Planning as a mid-century policy buzzword covered wildly divergent meanings

Evidence

If a wide spectrum of politicians agreed on planning however, no one could reach an understanding as to what it meant and covered: it ranged “from capitalist-sponsored efforts to ‘rationalize’ industries to market socialism to Soviet-style Gosplanning, with Keynes-inspired fiscal ‘planning’ often thrown in for good measure.” — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 715

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies that ‘planning’ was a contested umbrella term during the 1930s-40s, useful for understanding what neoliberals were actually reacting against.
• XREF: connects to: In this Article, Professor Schauer examines divergent uses of the term ‘formalism’ to elucidate its descriptive content. Conceptions of formalism, he argues, involve the notion that rules constrict the choice of the decisionmaker. Our aversion to formalism stems from denial that the language of rules either can or should constrict choice in this way. Yet Professor Schauer argues that this aversion to formalism should be rethought: At times language both can and should restrict decisionmakers.; 1930s planning consensus elevated bureaucracies and the M-form over individual entrepreneurship — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 271

Broader Connections

• In this Article, Professor Schauer examines divergent uses of the term ‘formalism’ to elucidate its descriptive content. Conceptions of formalism, he argues, involve the notion that rules… #expands (0.80)
• 1930s planning consensus elevated bureaucracies and the M-form over individual entrepreneurship #exemplifies (0.75) — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 271