Neoliberals adopted human rights language to enshrine a moral order for global capital.

Evidence

In the second half of the book, I turn to the 1970s and 1980s, as the neoliberals embraced the language of human rights promoted by a new generation of human rights NGOs, and these NGOs in turn adopted the neoliberal dichotomy between violent politics and peaceful civil society. I show that the earlier neoliberal critiques of the UN human rights process were now replaced by far more ambivalent attitudes, as the neoliberals recognised that this new interventionist human rights language might assist them in their own goals of enshrining a moral order for global capital. — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 65

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to the reader’s ongoing thread on human-rights discourse and market ethics; ‘violent politics versus peaceful markets’ dichotomy parallels the framing discussed in other readings on humanitarianism as imperial. — connects to: Neoliberals embraced human rights language as interventionist enforcement of private capital rights — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 139; Neoliberalism converged with human rights activism around shared political aims. — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 36; Neoliberal human rights discourse entailed a duty to spread capitalism globally — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 283 (+7 more)
  • QUESTION: How exactly did NGOs adopt ‘the neoliberal dichotomy between violent politics and peaceful civil society’? Worth tracing concretely.

Broader Connections