An idea central to my “political philosophy” these days is that Marxism and neoliberalism, while considered antitheses, each grows from European Enlightenment thinking where hierarchy and teleology are both values and organising principles (principles encode values). Each strives to “better” the world through arranging things in orders and directions. “Growth” in wealth is a common measure. Distribution is secondary. Most of the arguments lie in this secondary layer: markets or state departments; which does distribution? For a new left it is really hard to break with dialectics: thesis > antithesis > synthesis = new thesis ad infinitum.
Indeed for a new left even the directionality is a problem.
rWorld2 