Neoliberal populism as hegemony
A historical-ideological analysis of US economic policy discourse
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12876966 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Matt Guardino (0000-0002-9661-8854, Providence College, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 15 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 444-462 |
| Publication date | 2018-02-28 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Critical Discourse Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1740-5904 • E-ISSN: 1740-5912 |
| Publisher | Routledge (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/17405904.2018.1442361 |
| OpenAlex | W2791771513 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 10 |
| References cited | 26 |
This article explores how neoliberal and populist elements were initially fused in US political talk to legitimize the expansion of corporate power and socioeconomic inequality that has occurred over recent decades. Applying neo-Gramscian critical semiotic analysis to speeches, news texts and legislative statements about the 1981 Reagan economic plan, I illustrate how a distinctive neoliberal-populist discourse articulates signs of ‘the American people’ with signs of market individualism, and further connects these signs to the neoliberal political project’s policy moves to roll back state protections and deliver large tax cuts. Neoliberal populism is a paradigmatic instance of what Stuart Hall has termed the ‘trans-coding’ of distinct semantic elements to form a new hegemonic discourse. Through neoliberal-populist signifying processes, people who are deemed unable or unwilling to inhabit market-centric subjectivities, or to promote policies defined as ‘free market,’ are ideologically drawn outside the perimeters of social esteem and political legitimacy. These processes have created obstacles to imagining a unified, politically effective opposition to the neoliberal project in the United States. Moreover, by ideologically constructing ‘the American people’ as anti-statists in the realm of economic and social welfare policy, neoliberal-populist discourse makes it difficult to articulate democratic values and practices with the state as a mechanism through which greater economic equality and substantive democracy could be realized. My analysis illuminates the immediate historical roots of a public discourse with deep anchors in popular common sense which continues to pervade official US policy talk. The cultural resonance and political influence of neoliberal-populist discourse help to explain the persistence of the neoliberal project in the USA
Critical discourse analysis · Hegemony · Ideology · Neoliberalism (international relations · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Populism · Sociology · Elite Sociology and Global Capitalism · Law · Political theory and Gramsci · Populism, Right-Wing Movements
Framing Inequality
Mediatised “Statist Neoliberalism” in Kenya during the Time of Covid-19
Agitation Strategies of Anti-immigrant
The Banishment of the Poor From Public Space
Neoliberal legacy intellectuals and the Covid-19 pandemic
Deconstructing the Coloniality of the West-Centric Democratic Imaginary
Selection bias and ideological slant in DA approaches to populism
Megaprojects in austerity times
Cultivating critical language awareness
Back-to-normality outsiders
The liberal tradition in America
Right-wing populism in America
The populist persuasion
Why Americans Hate Welfare
Welfare Reform and Sexual Regulation
Liberal Tradition in America
Selections from the Prison Notebooks
The Populist Vision
British Cultural Studies
Signification, representation, ideology
The Neo-Liberal Revolution
Populism in American Politics
Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis
Latin American Neopopulism
Neoliberalizing Space
Neoliberalism with a Human Face
Brief History of Neoliberalism
The Color of Welfare
Imagined Double Movements
The Uses of Neoliberalism
The Rise of Authoritarian Neoliberalism
Populism's Power
Six theories of neoliberalism
Undoing the Demos
Neoliberalism as concept
| Unique citing works | 10 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1.43 |
| Citation span | 2019 - 2025 (7) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 10 |