Crises of liberalism are not deducible from crises of capitalism.

Evidence

Foucault is careful not to separate crises of liberalism from crises of capitalism, noting that the problems of the 1930s exemplify their intertwining. However, he then says: “But crises of liberalism are not just the pure and simple or direct project of these crises of capitalism in the political sphere. You can find crises of liberalism linked to crises of the capitalist economy. But you can also find them with a chronological gap with regard to these crises, and … the way … these crises manifest, are handled … is not directly deducible from the crises of capitalism” (p. 70). — Wendy Brown, Undoing the Demos, 492

Categorization

• XREF: This autonomy of political crises from economic ones parallels the reader’s interest in how economic base/superstructure debates recur across their sources. — connects to: Crises recurring across eras implies neoliberalism may not cause them — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 1787; Economic liberalism proved separable from democratic political commitments. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 323; The liberal individual was destroyed by capital, not by dictators — Yanis Varoufakis, Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism, 659 (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Crises in capitalism do not inevitably dissolve pre-capitalist modes. #complicates (0.78)
• Economic crises cannot by themselves overthrow advanced capitalist states. #complicates (0.75) — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 892
• Economic crises alone cannot topple advanced capitalist states because civil society resists #complicates (0.75)