For most neoliberals, property rights are contingent instruments for competitive order, not absolutes

Evidence

The open-endedness of the evolutionary process of capitalism meant that the devising of new frameworks of incentives was also never-ending. For most neoliberals, it is not property itself that is the absolute value but the fluctuating set of human-made laws required to encase the competitive order. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 194

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to other chapters on the constructed, non-naturalist quality of neoliberal property theory — the rejection of naturalism in Beddeleem’s contribution. — connects to: Neoliberal support for IP rights was contingent on competitive-order goals, not reflexive. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 166; Neoliberals held that rights originate from capitalism rather than nature; Neoliberals reinterpreted inalienable rights as instruments to foster economic initiative — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 335 (+1 more)
• SHARE: Worth sending to anyone who still repeats the reflex that neoliberalism equals privatization as a sacred principle — the contingency point reframes the whole debate.

Broader Connections

• Neoliberals held that rights originate from capitalism rather than nature #expands (0.85)
• Neoliberals reinterpreted inalienable rights as instruments to foster economic initiative #corroborates (0.80) — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 335