后金融危机时期新自由主义的命运和走向研究

发布时间：2018-05-10 15:29

本文选题：后金融危机时期 + 新自由主义　；参考：《内蒙古师范大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：自由主义是资本主义的主流意识形态,伴随着资本主义发展的整个历史过程。对于自由主义演进历史和走向的研究,向来是资本主义研究中不可或缺的重要内容,它对分析研究资本主义的发展进程和规律具有重要意义。在20世纪70年代的滞胀危机后,新自由主义得以复兴,并对之后资本主义三十多年的发展进程产生了重大影响。2008年全球金融危机爆发后,新自由主义何去何从的问题,再次引起了学界的关注,成为该领域研究的热点问题之一。由美国次贷危机引发的2008年全球金融危机,是上世纪30年代以来资本主义所经历的最严重的一次危机。此次危机从金融领域始发,逐渐演变成实体经济危机,不仅对美国经济社会发展造成严重的后果,而且对世界其他发达资本主义国家乃至发展中国家都带来了巨大灾难。对此次危机爆发的原因,社会各界众说纷纭,莫衷一是。然而,对于危机爆发的历史根源,学界乃至政界却有一种较为普遍的观点,即认为20世纪70年代末、80年代初发达国家所进行的以新自由主义为主旨的改革埋下了爆发此次危机的伏笔。这在危机后发达资本主义国家反危机的政策措施中得到了部分印证。全球金融危机爆发后,美国采取了积极救市、强化金融监管、实施新货币政策、削减税收、改革社会医疗保障制度、寻求新的经济增长点等一系列反危机措施。其他资本主义国家也纷纷采取了诸如救助股市、降低利率、金融机构国有化、加强政府监管等政策措施应对危机。在反危机的实践中,资本主义经济也呈现出贸易保护主义抬头、再工业化、新能源开发热等趋势。从各国政府采取的反危机政策措施来看,虽与“大萧条”后的凯恩斯主义反危机政策措施不尽相同,但所实施的政策措施似乎与新自由主义所倡导的“私有化、自由化、市场化”的主旨有所背离,表现出一种“逆新自由主义”趋向。结合资本主义国家在反危机过程呈现出的“逆新自由主义”的趋向、经济发展趋势以及自由主义在历史上的嬗变过程的梳理,至少可以得出如下几点结论:新自由主义遭遇重大挫折,它的主导地位已被动摇,甚至可以说,至少在危机爆发以来的近十年中新自由主义丧失了意识形态领域的主导地位;凯恩斯主义在某些领域、某些方面有回归的迹象,但完全回归的可能性不大;因为,现实证明,后金融危机时期无论是新自由主义或凯恩斯主义都无法使经济政策达到最优状态,无法为资本主义的发展提供“灵丹妙药”;发达资本主义国家或将在凯恩斯主义和新自由主义之间寻求平衡点,以求出路;根据历史经验,面对全球金融危机导致的重大挫折,新自由主义在未来必将会卷土重来。
[Abstract]:Liberalism is the mainstream ideology of capitalism and is accompanied by the whole historical process of the development of capitalism. The study of the history and trend of the evolution of liberalism has always been an indispensable and important part of the study of capitalism. It is of great significance to the analysis and study of the progress and law of capitalism in 1970s. After the crisis of stagflation, Neo liberalism was revived, and after thirty years of capitalist development, after the outbreak of the global financial crisis of more than thirty years, the question of where the new liberalism went away has aroused the attention of the academic circles again, and became one of the hot issues in this field. 200 of the American subprime crisis caused by the American subprime crisis. The 8 year global financial crisis was the most serious crisis that capitalism experienced since the 30s of last century. This crisis evolved from the financial field to the real economic crisis, which not only caused serious consequences to the economic and social development of the United States, but also brought to the other countries of the world and even the developing countries. Great disaster. There are many different opinions about the cause of the crisis. However, there is a more common view on the historical origin of the crisis, the academic circles and the political circles, that the late 1970s and the reform of the developed countries in the early 80s were buried under the crisis of Neo liberalism. This is partly confirmed in the policy measures of the crisis in the developed capitalist countries after the crisis. After the outbreak of the global financial crisis, the United States has adopted a series of anti crisis measures, such as active rescue, strengthening financial supervision, implementing new monetary policy, reducing tax revenue, reforming the social medical security system and seeking new economic growth points. Other capitalist countries have also adopted policies and measures, such as saving the stock market, reducing interest rates, nationalization of financial institutions and strengthening government supervision. In the practice of the anti crisis, the capitalist economy also presents the trend of trade protectionism, re industrialization, new energy development and other trends. The anti crisis administration adopted by the governments of various countries. Although the policy measures are different from the policies and measures of Keynes's anti crisis policy after the great depression, the policies and measures that are implemented seem to deviate from the purport of "privatization, liberalization and marketization" advocated by Neo liberalism, showing a trend of "anti new freedom principal". The trend of "anti Neo liberalism", the trend of economic development and the process of the evolution of liberalism in history, can at least come to the following conclusions: the new liberalism has suffered major setbacks, its dominant position has been shaken, and even less in the recent ten years since the outbreak of the crisis. It has lost the dominant position in the field of ideology; there are some signs of regression in some fields and in some aspects of Keynes's doctrine, but the possibility of complete return is not very likely. Because the reality proves that both Neo liberalism and Keynes doctrine can not make the economic policy reach the optimal state in the post financial crisis, and can not bring about the development of capitalism. For the "panacea", developed capitalist countries will seek a balance between Keynes's and Neo liberalism in order to find a way out. According to historical experience, in the face of the major setback caused by the global financial crisis, neoliberalism will certainly come back in the future.

【学位授予单位】：内蒙古师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：F119;D033.3

【相似文献】