@HeerJeet I wonder if you've been following this discussion between Chait and Robin, and if you have any thoughts - http://crookedtimber.org/2016/04/29/neoliberalism-a-quick-follow-up/ …
-
-
Replying to @dslakter
@marcos_gun Discussion led me to think that the various tangled meanings of neo-liberal basically make it a useless term.2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
@HeerJeet@marcos_gun Can you cite a single political term--liberalism, conservatism, socialism, etc.--that doesn't have a tangled meaning?2 replies 2 retweets 21 likes -
Replying to @CoreyRobin
@CoreyRobin@HeerJeet@marcos_gun Indeed. Meanings shift, tangle, esp. over time. And FWIW "neoliberal" is a very useful term for my work.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @LDBurnett
@LDBurnett@CoreyRobin@marcos_gun I think Foucault & David Harvey usages helpful. But Charlie Peters uses seems trivial & parochial.2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
@HeerJeet@LDBurnett@marcos_gun I don't think U have any basis for saying that but more important, it contradicts your previous statement.1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @CoreyRobin
@CoreyRobin@LDBurnett@marcos_gun No contradiction. If neo-liberal used narrowly, it's useful. If applied to too widely, becomes useless.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
@HeerJeet@CoreyRobin@marcos_gun Phooey. No one in the above mentioned roster uses it more narrowly than Charlie Peters. It's not about 1/23 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@LDBurnett @CoreyRobin @marcos_gun True, Peters uses it narrowly -- which is why I find his usage trivial & parochial.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.