This presentation deals with the neoliberal and welfare state conception of social development as dominant but mutually contrasted ones in the contemporary political discourse and real life.
Policies based on one or another conception have determined a destiny of many generations and will significantly determine solving of the current crisis and insofar also the destiny of future generations. There lies an importance of a comparative analyzing these two conceptions.
Main ideas behind this presentation are: 1. The neoliberal turn in a development of liberal capitalism from 1980s caused the current global and Euro zone crisis. 2. Austerity measures represent the neoliberal mechanism which cannot solve the crisis, but make it ever deeper; 3. The new welfare turn is necessary (different from the post WWII social welfare model) for overcoming both the Euro zone and global crisis. 4. Standards of social progress have to be revived in terms of an essential inter-connection of the economic growth and the peoples` quality of life.
The Brazilian Constitution of 1988 states a project of a Social State, committed to defending gender and racial equality, social justice and human dignity. However, Brazil has undergone a series of legal changes that take away social rights and put the constitutional project at risk. The current office is an example of abusive constitutionalism, which utilizes popular legitimacy to impose constitutional-amendment proposals that can radically change the Constitution’s purpose, like the neoliberal social-security reform, flexibilization of labour rights, changes related to abortion rights, amongst others. This paper aims to defend the concept of intersectional constitutionalism, which is the vindication of a radical point of view about the Constitution based on gender, race and social relations, with minorities at the centre of the constitutional design. In an ideal scenario, intersectional constitutionalism is a deontological state of constitutionalism.
Neoliberalism has had a pervasive influence in many developed and developing countries around the world. Chile has been at the core of this trend. The country was a pioneer in implementing neoliberal reforms during the dictatorship that governed the country in the 1970s and 1980s, and, despite the fact that democratic governance resumed in 1990 and since then most of the time a center-left coalition has controlled the administration, the market-based approach still persists in most policy sectors. This paper examines the hegemony of neoliberal reforms through an in-depth case study on the trajectory of Chile’s influential market-based approach to housing law and policy in the last four decades. The main argument the paper provides is that the neoliberal regulatory rationale has been institutionalized into a set of formal and informal norms, institutional practices and ideas that over time have reduced the range of viable alternative regimes to the one adopted during the dictatorship.
As the ILO celebrates its 100th anniversary in 2019, it is unavoidable to take stock of the effectiveness of its enforcement mechanisms. Although the ILO has proved its capacity to define, evaluate, and monitor international labour standards, it lacks tools to enforce compliance with ILO agreements. Procedural compliance, concerned with formal obligations such as reporting, seems to be on the decline. Substantive compliance, i.e. whether states have fulfilled obligations set out in an international instrument, is also unsatisfactory, especially in terms that ILO appears to be unable to respond to cases of non-compliance. As ILO has no effective mechanism to impose sanctions against countries that fail to comply with its agreements, many authors draw attention to the potential of the WTO in this regard. The findings complement existing research on possible future strategies related to both “the institutional approach” and “the integrated legislative approach”.
My paper reveals the global spread of neoliberalism via an uncharted mechanism: United Nations Constitutional Assistance (UNCA) (1989-2019). The UN assists states adopt the Western liberal constitution (the Constitution) and its capitalist property rights. This is UNCA. Which was conceived in response to Third World peoples’ perceived incapacities. UNCA enabled colonies transit to independence from 1949-1960 for in 1960, self-determination became an absolute right.
I therefore, ask: Why has UNCA been revived in over forty Third World sovereign states (States). I answer this question based on the UN’s official statements. My paper reveals that from 1989-2018, the UN and the International Financial Institutions (IFIs) have co-promoted the Constitution, (the latter’s conditionality), which is key to achieving their neoliberal policies. For this reason, conflict was defined broadly to include socio-economic causes. And UNCA worked ostensibly to prevent conflict, but created within debtor-states, based on their contrived consent, an environment favouring powerful transnational interests. In this way, it violates their right to self-determination.