a search for economies of scope, non-price based competition.o The money form: dominated by private, globalized bank credit, involving the emergence of more flexible forms of credit, innovation in financial services, subordination of state credit to imperatives of international money and credit markets.o The consumption sphere: emphasis on differentiation and niche marketing, combination of global sourcing with customized production for elite markets.o The state form: displacement of Keynesian welfare statism with Schumpeterian workfare statism, involving the promotion of competition and supply-side innovation (at all levels of the production system and between social institutions), use of social policy instruments not to generalize norms of mass consumption but to encourage flexibility, hollowing out of the nation state as powers are displaced upwards and downwards. Despite the common-sense appeal of this regime of accumulation to libertarian social theorists and economists, it is rife with contradictions and inadequacies. Arising out of this fact, the second interpretation of the post-Fordist recognizes the ascendancy of Neoliberalism, but conceives of it more as a temporary regulatory vacuum, or "the absence of a new institutional fix." Because Neoliberalism represents capitalisms "jungle law," social regulatory structures are incompatible with the laws of the market. This is a damning paradox for Neoliberalism because of its inherent destructive tendencies. It would be a mistake to label Neoliberalisms collection of regulatory laws as a mode of social regulation since it is internally crisis prone and inherently unstable. Neoliberalism guarantees social dislocation and polarization, the exaggeration rather than minimization of macroeconomically destabilizing business cycles, structural imbalances in international trade and finance, and rampant environmental degradation. "As long as Neoliberalism prevails with its emphasis ...
