American corporate media silence renders the term ‘neoliberalism’ unusable in US politics

Evidence

Like many other people in the movement, Graeber complained that “anti-globalization” was an entirely inaccurate label imposed by capitalist media. In reality, they were pro-globalization but anti-neoliberal. He wrote, “In Argentina, or Estonia, or Taiwan, it would be possible to say this straight out: ‘We are a movement against neoliberalism.’ But in the US, language is always a problem. The corporate media here is probably the most politically monolithic on the planet: neoliberalism is all there is to see—the background reality; as a result, the word cannot be used.” — Vincent Bevins, If We Burn, 131

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to today’s discourse where ‘neoliberal’ is now common — a striking shift Graeber could not foresee. — connects to: Media bias is neither conspiracy nor freedom but overdetermined institutional convergence
• QUESTION: Why did ‘neoliberalism’ become usable in American discourse after 2002? What changed?

Broader Connections

• Media bias is neither conspiracy nor freedom but overdetermined institutional convergence #expands (0.78)