Liberalism: Dead end?
Western scholars and governments were the strong proponents of liberalism; that is, favouring what they call ‘small government’ which especially does not interfere in economic matters, in other words, market economy. But when the Wall Street Bill is approved, these scholars kept silent. Why? I support Obama getting the Wall Street Bill approved as the financial market was benefiting the few greedy speculators only than the large majority. But this was against the western ideology of liberalism. In my view, liberalism has weaknesses from inception due to the fact that market as economic regulatory system is not always perfect. Who can stand for the majority when market fails to regulate the economy if a government is keeping silent? There is development without liberalism and democracy as observed in China. If there is development, there inevitably comes democracy. Without development and, at least, sustaining peoples physiological and safety needs, it is difficult to think of proper democracy. This is why USA which was the strongest proponent of liberalism has finally engaged exercising ‘big government’ passing Wall Street Bill, etc. I feel sorry for neo liberal economists as their school of thought is becoming dead-end!!