№ 5/2017

Ekon Ukr. 2017 (5): 90–105

УДК

JEL:

KORABLIN Sergiy¹

¹Institute for Economics and Forecasting of the NAS of Ukraine
OrcID ID : https://orcid.org/https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2979-3206

NEOLIBERAL MAINSTREAM: WHEN AMERICA IS AGAINST

Economic reasons and conditions of the attractiveness of neo-liberal doctrine in international relations have been analyzed. It is shown that, as a rule, the principles of free competition and self-regulating markets are advocated by countries that have obvious competitive advantages on the markets. When these advantages disappear, interest in free competition disappears. It is replaced by some types of protectionism (including strict administrative prohibitions).
In this respect, J. Faux’s Report can be considered as an example of lobbying for US economic interests, which contradicts the modern neoliberal mainstream. At the same time, it reflects real international practice, pursuing not the purity of market competition, but the specific national interests of its participants.
These features lead to the fact that the principles of free competition are used in international politics exclusively for the case of markets for commodity/services and capital, while competition in the global labor market remains beyond the brackets of the neoliberal mainstream. There can be no theoretical justification for such discrimination of the labor market, of course, especially given that it is precisely labor that makes the economy an economy, “animating” all other resources involved in its turnover.
The only explanation for this illogicality can be the fact that the neo-liberal doctrine – willingly or unwillingly – focuses only on those markets where the competitive advantages of industrial countries are strong. In the same place, where these advantages are minimal, and the risks for industrial economies are high (in the global labor market), there is no question of free competition – neither in the plane of neoliberal concepts and their practical applications (the Washington Consensus), nor at the level of national policies and charters of international organizations (IMF, World Bank, ILO)

Keywords:

Article original in Ukrainian (pp. 90 - 105)	Download	Downloads :313
Article original in Russian (pp. 90 - 105)	Download	Downloads :317

The article was received by the Editorial staff on January 17 , 2017

References
1. Kissinger H. Mirovoi Poryadok [World Order]. Moscow, AST, 2016 [in Russian].
2. Smith D. Trump signs order to begin Mexico border wall in immigration crackdown. The Guardian, 25 January, 2017, available at: www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/25/donald-trump-sign-mexico-border-executive-order .
3. Stiglitz J. Velikoe Razdelenie. Neravenstvo v Obshchestve, ili Chto delat’ Ostavshimsya 99% Naseleniya? [The Great Divide: Unequal Societies and What We Can Do About Them]. Moscow, Eksmo, 2016, p. 40 [in Russian].
4. Stiglitz J. Globalization and Its Discontents. London, Penguin Books, 2002, p. 221.
5. Reinert E.S. Kak Bogatye Strany Stali Bogatymi, i Pochemu Bednye Strany Ostayutsya Bednymi [How Rich Countries Got Rich ... and Why Poor Countries Stay Poor]. Moscow, PH of the State University – High School of Economics, 2011 [in Russian].
6. Delyagin M., Sheyanov V. Mir Naiznanku. Chem Zakonchitsya Ekonomicheskii Krizis dlya Rossii? [The world inside out. How will the economic crisis end for Russia?]. Moscow, PH “Kommersant”, Eksmo, 2009, p. 67 [in Russian].
7. Roubini N., Mihm S. Nuriel’ Rubini: Кak Ya Predskazal Krizis: Ekstrennyi Kurs Podgotovki k Budushchim Potryaseniyam [Crisis Economics: A Crash Course in the Future of Finance]. Moscow, Eksmo, 2011, p. 186 [in Russian].