Not long ago, I was reading book reviews in the most recent issue of the Journal of American History, when I came across this review (by Laura Hirshbein) of Daniel Horowitz’s Happier? The History of a Cultural Movement that Aspired to Transform America:
Horowitz points out that researchers and promotors [sic] of popular psychology range across the political spectrum. And yet a clear synergy exists between neoliberal ideas about small government and individual agency and positive psychology descriptions of character and personal responsibility.
I haven’t read the book (though I have added to my lengthy “someday” list), but the review led me to wonder: Is there a saturation point?
In recent years, it seems, critiques of “neoliberalism” are everywhere—perhaps to the point that the term has lost its meaning, as some have argued. To be sure, neoliberalism is an important topic, worthy of serious study from many disciplinary and theoretical angles—and as someone interested in the history of certain “neoliberal” policies, I have a vested interest in its continued relevance—but does there come a point where a particular topic is just too in vogue? (And if so, have we reached it?)
