@aral A central aim of Neoliberalism was to dismantle Antitrust https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/now-you-see-it-now-you-dont-antitrust-arguments-chicago-style

Let's restore antitrust enforcement
https://european-pirateparty.eu/programme/economy-finances/

@aral I was reading about that recently. For the majority of people who don't clash with the regime, most dictatorships are boring affairs and they're content to just live. People don't resist. They adapt. They get used to it. They don't want to lose their jobs, their lives, their children, etc. over rocking the boat, so they don't.

An incredibly common attitude? "They aren't coming for me so why do I care? Maybe they should shut up if they were smart."

@aral

This is true where at morality level I think it's really driven by the association of money with righteousness among neoliberals and conservatives. If something makes money it must be right.

The fascism of today is of a different flavour than that of the 1930s, equally abhorrent, but the emphasis is much more heavily on property being the ultimate rule, the ultimate barometer of righteousness. A feudal oligarchy maintained by fascist principles.

@aral

Mic drop

@aral

Neoliberals aren't the only one who have to learn to live under fascism.

Its also a question of (1.) how much you're willing to mask your views, or how secure you are in your untouchability OR (2.) how dependant your extended social network is of the fascist regime.

It's all good to say "anyone who lives under fascist regime is a fascist", but that simplification leads to forgetting people like Albert Göring (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_G%C3%B6ring) (who's ofc an extreme example, but nevertheless!)

@aral

Would the situation be the same if we were talking about mere liberalism, sans the “neo”?

I asked this question before reading the trenchant posts above that address various sides of the liberalism-versus-neoliberalism distinction, but the question still holds. Thanks, all.