新自由主義是什麼？三種理論觀點的比較研究

What is Neoliberalism? A Comparative Analysis of Three Theoretical Perspectives

新自由主義引發許多學術爭議的一個主要來源，或許是因為它「千變萬化」：一方面不同立場與傳統的學術論述從各種角度去定義它；另一方面新自由主義在各個地區展現出完全不同的形式，甚至指涉迥異的對象。如果一個詞彙可以無節制地擴散指涉所有事物，那麼這個詞彙被認為用處不大，也是可以理解的。本文以「多樣性」（variety）作為問題意識，聚焦在三條主軸：馬克思主義政治經濟學、新制度主義（neo-institutionalism）以及晚近受到Michel Callon 啟發從STS進路對市場的見解，既探討各種不同學術論述對新自由主義的不同理解，也探討如何理解新自由主義在世界各地不同的表現形式。本文認為一個較周全的新自由主義研究綱領必須掌握結構、制度、過程及行動四個面向。總體來看，我們或許可以將新自由主義看作是一種為了挽救積累危機而建構的規則體系或技術物，就實質內涵而言，包含了霸權計畫、市場制度、國家形式與市場展演性（performativity）等諸元素。

One of the main controversies that surrounds academic discussions about neoliberalism may originate from its variegation. On the one hand, many conflicting theoretical perspectives have been mobilized to analyze it; on the other hand, neoliberalism denotes different things and embodies different forms in different places. So, it is understandable that many people feel this term carries little analytical weight. This article focuses on “variety” as a problematic, tracing three main traditions: Marxian political economy, neo-institutionalism, and a Science and Technology Studies (STS) approach inspired by Michel Callon. While each tradition may penetrate some important facets of neoliberalization as a process, they fail to capture others. How can the “varieties of neoliberalization” be understood? This article suggests that it is possible to attain a better understanding of neoliberalism if we grasp its four facets at the same time: structure, institution, process, and action. In sum, we may regard neoliberalism as an artifact that reacts to the crisis of world capitalism’s accumulation, and its contents include hegemonic projects, market institutions, state forms, and market performativity.