Against the Oligarchs and the Corrupt yet Favours an unjust Market:
Neoliberalism’s Ironic Bedfellows
In a world rife with economic inequality and political corruption, the rise of self-proclaimed champions of the people is not surprising. These figures often decry the concentration of power in the hands of a few—“the oligarchs,” as they are often labeled—and passionately rail against the corrupt systems that sustain them. However, an uncomfortable and glaring contradiction arises when these same critics endorse neoliberal policies. Neoliberalism—characterized by deregulation, privatization, and austerity—has not only failed to dismantle the oligarchic structures that critics decry, but has, in fact, entrenched them further. Far from challenging the status quo, neoliberalism serves to consolidate elite power and wealth under the guise of reform.
“Expanding the Pie” or Expanding Inequality?
The notion of “expanding the pie” is central to the neoliberal justification for policies like deregulation and privatization. Proponents argue that market liberalization and reducing government intervention will unlock growth, benefiting society as a whole. The narrative promises that as the economy grows, everyone will have a larger share—especially the middle and working classes. However, this claim collapses when examined through the lens of the resulting wealth concentration.
In reality, the beneficiaries of neoliberal reforms have overwhelmingly been the wealthy elite and corporate giants. When state-owned enterprises are privatized, they do not become more efficient or equitable; they are sold to well-connected individuals and corporations, often at a fraction of their actual value. These private entities, now shielded from competition by deregulation, can charge higher prices, exploit workers more aggressively, and funnel profits into offshore tax havens. The resulting wealth concentration is not the expansion of the economic pie, but the consolidation of it in fewer hands.
What is presented as a market-driven solution to inequality is instead a systematic redistribution of wealth upward. This consolidation is not just about individual fortunes—it is about securing political power. The newly enriched oligarchs, having captured major industries, wield increasing influence over political decision-making, ensuring that their interests remain well-protected and insulated from the scrutiny of the public or government. The idea that everyone benefits from “expanding the pie” becomes a cruel joke when it is the oligarchs themselves who own most of the pie.
The Myth of “To, For, and By the People” under neoliberalism
At the heart of neoliberalism’s contradiction is its assault on the very idea of collective governance. For neoliberals, the market is the ultimate arbiter of value, and individual success is the product of personal effort and merit. In this view, government intervention is a hindrance, and the “people” are best served by allowing free-market forces to dictate the flow of resources. This ideology stands in direct opposition to the core principles of democracy, which emphasize governance “to, for, and by the people.”
Margaret Thatcher’s infamous declaration that “there is no such thing as society” encapsulates the neoliberal worldview. In this framework, there is no collective responsibility or shared interest. Society is reduced to a collection of individuals, each acting in their self-interest, with no obligation to the broader community. This ideological stance is not just a rejection of social solidarity; it is an abdication of the idea that public institutions exist to serve the common good.
By dismantling public services, weakening labor protections, and eroding social safety nets, neoliberalism further entrenches inequality and undermines the concept of a society working together for mutual benefit. Public institutions like education, healthcare, and transportation become commodified, where access is determined by one’s ability to pay rather than by a right to basic services. The emphasis shifts from a collective vision of the good life to a competitive marketplace, where the strong survive and the weak are left behind.
For those who claim to be fighting against the oligarchs and corruption, this stance is profoundly hypocritical. Neoliberal policies do not challenge the power of elites; they increase it. The rich do not simply benefit from these policies—they design them. The more deregulated and privatized the market, the more power the oligarchs can amass, and the less the public’s needs are taken into account.
"Reform" as a False Narrative
When neoliberals speak of “reform,” they often frame it as necessary for modernization and progress. But true reform would address the structural inequalities that undergird the system, not merely offer a fresh veneer to the same system of exploitation. Neoliberal “reforms” are not genuine reforms at all; they are adjustments that allow existing power structures to function more efficiently in their pursuit of profit.
Take the concept of deregulation, for instance. Neoliberal advocates tout deregulation as a way to free up markets, increase competition, and promote innovation. In practice, deregulation eliminates protections that were meant to safeguard public interests, such as environmental protections or consumer safeguards. What is hailed as “freeing” markets often amounts to allowing corporations to run roughshod over people and the planet. For example, financial deregulation in the years leading up to the 2008 financial crisis resulted in the creation of speculative financial products that decimated global economies while enriching the very players responsible for the collapse.
Similarly, privatization is framed as a way to improve efficiency and bring market discipline to bloated, inefficient public sectors. In reality, privatization often results in higher costs for consumers and lower wages for workers, all while enriching private contractors and multinational corporations. In the case of essential services like water, electricity, and healthcare, privatization has led to skyrocketing costs for consumers and decreased access for the most vulnerable. Far from expanding access to services, privatization turns basic needs into profitable ventures for a select few.
Austerity is another favorite tool of neoliberal “reformers.” Presented as a fiscal necessity, austerity disproportionately impacts the poorest members of society, cutting social safety nets, public services, and worker protections. Austerity measures may help reduce budget deficits, but they do so at the cost of widening inequality, decimating public infrastructure, and deepening poverty. These policies fail to address the root causes of financial crises—they simply shift the burden onto those least equipped to bear it.
Criticising the order yet defending the system?
- A Hollow Opposition
For critics of oligarchy and corruption to simultaneously defend neoliberal policies is a profound contradiction. These policies do not dismantle oligarchic structures but reinforce them. While neoliberals may rail against specific oligarchs or corrupt officials, they defend the system that allows those oligarchs to flourish. Their opposition becomes little more than a rhetorical gesture—a condemnation of individuals rather than a rejection of the system that enables their rise.
This hollow opposition reveals an uncomfortable truth: neoliberalism does not exist to serve the people, but to serve those who already hold power. The embrace of neoliberalism by critics of the oligarchy is an implicit admission that they do not truly believe in a collective, democratic society. There is no genuine desire to empower the people. Instead, the goal is to preserve the structures that allow the powerful to remain powerful, albeit with a few new faces at the top.
Neither "Oligarch" nor the "Bankster":
Toward Genuine Opposition
If we are to see real change, we must reject the false promises of neoliberalism and confront the systemic structures that perpetuate oligarchy and corruption. True reform must address the underlying power imbalances that favor the rich and powerful. This means breaking up monopolies, restoring public control over essential services, and creating an economic system that prioritizes human well-being over corporate profits.
A genuinely democratic society requires a commitment to collective responsibility and public welfare. It means acknowledging that the people, not corporations, should be at the heart of governance. It means rejecting the notion that markets should dictate the terms of existence and instead embracing a vision of society that works for all, not just the privileged few.
The contradiction of hating oligarchs while defending neoliberalism is not just a philosophical quirk—it is a sign of intellectual and moral failure. If the critique of corruption is to be taken seriously, it must confront the systems that perpetuate it. Without this, all the talk of reform remains empty rhetoric, serving only to reinforce the very inequalities it purports to oppose. Only by embracing genuine reform—one that redistributes power and wealth—can society move toward a future that is truly “to, for, and by the people.”