Neoliberals feared postcolonial economic planning would erode property-rights separation

Evidence

In the great period of decolonisation, the neoliberal majority was preoccupied with the danger that independent postcolonial states would refuse to submit to their existing positions in the international division of labour. They had become increasingly anxious that a ‘dangerous liaison’ between supporters of planning in developed and developing countries threatened the market system. Emerging agendas of industrialisation, import substitution and economic planning threatened to recapitulate the ‘totalitarian’ Fabian model, while demands for economic self-determination politicised the economy and eroded the separation of dominium and imperium. — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 279

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Clarifies the dominium/imperium distinction central to the neoliberal critique of economic self-determination.
  • XREF: Echoes the reader’s earlier material on property regimes and how postcolonial states were pressured into market positions. — connects to: Neoliberals opposed colonial state planning as a politicisation of the economy — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 240; Postcolonial states choosing Soviet-style planning threatened the emerging neoliberal vision. — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making…, 1263; Neoliberal critique deployed a two-pronged argument against planning — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making…, 1367 (+1 more)

Broader Connections