This chapter provides a working definition of neoliberalism and examines its foundational role in shaping Chile’s economic reforms under the Pinochet regime. Neoliberalism, as implemented by the Chicago Boys, is presented as an extreme form of capitalism characterized by privatization, deregulation, and limited state intervention. The chapter explores how these principles transformed traditional public sectors such as pensions, healthcare, and education, establishing a model that marked a decisive shift from the previous state-led approach. While these reforms delivered macroeconomic stability and institutional endurance, they also generated widespread debate over equity, access, and long-term outcomes. By examining growing public dissatisfaction and attempts at reform, the chapter highlights the contested nature of neoliberalism’s legacy in Chile. Rather than offering a definitive verdict, it emphasizes the complexity of evaluating the model’s impact, noting both its adaptability and the persistent questions surrounding its role in shaping social policy. This perspective invites further reflection on how market-driven systems evolve in response to pressure and what that evolution reveals about the broader tensions between macroeconomic efficiency and democratic legitimacy.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Neoliberalism: Problem or Solution?

  • Kenneth Bunker

摘要

This chapter provides a working definition of neoliberalism and examines its foundational role in shaping Chile’s economic reforms under the Pinochet regime. Neoliberalism, as implemented by the Chicago Boys, is presented as an extreme form of capitalism characterized by privatization, deregulation, and limited state intervention. The chapter explores how these principles transformed traditional public sectors such as pensions, healthcare, and education, establishing a model that marked a decisive shift from the previous state-led approach. While these reforms delivered macroeconomic stability and institutional endurance, they also generated widespread debate over equity, access, and long-term outcomes. By examining growing public dissatisfaction and attempts at reform, the chapter highlights the contested nature of neoliberalism’s legacy in Chile. Rather than offering a definitive verdict, it emphasizes the complexity of evaluating the model’s impact, noting both its adaptability and the persistent questions surrounding its role in shaping social policy. This perspective invites further reflection on how market-driven systems evolve in response to pressure and what that evolution reveals about the broader tensions between macroeconomic efficiency and democratic legitimacy.