John Comaroff thinks not:
Once upon a time, anti-neoliberal theory posited an opposition between state and the free market, arguing that the antidote to the latter lay in the active intervention of the former. But the opposition is false, just another piece of the detritus of the modern history of capital. As states become mega-corporations (Kremlin, Inc.; Britain, PLC; South Africa, Pty Ltd.; Dubai, Inc.) all of them, incidentally, branded and legally incorporated – they become inextricably part of the workings of the market and, hence, no longer an “outside”, an antidote or an antithesis, from which to rethink or reconstruct “the neoliberal paradigm”. Which, in part, is why government is increasingly reduced to an exercise in the technical management of capital, why ideologically-founded politics appear dead, replaced by the politics of interest and entitlement and identity, three counterpoints of a single triangle. And why the capillaries of neoliberal governance seem so firmly entrenched in the cartography of our everyday lives, there to remain for the foreseeable future. To the degree that any future is foreseeable.
The article is worth reading in full.
Pingback: Problems with Neoliberalism as a Theoretical Framework « Neoliberalism and the Internet