The Origins, Wrong Path, and Reflections on Neoliberalism

At present, the global development deficit is intensifying, with worldwide disparities in wealth, class antagonisms, and ecological crises growing increasingly severe, seriously impacting the development models of various countries and the global governance system. These phenomena are the result of the excessive expansion of neoliberalism since the end of the Cold War, reflecting its profound shortcomings as a political philosophy and development model. An in-depth analysis of the origins, core concepts, and practical dilemmas of neoliberalism is a key to understanding the contemporary world and a fundamental prerequisite for restructuring the global development order.

当前，全球发展赤字不断加剧，特别是世界范围的贫富差距、阶层对立、生态危机愈演愈烈，对各国发展模式和全球治理体系构成严重冲击。这些现象的出现是冷战结束以来，新自由主义过度扩张的结果，反映出其作为一种政治理念和发展模式的深刻弊端。深入剖析新自由主义的来龙去脉、核心理念和现实困境，是理解当代世界的重要钥匙，也是重构全球发展秩序的基本前提。

The Formation and Core Concepts of Neoliberalism

新自由主义的生成及核心理念

Neoliberalism is defined in relation to classical liberalism. Economists represented by Adam Smith advocated laissez-faire and individual rights, opposing the expansion of state power, believing that the market’s “invisible hand” could optimize resource allocation, improve economic efficiency, and ultimately construct a “spontaneous order” from which everyone could benefit. This proposition contributed to economic prosperity and the development of social productive forces, but an unconstrained market inevitably leads to market failures, triggering periodic economic crises. After experiencing the “Great Depression,” Keynesianism, which emphasized government intervention, became the dominant governance philosophy, driving the expansion of state power and the construction of welfare systems in Western countries. However, the government’s “taking on everything” [1]1 “大包大揽” (dà bāo dà lǎn): A Chinese idiom meaning to take on all responsibilities or tasks oneself, often implying overreach or excessive control. led to a decline in economic efficiency and a loss of social vitality. Against this backdrop, scholars such as Friedman launched fierce critiques of Keynesianism, and neoliberalism began to take the historical stage, sparking the far-reaching “Reagan-Thatcher Revolution,” which helped the Western world emerge from the “stagflation” crisis and reshape its competitive advantage. Since the end of the Cold War, with the help of U.S. global hegemony, neoliberalism has been forcibly promoted worldwide as the “end of ideology,” dominating the historical process of economic globalization and national modernization.

新自由主义是相对于古典自由主义而言的。以亚当·斯密为代表的经济学家主张自由放任和个人权利，反对政府的权力扩张，认为市场这只“看不见的手”能够优化资源配置、提高经济效率，最终构建出人人均能受益的“自发秩序”。这一主张有助于经济繁荣和社会生产力发展，但失去制约的市场必然出现失灵，引发周期性经济危机。在经历了“大萧条”之后，强调政府干预的凯恩斯主义成为主导性治理理念，推动了西方国家的政府权力扩张和福利体系构建。不过，政府的“大包大揽”又导致经济效率下降、社会活力缺失。在这一背景下，弗里德曼等学者对凯恩斯主义进行激烈批判，新自由主义开始登上历史舞台，掀起了具有深远影响的“里根—撒切尔革命”，推动西方世界走出“滞胀”危机并重塑其竞争优势。冷战结束以来，借助美国的全球霸权，新自由主义作为“意识形态的终结”在世界上被强行推广，主宰了经济全球化和国家现代化的历史进程。

Neoliberalism has different theoretical schools, and its specific views are constantly adjusting and changing, but its core concepts have always remained stable and clear. Economically, it advocates comprehensive privatization and free markets. Neoliberalism holds that private property rights are the cornerstone of efficiency and freedom, and that market competition can achieve the optimal allocation of resources and factors. It calls for minimizing government intervention, relaxing market regulations, and promoting the free flow of trade, capital, and people. In the view of neoliberals, the free market best stimulates individual initiative and the spirit of innovation, maximizes wealth effects through the process of survival of the fittest, and raises the overall welfare level of society through a “trickle-down” mechanism. Politically, it emphasizes multiparty democracy and checks and balances on power. Neoliberalism views government power as a “necessary evil,” arguing that without the separation of powers and checks and balances, it will inevitably infringe on individual rights and social freedoms. It advocates for institutional arrangements based on the separation of the three powers [2]2 The separation of the three powers: Refers to the classical liberal principle of separating government into legislative, executive, and judicial branches to provide checks and balances. and competitive elections among multiple parties to ensure the limited nature and circulation of power. Socially, it promotes multiculturalism and the primacy of the individual. Neoliberalism regards the protection of individual rights and the pursuit of individual values as the highest value pursuit, opposes a single set of values and ideology, and encourages multiculturalism based on lifestyle and identity. These three dimensions do not exist in isolation but form an organic whole that supports each other, whose essence is to serve the free flow and infinite multiplication of capital on a global scale and in all fields.

新自由主义有着不同的理论流派，其具体观点也在不断调整变化，但其核心理念始终稳定且清晰。在经济上，主张全面私有与自由市场。新自由主义认为，私有产权是效率与自由的基石，市场竞争能够实现资源和要素的最佳配置，应该最大限度减少政府干预、放松市场管制，推动贸易、资本、人员的自由流动。在新自由主义者看来，自由市场最能激发个体积极性和创新精神，在优胜劣汰的过程中实现财富效应的最大化，并通过“涓滴”机制提升全社会的福利水平。在政治上，强调多党民主和权力制衡。新自由主义认为政府权力是“必要的恶”，若缺乏分权制衡势必侵犯个体权利和社会自由，主张通过三权分立的制度安排和多党之间的竞争选举以确保权力的有限性和流动性。在社会上，提倡多元文化和个人至上。新自由主义将维护个人权利、追求个人价值作为至高的价值追求，反对单一价值观和意识形态，鼓励基于生活方式和身份认同的多元文化主义。这三个维度并非孤立存在，而是一个相互支撑的有机整体，其本质是服务于资本在全球范围和各个领域的自由流动与无限增殖。

The Defects and Practical Dilemmas of Neoliberalism

新自由主义的缺陷与现实困境

However, this set of neoliberal theoretical propositions has insurmountable theoretical defects. Economically, comprehensive privatization inevitably leads to a decline in the supply of public goods and a lack of long-cycle and strategic investment; unconstrained free market competition easily breeds monopolies and speculation, triggering systemic economic crises, and will also exacerbate negative externalities such as social inequality and environmental pollution. Politically, periodic elections cannot ensure that leaders of both virtue and talent are necessarily elected, and multiparty competition does not imply the scientific and rational nature of public policy. Especially under conditions where capital intervenes in politics, democracy merely serves as an intermediary for converting economic power into political power. At the same time, the excessive pursuit of checks and balances on power easily falls into “vetocracy,” where different political parties and their interest groups oppose for the sake of opposing, making it impossible to advance major policy agendas. Socially, as individual rights consciousness continuously expands, community bonds will be persistently weakened, making it difficult to reach the consensus and solidarity necessary for the functioning of society. More importantly, neoliberalism permeates the logic of the market from the economic to the social sphere; individual choices, interpersonal relationships, and value pursuits are all commodified, inevitably leading to the expansion of materialism and the dissolution of the world of meaning. In short, the core problem of neoliberalism lies in placing capital in a supreme position, comprehensively dominating the economic, political, and social order, which over time will inevitably lead to a crisis of national governance.

然而，这套新自由主义的理论主张存在难以克服的理论缺陷。在经济上，全面私有化必然导致公共产品供给下降，以及长周期和战略性投资的缺乏；不受制约的自由市场竞争容易催生垄断和投机，引发系统性经济危机，也将加剧社会不平等以及环境污染等负外部性问题。在政治上，定期选举无法确保德才兼备的领导人必然当选，多党竞争也不意味着公共政策的科学化和合理性。特别是在资本介入政治的条件下，民主只是充当了将经济权力转化为政治权力的中介。与此同时，对权力制衡的过度追求容易陷入“否决政治”，不同党派及其利益集团为了反对而反对，使得重大政策议程无法推进。在社会上，当个体权利意识不断膨胀，共同体纽带就将被持续弱化，维系社会运转所必需的共识和团结也将难以达成。更重要的是，新自由主义将市场逻辑从经济向社会领域渗透，个人选择、人际关系、价值追求都被商品化了，必然带来物质主义膨胀和意义世界的消解。质言之，新自由主义的核心问题在于将资本置于无上地位，全面统摄经济、政治和社会秩序，久而久之必将带来国家治理危机。

From a practical perspective, the dilemmas of neoliberalism in the Western world are becoming increasingly prominent. Economic privatization and market competition concentrate wealth in the hands of a very small minority, leading to the shrinking of the middle class and the solidification of social strata. According to a report released by the U.S. Census Bureau in September 2025, the share of income held by the highest-income one-fifth of families is 52.3%, while the share held by the lowest-income one-fifth of families is only 4.8%, a very clear characteristic of income concentration among high-income groups. Furthermore, economic liberalization has also led to a series of ailments in Western countries, such as the shift from real to virtual economy, industrial relocation, and financial crises. Politically, multiparty competition exacerbates political polarization. Taking the United States as an example, both parties view each other as core threats, and the struggle between them has led to the near collapse of political consensus, making it difficult to advance major political agendas. At the same time, capital’s intervention in politics has become more overt. During the 2024 U.S. election, 11,000 political groups spent at least $14.7 billion on the presidential and congressional elections. The result is that public power is captured by capital, making genuine democracy even more unattainable for ordinary people. Socially, against the backdrop where the pursuit of individual values has become “politically correct,” the antagonisms and rifts between different groups based on race, gender, and values are becoming increasingly prominent, further exacerbating the anxiety and unease of the general public.

从现实层面看，新自由主义在西方世界的困境不断凸显。经济上的私有化和市场竞争使得财富向极少数人高度集中，带来中产阶级萎缩、社会阶层固化。根据美国人口普查局2025年9月发布的报告，美国收入最高1/5家庭的占比为52.3%，而收入最低1/5家庭的占比仅为4.8%，收入向高收入群体集中的特征十分明显。此外，经济的自由化还导致西方国家出现脱实向虚、产业转移、金融危机等一系列病症。政治上，多党竞争加剧政治极化。以美国为例，两党都将对方视为核心威胁，相互之间的斗争导致政治共识濒临瓦解，重大政治议程难以推进。与此同时，资本对政治的干预更加公开化。2024年美国大选期间，1.1万个政治团体为总统和国会议员选举花费了至少147亿美元。其结果是公共权力被资本所俘获，真实民主对于普通民众更加遥不可及。社会上，在追求个人价值成为“政治正确”的背景下，不同群体因种族、性别、价值观而产生的对立和裂痕也愈发凸显，进一步加剧了社会大众的焦虑和不安。

Transcending the Binary Logic of Opposition

超越对立的二元逻辑

Neoliberalism is not only increasingly dysfunctional within Western countries but has also induced governance crises in many developing countries. The West has forcibly promoted neoliberalism as a “prescription” for modernization to regions such as Latin America, Eastern Europe, and Asia, bringing disaster rather than blessings to the vast number of developing countries. The simple transplantation of the neoliberal development model by some countries, divorced from their basic national conditions, has intensified social contradictions, plunging them into the immense pain of growth stagnation, political turmoil, and social fragmentation. More importantly, the West, under the guise of “liberal democracy,” engages in hegemonic and bullying practices, carrying out political infiltration and regime subversion in other countries through color revolutions [3]3 Color revolutions: A term used by the CPC to describe a series of popular uprisings and political movements in post-Soviet states and other regions, often seen as attempts by Western powers to install pro-Western governments through non-violent means., cultivating proxies, and even directly conducting wars for value export, essentially “enclosing land” [4]4 “跑马圈地” (pǎo mǎ quān dì): A Chinese idiom literally meaning “to race horses and enclose land,” historically referring to the seizure of land by force. Here it is used metaphorically to describe the aggressive expansion of capital into new territories. for the expansion of international capital. Moreover, in the face of increasing global challenges such as economic crises, climate change, and pandemics, the response of neoliberalism appears feeble and powerless. It can neither prevent the emergence of problems nor find effective and positive solutions. In particular, the insufficient supply of international public goods has led the global governance system into a collective action dilemma.

新自由主义不仅在西方国家内部日益失灵，更诱发了不少发展中国家的治理危机。西方将新自由主义作为现代化“药方”强行推广到拉美、东欧、亚洲等地，给广大发展中国家带来的是灾难而非福音。一些国家对新自由主义发展模式的简单移植，脱离了基本国情，激化了社会矛盾，陷入增长停滞、政治动荡和社会撕裂的巨大阵痛之中。更为重要的是，西方以“自由民主”之名行霸权霸道之实，通过颜色革命、培植代理人等方式对他国进行政治渗透和政权颠覆，甚至直接通过战争进行价值输出，实质是为国际资本的扩张“跑马圈地”。不仅如此，面对经济危机、气候变化、大流行病等全球性挑战的不断增加，新自由主义的应对也显得苍白无力，既不能阻止问题的出现，也难以找到积极有效的方案，特别是国际公共产品供给的不足导致全球治理陷入集体行动困境。

It is precisely because of the logical defects and practical problems of neoliberalism that an increasing number of countries have begun to evolve in the direction of populism, protectionism, and unilateralism. In particular, the United States under Trump’s governance insisted on “America First,” wantonly wielded the tariff stick, and stubbornly pursued “decoupling and severing supply chains,” aiming to achieve the revival of its hegemony by extracting external resources, shifting internal contradictions, and undermining international rules. This is not only a trampling on the legitimate interests and development rights of all countries but also a subversion of the international economic and trade order, which will inevitably bring new turmoil and conflict to the world. Faced with the question of the times—where human society is heading—we must transcend the binary logic of “laissez-faire” and “closed conservatism,” seek more inclusive, balanced, and sustainable development concepts and governance models, maintain a dynamic balance between market efficiency and social equity, checks and balances of power and government action, individual rights and social values, and at the same time respect the legitimate rights of other countries while pursuing our own interests, and build a community with a shared future for mankind in the process of cooperatively advancing global governance.

正是因为新自由主义的逻辑缺陷和实践问题，越来越多的国家开始朝着民粹主义、保护主义、单边主义的方向演进。尤其是特朗普治下的美国坚持“本国优先”，肆意挥舞关税大棒，执意追求“脱钩断链”，意图通过汲取外部资源、转嫁内部矛盾、破坏国际规则实现霸权重振。这是对各国正当利益和发展权利的践踏，更是对国际经济贸易秩序的颠覆，必将给世界带来新的动荡冲突。面对人类社会何去何从的时代之问，我们必须超越“自由放任”与“封闭保守”的二元逻辑，寻求更具包容性、平衡性和可持续的发展理念和治理模式，在市场效率与社会公平、权力制衡与政府作为、个体权利与社会价值之间保持动态平衡，同时在追求自身利益的同时尊重他国正当权利，在合作推进全球治理的进程中构建人类命运共同体。

(The author is a professor at the School of Marxism, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, and a researcher at the Sichuan Provincial Research Center for the Theoretical System of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.)

（作者系西南财经大学马克思主义学院教授、四川省中国特色社会主义理论体系研究中心研究员）