You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

RichardKennaway comments on Open thread, 25-31 August 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: jaime2000 25 August 2014 11:14AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (227)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 27 August 2014 12:31:08PM *  3 points [-]

Why do you think it's useful to stick a "post-neoliberal" moniker on them, especially given that Wikipedia seems to think that "neoliberal" is a pejorative term used mostly by people who don't like markets?

As far as I can make out, the "post-" prefix in words such as postneoliberal, postcolonial, postmodern, etc. means not merely "after", but also "in reaction or opposition to", with connotations of supercession of the old and bad by the superior new and good. Claiming the "post-" moniker for oneself is a way of linguistically framing the situation (that is, casting a magic spell) to define oneself into having the high moral ground.

Comment author: Lumifer 27 August 2014 02:41:33PM 1 point [-]

Sure, but you're talking about verbal jiu-jitsu techniques, basically. However here I just don't know which meaning the OP wants to associate with the label "post-liberal". There are a lot of ways the "superior new and good" can play out.