Embedded Neoliberalism and Its Limits

Embedded Neoliberalism and its Limits: The Dutch Political Economy and The ???NO??™ to The European ConstitutionINTRODUCTIONWhen the Dutch with an unexpectedly large majority voted ???Nee??™ to the European Constitution,It became apparent that even the Project of European Integration had entered into a serious legitimacy crisis.Many were quick to proclaim that the resounding ???No??™ vote reflected several socio-cultural anxities over European issues-such as a possible future accession of Turkey- This article mantain that the rejection of the European Constitution may in part be seen as a manifestation of the failure of this hegemonic Project in terms of sustaining the necessary levels of mass legitimacy.The main purpose of this is to gain deeper insights into how the contradictions of embedded neoliberalism unfold in a national context.

This will help us understand the limits of the European Project and its likely future transnational dynamics.The author argues that what in the 1990s came to be known as the Dutch model showed the same contradictions and limits identified with respect to the European embedded neoliberal Project.He claims that the Dutch model was in the end much less successful in combining competitiveness with social cohesion.The second part examines the implications of these limits of the Dutch national competitiveness strategy for the legitimacy of this strategy and of the European socio-economic governance.

The focus here is on what the author calls political economy of the dutch ???No??™ in the referendum.THE RISE AND FALL OF THE DUTCH MODEL IN EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE: THE LIMITS OF ???EMBEDDED NEOLIBERALISM??™ RE-VISITEDIn the post-war era,the Dutch political economy became f?rmly anchored in the European integration process with Dutch governments consistently favouring a supranational deepending of the European Project.At the same time the ???old trade??™ model to which European economic integration initially maintains its own distinct welfare state and pursue its own market-correcting and industrial policies.In this context,the Internal Market programme launched in the mid-1980s was again enthusiastically supported by the Dutch as dominant sections of Dutch capital.

Although part of Dutch transnational capital thus promoted a neo-mercantilist strategy,emphasizing in particular the need to protect European industry .The 1980s also saw the opening gambits of what became the dominant market liberalization trend in the then European Community.Moving into the 1990s,then,Dutch soc?o-economic policies proved to f?t perfectly within the new European framework of embedded neoliberal governance.The Dutch model made out to represent a successful case of combining enhanced competitiveness while maintaining social cohesion,that is,the ???hegemonic formula??™ underpinning the Lisbon reform agenda.The limited embeddedness of embedded neoliberalism,primarily takes place at the national level.

Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot

Premium Partner
From $18.00 per page
4,8 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,80
Delivery
4,90
Support
4,70
Price
Recommended Service
From $13.90 per page
4,6 / 5
4,70
Writers Experience
4,70
Delivery
4,60
Support
4,60
Price
From $20.00 per page
4,5 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,50
Delivery
4,40
Support
4,10
Price
* All Partners were chosen among 50+ writing services by our Customer Satisfaction Team

It is within this context that the rise of embedded neoliberalism in the Netherlands,critically assessing its socio-economic performance and its success as a hegemonic project.1Gomulu Neoliberalizm ve S?n?rlar? : Hollandan??™?n Politikal Ekonomisi ve Avrupa Anayasas?na ???Hay?r??™ PolicesiGirisBeklenmedik buyuk bir cogunlukla Hollandal?n?n, Avrupa anayasas?na Hay?r oyu verdigi zaman,Avrupal? butunlestirmenin projesinin, ciddi bir mesruiyet krizine girmis oldugu ac?k oldu. Bircogu kimse,Hay?r oyunun, Avrupa sorunlar?ndan ornegin gelecekte olas? bir Turkiye??™nin girmesinden cok socio-kulturel kayg?lar?n bu sonucu yans?d?g?n? dusunmustur. Bu argumana gore; Avrupal? anayasan?n reddinin bak?m?ndan, kutle mesruiyetinin zorunlu duzeylerine dayand?r?larak bu hegenomic projenin basar?s?z goruldugunu savunmustur Bu arguman?n ana amac?, daha derin bir anlay?sta gomulu neoliberalizmin celiskilerin nas?l ulusal bir baglamda ac?kl?k kazand?g?n? anlamakt?r.

Ve bu da bizlere Avrupa projesinin ve muhtemel ulusal s?n?rlar?n? da asan dinamigi konusundaki gelecegiyle ilgili daha iyi anlamam?z konusunda yard?m saglayacakt?r.Oncelikle, Hollandada gomulu neoliberalismin celiskileri ve yap?s?n? incelememiz gerek. Yazar??™?n arguman?na gore; 1990larda Hollanda Model olarak bilinen , Avrupan?n gomulu neoliberal Projesiyle ayn? celiskileri ve Limitleri gosterdigini one suruyor.

Hollanda Modelin sonucta sosyal baglam?ndaki rekabetle incelenince daha az basar?l? olmustur.Sonras?nda ise Yazar, Hollanda ulusal rekabet stratejisinin s?n?rlar?n? Avrupa sosyo-ekonomik yonetim strajesininde inceler. Buradaki onemli nokta, yazar?n politik ekonomideki refandumun neye hollanda??™n?n ???NO??™ politikas? dedigi..Avrupa Perspektifine gore Hollanda Modelin Yukselisi ve Inisi: Gomulu Liberalizm??™in Limitine DeginmeSavas oncesi donemde, Hollandaya ait politik iktisat, tutarl? bir sekilde Avrupa butunlestirme surecinde Hollandaya ait hukumetlerde Avrupa projenin ulusal gucun otesinde bir derinlikte demir att?g? olmustur. Ayn? zamanda ???eski ticaret??™ modelinin takip ettigi endustriyel politikalar?n? Avrupal? ekonomik butunlestirmenin once kendisine has sosyal devletini surdurdugu ve kendi pazar-duzeltmesi politikas? sahiptir.

Bu cercevede, Hollandal?lar taraf?ndan desteklenen Ic Pazar Program??™?n destegi 1980lerde yeniden girisilmistir.Her ne kadar Hollanda??™n?n ulus otesi sermayesi Avrupa sanayisini koruma ihtiyac?n? vurgulamak icin neo merkantilist stratejisini desteklemis olsada. Ayn? zamanda 1980lerde Avrupa Cemiyetindeki dominan liberalizasyon piyasa trendindeki ac?klar?n? da farketmistir. 1990lara dogru ise Hollanda sosyo-ekonomi policeleri Yeni avrupa sisteminde gomulu neoliberal yonetimin tam oturdugunu kan?tlam?st?r.

Hollanda Modeli gelismis rekabet gucunu birlestirerek ayn? zamanda sosyal birlesimde saglayarak yani Lisbon??™un reform agendas?n?n ???hegenomik formulune??™ destekleyerek basar?l? bir durumda gosterebilmistir. Gomulu Neoliberalizm ulusal bir ac?dan bak?labilmis ve Bu baglamdad?r ki; Hollanda??™da gomulu liberalism??™in yukselisi ve sosyo- ekonomik ac?dan bir hegenomik proje olarak basar?ya erismistir.1THE DUTCH VARIETY OF EMBEDDED NEOLIBERALISMThe origins of the Dutch variety of neoliberalism lie in the severe profitability crisis hitting Dutch capital in what fort the Netherlands became the deepest post-war recession.It was this reconfiguration of Dutch class relations, that undermined the post-war class compromise and laid the basis for the Dutch variety of the neoliberal Project.???Wassenaar??™ agreement,which the Dutch trade unions for the first time accepted was restraint for restoring economic growth and employment mark the watershed in Dutch labour relations.The Wassenaar agreement also implied the socio-economic restructuring in labour articulated in the ideology of social partnership.The particular form in which Dutch neoliberalism took shape also had.THE CONTRADICTIONS OF EMBEDDED NEOLIBERALISM OR WHY THE DUTCH MODEL WAS NOT SO MIRACULOUS AFTER ALLEmploying Standard economic indicators,the performance of the Dutch economy was quite impressive from the late 1980s,until the turn of the century.

The GDP was above the European average while in a period of 15 years the employment rate went up from 50 per cent to 74 per cent in 2001 the trend reversed again.The global economy was hit by a strong recession in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.In the dominant explanation of the so-called Dutch miracle in the 1990s wage restraint, the policy of keeping wages below productivity growth from Wassenaar onwards,was singled out as the key factor.Another element is the flexibility of the Dutch labour market.

The hegemonic view that the Dutch miracle happened because of a competitive corporatist policiy of wage restraint is not shared by everyone,however,Uwe Becket claims that Dutch job growth in the 1990s can be better explained in terms of a big increase in-mainly female and juvenile-part-time employment.Job growth has thus mainly consisted of the growth of low-paid part-time work.Next to the increase in part-time labour,the ???DUTCH miracle??™ also involved significant cutbacks in social security.As Woldendorp concludes: Dutch miracle between 1995 and 2000 consisted of a considerable increase in part time participation of women on the labour market,combined with a majore retrenchment of the welfare state.THE DUTCH MODEL AS A NATIONAL ???SUPPLY-SIDE??™ COMPETITIVENESS STRATEGY WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A SUPRANATIONAL MARKET AND MONETARY UNIONAlthough, Dutch embedded neoliberalism also has its specific domestic origins,the subsequent path of its evolution has also been conditioned by the integration into the European framework of a supranational internal market and monetary union. Dutch embedded neoliberalism,then,has to be understood neither as an autonomous national development subsequently shaping European integration nor as simply an outcome of Europeanization,but as a transnationally constituted national or local Project,transnational constitution in which the EU plays a key role.2Cesitlerine gore Hollanda Gomulu LiberalismHollanda??™daki neoliberalism cesidinin olusumunda baskentindeki ciddi boyutta karl?l?k krizin vurmas? ve Hollandan?n en derin savas oncesi krizi yasanmas? etkilemistir. Hollandaya ait s?n?f iliskilerinin savas sonras? s?n?f uzlasmas?n?n temelini kazd? ve neoliberal projesinin Hollandaya ait degisikligi esas? koydu.

Wassenaar, Ilk kez Hollandaya ait sendikalar?n kabul gordugu, ekonomik buyumeyi restore eden ve Hollandaya ait emek iliskilerinde cal?san oran?n? belirleyen bu anlamda s?n?rlay?c? bir anlasmad?r. Wassenaar anlasmas? ayn? zamanda sosyal ortakl?g?n ideolojisindeki socio-ekonomik cal?smas?n? yeniden yap?land?rmaya yonelikte bir anlasmad?r. Hollanda Neoliberalizmin yap?s?n?n da benzer bir sekilde ald?g? gibi bir yap?land?rmad?r bu.Gomulen NEOLIBERALISMin celiskileri veya Hollandaya ait modelin, sonucta neden oyle mucizevi olmad?g?Standart ekonomik gosterge cal?sanlar? gosterir ki, 1980lerde Hollandaya ait ekonominin performans?nda oldukca etkileyiciydi, ta ki yuzy?l?n donusune kadar.

GDP, Avrupal? ortalamas?n?n ustundeydi, 15 y?ll?k bir donem boyuncada cal?sma oran?lar? yuzde 50den yuzde 74e yukselmisken, daha sonra 2001de bu trend ters etki yapm?st?r. Global ekonomi 9 Eylul sald?r?s?yla derin bir gerileme donemine girmistir. 1990 maas s?n?rlamas?nda sozde Hollandaya ait mucizenin bask?n ac?klamas?nda, Wassenaardan itibaren uretkenlik buyumesinin ucreti asag?da tutma politikas? da ayr?ca anahtar faktor olarak gosterilmistir bu duruma.

Bir baska faktor ise Hollanda Cal?sma Piyasas?n?n izledigi esneklik politikas?yd?. ???Hollanda Mucizesin??™in??™ yasanmas?nda Hegenomik gorus ise buna Maas s?n?rlamas?n?n rekabetci corporatist politikas?n?n herkes taraf?ndan paylas?lamamas? sebep gosterilmistir. Ama Uwe Becket??™ e gorede 1990??™lardaki Hollandadaki Is buyume piyasas? genel olarak kad?n ve genclerde art?s gosteren part-time is olanaklar?n saglanmas?yla ac?klanabildigini savunur. Is buyume boylece genel olarak az-odenen part-time is olanaklar?n buyumesiyle dogru orant?l? olarak ac?klanabilir.Is Buyume oran?n yukselmesi yan?nda ???Hollanda Mucizesi??™ ayn? zamanda sosyal guvenliklerindeki onemli k?s?nt?larla da ilgilidir. Woldendopta; Hollanda mucizesinin kad?n ve genclerde art?s gosteren part-time is olanaklar?n saglanmas?yla state welfare??™?n? ciddi olcude etkiledigini soyler.

HOLLANDA MODELin ULUSAL olarak arz REKABET STRATEJISI uluslar ustu bir market ve parasal birligin kapsam?nda DegerlendirilmesiHollandaca gomulu neoliberalizm kendine ozgu ic kokenleri olmas?na ragmen, ayr?ca uluslarustu bir ic pazar ve parasal birligin entegre edilerek Avrupa cercevesi icine sart kosulmas?yla evrimlesmeye ve gelismesiyle k?s?tl?d?r.Bu durumda Hollanda Modelin ne ulusal ozerk kalk?nmas? Avrupa entegrasyonunu sekillendiren, nede basitce ???Avrupal?l?lasma??™ sonucu ile ile ac?klanabilecegi fakat burada AB??™n?n onemli bir rol oynad?g? Uluslararas? bir ulusal veya yerel projeyi olusturduguyla anlas?labilinir.2First the weakening of organized labour and the restoration of capitalist class power as well as a shift within the latter class from industrial to financial capital has been significantly amplified deepened and institutionalized through the neoliberal European integration process.

Monetary integration too became a critical factor in restructuring Dutch labour relations.Second,the commitment of subsequent Dutch governments since the early 1980s to a programme of privatization,marketization,budget austerity and welfare state retrenchment but also be understood also as ideologically and institutionally reinforced by an emergence of European socio-economic governance regime which can be seen as the EU-level manifestation of this transnational Project. These strategies not only often fall to raise competitiveness,they also tend to erode rather than strenghten national social cohesion.

The Lisbon promise thus remains unfulfilled.THE LEGITIMACY CRISIS OF EMBEDDED NEOLIBERALISM IN THE DUTCH POLDER AND THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF THE ???NEE??™Signs of a weakening pro-european consensus were in fact already visible in the 1990s.The main issue through which this transpired was that of the Dutch contribution to the EU budget and the fact that the Netherlands had become the so-called largest net payer per capital.Arguably,the new Dutch attitude towards the EU as transpired in the 1990s,emphasizing financial costs rather than its benefits,must also be seen in the context of the dominant neoliberal ideology. To this ideological position also belongs a scepticism vis-a-vis a more ambitious federalism as the Dutch government for instance had supported until the Maastricht treaty,and especially vis-a-vis the Notion that the EU should have its own budget serving certain redistributive functions.Thus from the 1990s onwards the Dutch government has increasingly sought to put pressure on the EU budget,supporting efforts to make cut backs in the CAP.

This serves to underline how the Dutch government has increasingly come to support the European Integration Project.THE DISCONTENTS OF NEOLIBERAL RESTRUCTURING AND THE POPULIST TURN IN DUTCH POLITICSIn May 2002,the purple coalition that had changed the Dutch political landscape in the 1990s suffered a heavy defeat,with the social-democratic.Losing almost half of their seats in the biggest upset in post-war parliamentary elections.The elections were won by the Christian Democrats by the new party of maverick Pim Fortuyn,who had been assassinated weeks before the elections.

More substantively,there was a rising discontent with the neoliberal policies of the Kok governments.Concomitant to this,anti-immigrant sentiments especially in declining inner city areas,were growing and after the attacks of 9/11,ditching multiculturalism in favour of uniculturalism.3Ilk olarak cal?sma gucunun zay?flatmas? ve kapitalist s?n?f gucunu onaran, s?n?flar basamag?n? sanayiden mali kapital s?n?f?na kayd?ran ve Boylelikle Avrupa entegrasyon surecinde onemli bicimde kurumsallast?rmas?na destek verdi.

Parasal entegrasyonda gibi bu da Hollanda Is iliskilerini yeniden duzenlemesinde kritik bir rol oynam?st?r.Ikinci olarak; 1980lerin bas?ndan beri takip eden Hollanda hukumetlerinin taahhut ettigi ozellestirme, marketization, butce tasarruf ve refah devletinin k?s?tlamalar?n oldugu bir program gibi anlas?lmas?n?n yan?nda ayn? zamanda Ab duzeyinde tezahur bir uluslararas? proje olarak ideolojilerle ve enstitulesmeyle desteklenmis bir Avrupa sosyo-ekonomik yonetim rejimi olarakta gorulebilir. Bu stratejiler yaln?zca rekabeti artt?rmakla kalm?yor ayn? zamanda ulusal sosyal birlesimin gunclenmekten ziyada zay?flamas?na egilimlidir. Boylelikle Lizbon sozu yenine getirilemis olmakta.Hollandan?n GOMULU Neoliberalizm ???POLDER??™? (O??™dan) VE Siyasi ekonomi??™deki NEEin mesruiyeti1990??™lar?n baslang?c?yla asl?nda Avrupa oncesindeki oy birligin gozle gorulur bir sekilde zay?flad?g? gorulmustur. Gucsuzlesme belirtilerindeki ana sorunlar?n Hollandan?n AB butcesine katk?da bulunmas?yd? ve bolelikle Hollanda sermaye bas?na en buyuk net mukellefi olmustu.

Yani egemen neoliberal ideoloji baglam?nda faydalar? yerine finansal maliyetlerine vurgular?na odaklamalar?, Bu ideoloji pozisyon olarak gorulmesinde ayn? zamnada Hollanda hukumetin skeptik ve daha h?rsl? bi federalizm politikas?yla izlemesi Ornegin; Maastrick anlasmas?nda AB??™nin kendine ozgu baz? islevlerini cal?st?rmas?nda kendi butcesinin olmas? gerektigini soylendigi gibi. Boylece 1990lardan itibaren Hollanda hukumeti giderek AB butcesi uzerinde bask? yapmas? icin, CAP projesinden belli k?s?nt?lar?n yap?lmas?nda destekte bulundu., Bu da nas?l Hollanda hukumeti giderek Avrupa Entegrasyonu Projesi destek verdigini gozteriyor bizlere.

NEOLIBERAL yeniden yap?land?rmas?n?n hosnutsuzluklar ve populistlerin Hollandaya ait politikada geri donmesiMay?s 2002??™de, 1990lardaki Hollandaya ait siyasal manzaray? degistirmis olan mor koalisyon,sosyal-demokratiklere kars? ag?r bir yenilgiyi ugrayarak neredeyse koltuk say?lar?n?n yar?s?n? kaybederek savas sonras?ndaki parlamentoya secimlerini en buyuk hayalk?r?kl?g? olmustur. Secimler, secimlerden haftalar once suikast yap?lm?s olan Pim Fortuynun yeni partisi taraf?ndan H?ristiyan demokratlar taraf?ndan kazan?ld?. Daha da onemlisi, Kok hukumetlerinin neoliberal politikalar?yla yukselen bir hosnutsuzluk vard?. Bu da Ozellikle reddetmis olan ic sehir alanlar?nda bu anti-gocmen dusunceler buyuyordu, ve 9 Eylul sald?r?lar?ndan da sonra, uniculturalismin lehinde multiculturalismi bas?ndan savmas?na neden olmustur.3After years of privatization,rationalization and marketization the quality of public services had also become underfunded. Against this background the political entrepreneur Fortuyn could successfully sell his slogan ???the ruins of the purple coalition??™. He was also benefiting from the economic downturn that had set in just around that time and that indicated that the Dutch ???miracle??™ was indeed over.The rise of Fortuyn has been interpreted as marking a shift from a ???depoliticized,democracy to a centrifugal democracy??™.

More generally,we may interpret the populist turn in Dutch politics and the 2002 election results in terms of the socio-economic contradictions and subsequent political limits of Dutch embedded neoliberalism.THE 2005 TURNING POINT:THE POPULAR REJECTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL TREATYThe end to the Eurpoean integration process and the growing Euroscepticism at both the elite and mass levels became visible for all to see when 62 per cent of Dutch voters rejected the proposed European Constitution on 1 June 2005.Although this resounding ???Nee??™ came as a shock to the political establishment it was in fact the culmination of some longer structural trends. Parties on the opposing ends of the political spectrum played a critical role in mobilizing the Dutch ???No??™ vote.On the right there was the nationalist and xenophobic campaign of Geert Wilders.

In spite of what some had feared beforehand,right-wing nationalist far from dominated the ???No??™ campaign and in terms of media exposure Wilders was surpassed by the Socialist Party.However,on the contrary to the SP as an ???extreme the neoliberal character of the integration Project. All political parties opposing the Constitution were more or less United around the theme of defending the nation-state.In the pro-constitution camp the centre-right governing coalition as well as the major oppoisition party were generally careful to avoid claiming that they favoured ???more Europe??™,but rather defended the Constitution as a necessary of making European decision-making more effective and more democratic.

This also showed the limits of a consensus-oriented corporatism,neutralizing dissenting voices in the short run but arguably not enhancing legitimacy in the longer run.In this,the binary framing of the European debate in the Netherlands can also be seen as partly a product of the consensus-oriented way of Dutch EU policy-making.The argument here is that once the lid on the discontent is taken off,the politicization then taking place will not be favourable to those supporting European integration.

This is precisely what happened with the 2005 referendum.THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF THE DUTCH ???NO??™The debate was very much framed along the vertical dimension of more versus less Europe,with concerns about sovereignty dominating much of the ???No??™ campaign.The argument that we can only make sense of the massive ???No??™ vote against the Constitution in the context of the contradictions and growing ensuing tensions of Dutch embedded neoliberalism.

The Dutch voted ???No??™ for a multitude of reasons but above all because they could no longer identify with this Project the output of which was perceived as a threat to both national identity and national welfare and social security.4Ozellestirme, rasyonalizasyon ve marketization kamu hizmetlerinin kalitesinin y?llar sonra da az finans edilmesiyle neoliberalist yap?da iyici zay?flam?st?r. Bu arka plana dayand?r?larak siyasal organizator Fortuyn basar?l? bir sekilde, Mor koalisyonun y?k?nt?lar? slogan?n? sunabilmistir insanlara.

O zamanlarda yasanan ekonomik darbogazl?g?n? da kendi lehine kullanarak ???Hollanda Mucizesinin??™ sonunda bittigini ilan edebilmistir. Fortuyn yukselisi ???Depolitize edilmis demokrasiden, centrifugal (Merkezden uzak) demokrasiye??™ gecisini isaret eden bir nokta olarakta alg?lanabilir. Daha Genel olarak ise bu 2002 oylama sonuclar?n? Hollanda gomulu neoliberalizmin sosyo-ekonomik celiskilerin ve politik s?n?rlar? olarakta alg?layabiliriz. 2005 DONUM NOKTASI: Anayasal Antlasmas?n?n POPULER reddelisiAvrupa butunlestirme surecinin sonu ve hem seckin tabakada hemde kutle duzeylerinde buyuyen Euroscepticism (Avrupa entegrasyonun tersi) ve , Hollandaya ait secmenlerin yuzde 62inin, Haziran?n 1i 2005te teklif edilen Avrupa anayasas?n? geri cevrildiginde herkesin gozunde anlas?lm?st?r. Yank?lanan Nee oyunun siyasal kuruma bir sok olarak gelmesine ragmen, asl?nda baz? daha uzun yap?sal trendlerin doruk noktas? olmustur.

Siyasal tayf?n kars? rakip partileri, Hollandal?n?n Hay?r, oy verdiginde harekete gecirmekte kritik bir rolu oynad?. Sag tarafta milliyetci ve Geertin xenophobic kampanyas? var. Egemen olmus olan Hay?r kampanyas?ndan milliyetci sagc?-kanat domine etmekten uzakta, ve medya bak?m?ndan maruz kalan Wilder, sosyalist parti taraf?ndan gecildi.Ama yinede SPin aksine Butunlestirme projesinin neoliberal karakterinin oldugu uc noktadaki.

Butun politik anayasa kars?t? partileri ulusal sehri koruma amacl? bir cat? alt?na birlesebilmistir. Orta sagc? koalisyon yonetimi genel olarak ???daha avrupal???™ tarafl? oldugunu dusunulmemek icin dikkatliydi, daha ziyade Anayasan?n korunmas?nda Avrupa karar alma politikas?n?n daha etkili ve demokratik oldugu icin koruduklar?n? sebep gostertmek istediler. Bu ada ayn? zamanda oy birligi??™yle orant?lanan Corporatism, k?sa kosuda seslerden farkl? dusunmeyi notralize etmek, ama tart?smal? sekilde daha uzun kosuda mesruiyeti artt?rmamak icindi. Bu anlamda asl?nda Hollanda AB karar-alma??™da oy birligiyle dogru orant?l? oldugu anlas?labilir. Buradaki arguman bir defa hosnutsuzluklar uzerindeki kapak ac?ld?g?nda siyasallasma surecine girilmesi sonra da bu Avrupa entegrasyonu destekleyen say?s? azalacakt?. 2005 y?l? refarandumunda da tam olarak bu gerceklesmistir.

Hollandan?n ???no??™ karar?ndaki polik ekonomisiTart?sma daha cok dikey boyutu boyunca daha az Avrupaya kars? olanla, Hay?r kampanyas?n?n buyuk k?sm?na egemen oluyor olan?n egemenligi hakk?ndaki meseleler etraf?nda cercevelendi. Buradaki Tek mant?kl? arguman Buyuk cogunlugun verdigi ?????™hay?r??™??™ oyuna kars?n anayasadaki buyuyen Hollanda gomulu neoliberalism celiskileridir. Hollandal?lar ???hay?r??™ oyunu bircok sebebten oturu vermistir ama hepsinden de onemli olan konu art?k bu projenin kendisinin her iki ulusal kimlik ve ulusal refah ve sosyal guvenlige bir tehdit sonucu ihtimalini tan?yamazd?.4According to Aarts and Van der Kolk the survey shows that Dutch voters were above all concerned with the ???pace and scope??™ of the integration process,especially with respect to the move to monetary union.This fits the general hypothesis put forward by Hooghe and Marks and others that since the Maastricht Treaty the integration process has become much more politicized as it has deepened to such an extent that it intervenes much more directly into people??™s daily lives into the domestic political arena,has risen with some political parties effectively mobilizing against European integration.Van der Kolk and Aarts conclude from their survey that European integration in the Netherlands by the time of the referendum had increasingly come to be perceived as a threat: a threat to welfare,a threat to social security and a threat to the national identity,concluding that the Dutch image of the EU has changed from ???one of an institution stimulating international trade for the Dutch open economy (to) an institution costing too much and threatening both our jobs and our social security.In sum,the Dutch case has shown how the socio-economic output of the (embedded) neoliberal model of European integration is at least one important source of the growing loss of legitimacy of the European Project.

BEYOND NEOLIBERAL INTEGRATIONThe new government does not intend to reverse any of the neoliberal reforms,whether with regard to privatization,welfare state restructuring or the flexibilization of the labour market and is in fact planning further advances in some areas.CONCLUSIONThe case of the Dutch political economy as we can in many ways be taken,in spite of the paticularities of the Dutch.Not only does the Dutch case show what embedded neoliberalism means in practice in terms of national restructuring that gradually erodes national arrangement of social protection,it clearly also demonstrates the contradictions that embedded neoliberalism generates,and thereby also its political limits.Although every national state-society is always unique in several respects,the general political patterns engendered by the contradictions of embedded neoliberalism are observable in many of the EU??™s Member States,the erosion of mass political parties,electoral volatility,xenophobia,as well as rising Euroscepticism and contestation of European governance.In the Dutch case,this contestation has led to a massive popular rejection of the proposal European constitution.5Aart ve Van der Kolk??™a gore Entegrasyon surecinde Avrupa secmenlerin en buyuk kayg?s? ???at?lan ad?mlar ve faaliyet alan?yd???™ ozellikle de parasal birligi dogru gidisat?ndan dolay?. Bu da Hooghe ve Maks??™?n genel hipotezine uygun dusmektedir cunku Maastricht anlasmas? daha da derinlemesine konularda s?n?rlar?n? asm?st? oyle ki insanlar?n politik arenadan gunluk hayat?na kadar kar?s?lyordu.

Bu da Avrupa entegrasyonuna kars?t partilerin ortaya c?kmas?nda etkili olmustur. Vans der Kolk ve Aart hipotezlerinde Hollandadaki Avrupa entegrasyonun tehdit olarak yani sosyal guvenligine, ulusal kimligine ve ulusal c?karlara olan tehditin alg?lanmas?na karar verilen refaranduma kadar gecen zamanda Hollandal?lar?n AB??™ye olan imaj??™? degismistir ?????™yani ac?k ekonomiye uluslaras? ticareti stimule eden bir kurumdan, sosyal guvenirligini ve isleri tehdit eden cok gideri olan bir kuruma donusmustur.??™ Ozetle Avrupal? butunlestirmede gomulen neoliberal modelinin socio-ekonomik ac?dan en az?ndan bir onemli sonucu, Avrupa projesinin guvenirligi yitirebilmesiydi.Neoliberalism Entegrasyon OtesiYeni hukumet yap?lan neoliberal reformlarda gerek ozellistirme ac?dan gerek ulusan refah yada gerek isci piyasas?n?n esnekliginin sebep, geriye donmeyi dusunmuyor ve hatta baz? bolgelerde daha ileri seviyeli gelistirmeler yapmay? planl?yor.SONUCHollandal? politic ekonomisi olgusu her anlamda bak?labilecegi gibi, Hollandaya ait olay sadece, gomulen neoliberalismin, asamal? olarak sosyal koruman?n ulusal duzenlemesini as?nd?ran ulusal yeniden yap?land?rma bak?m?ndan pratikte ne ifade ettigini gostermekle kalmay?p, hemde ac?kca neoliberalismi gomulu modelinin celiskilerini gosterir, olusturur, ve o suretle birde kendi siyasal s?n?rlar?n? cizer.

Gomulen neoliberalismin celiskilerinin neden olmus olan genel siyasal desenleri, ABnin uye durumlar?n?n bircogunda gorulebilirdir, siyasal partilerin, secimle ilgili ucuculugun, yabanc? dusmanl?g?n?n oldugu kutlenin erozyonu ve Euroscepticism yukselmeside Avrupal? yonetimine birde ek olmustur. Hollanda Davas?nda, Tart?smalar Avrupa Anayasas?nda populer bir RED karar?na neden olmustur.5