dismantled many of those advances in the late 80s, and even those cutbacks were seen by Palme as a necessary evil to eventually return back to a more robust social democracy later on.

My bad I got Sweden and the Netherlands confused. But the Netherlands is an anomaly because there absolutely was a rightward turn in most western countries. The US, Britain, France, Canada, Sweden, Denmark, etc.

But Palme lost power in 76, when a right wing party took over for 2 elections before he came back in 82 and continued their reforms it didnt wait till the late 80s.

The thing is it doesn't matter if the cuts are seen as temporary when the party obviously adopted a more conservative strategy nobody in the SSPD was talking about balancing welfare with Austerity pre-76

The Netherlands really wasn't an anomaly, it's how it went for most European countries, Sweden didn't turn third way under Olof Palme either in the 70s, it happened with his second administration in the 80s. And it wasn't an ideological project like the US and UK unde Reagan and Thatcher. France also didn't have that same ideological turn in the 70s, Mitterand even made the communist party part of their cabinet in the 80s

I think you're trying to group continental European countries in with the US, Canada and the UK and you really can't do that when talking about how neoliberalism became the ruling ideology and how the demise of the USSR affected that. The USSR had a much stronger ideological influence on continental Europe.

So you're just gonna ignore the centre/right coalitions that came before Palme and Mitterand? Lol. Mitterand even famously switched up only 2 years into his presidency. It doesn't matter if neoliberalism wasn't a conscious ideological project at first, it also wasn't under Carter but everybody knows he paved the way for Reagan. Your portrayal of the relation between leftism in Europe and leftism in the USSR is too simplistic, they were two different things.

@bopman @Scratchin_Bandit

But again with Mitterrand's u-turn, it still wasn't neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is more than a monetary and budgetary response to inflation, it's a whole ideology. Mitterand nationalized a good amount of France's economy and didn't reverse that despite his u-turn in 83, that only happened later on under Jacque Chirac.

And neoliberalism was always a conscious ideological project from the beginning, the point is that there was also conscious ideological resistance to that, which in continental Europe was impacted by the USSRs demise a lot more than the rest of the west.

Let's just agree to disagree because we're working from two different definitions of Neoliberalism

Drawing the conclusion that the US was too prosperous and already fascistic for its version of the brown shirts, the KKK, to branch out of its self satisfied establishment conservative middle class and petit bourgeois base. The new deal then neutralized any danger from the lumpens so the east coast elites didn't get enough blackshirts to organize into a weapon against FDR, and the fact that left wing energy was siphoned into a liberal who was basically one of them anyways meant they could strike a compromise.

Sad

im gonna ask my homie who lives in peru whats going on
i think @Womanpuncher69 asked me about this but idk i havent been following peru unforunately

one of my cousins is moving back to south america, he was like im gonna go to bolivia (thats where he originalyl lived) but then apparently said the politics are too messed up there
its just cuz theres a communist in power there

so he f***ing chose peru

its like ok bro ur really smart, peru seems to be more instable than f***ing bolivia but great choice