A neoliberális "kapitalizmus" fogalom megszűnése (The disappearance of the term “neoliberal capitalism”)

A kommunizmusnak – vagy amit a XX. században annak neveztek – a fasizmus nem elfogadható alternatívája. Az elmúlt húsz év meghatározó ideológiai áramlata, a neoliberalizmus ezt nem értette meg. A baloldallal szemben túlzott mértékben lépett fel, míg ezzel szemben a jobboldali szélsőségnek jelentős teret engedett. A szélsőjobboldali szemlélet, az anakronisztikus, barbár provincializmus felszámolásához szükség van a nyugati típusú konzervativizmus és a szociáldemokrácia együttműködésére, a két elméleti irányzat partneri viszonyára. Ehhez mindenekelőtt a neoliberalizmus elméleti meghaladására van szükség. A tanulmányban ezért a neoliberalizmus meghatározó tételeinek kritikáját végezzük el annak érdekében, hogy az új világrendhez igazodó elméleti keret kialakulásához hozzájáruljunk. _____ The acceptable alternative of communism, or what it had been called in the 20th century, is not fascism. The mainstream in the ideology of the last couple of decades, neo-liberalism, has not understood this statement. It allows too wide range for the extremists in the far right; however, in the other side it was too rigid with the left. To terminate the barbarian, anachronistic provincialism in the far right, cooperation between the neo-conservativism prevailing in the West and the social democrat movement is needed. The partnership between the two streams is inevitable. In order to achieve this goal the first step is the debate with the theoretical background of the neo-liberal way of thinking. The main purpose of this paper is to start this discussion hoping that we can contribute to the new theoretical framework in the social sciences.

More Than Words, Brand Destruction in the Online Sphere

The focus of this paper is brand destruction, however in a slightly different sense than the traditional marketing literature depicts it. The concept of brand destruction basically tends to be discussed either (1) as an accidental, counter-productive event in a campaign which leads to the ruining of the brand, or (2) an intentional act by competitors in the market, which results the same breakdown mentioned above. As this paper shows, there are other ways to consider as well, when speaking about brand destruction. An often overlooked type of brand destruction is a rather new phenomenon: destroying the brand by customers or business partners. The adequate scene for this case is the internet itself, especially different social media platforms, e. g. Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Instagram, etc. Also popular weblogs can play an important role in brand destruction made by customers or business partners (general cases related to social media are depicted in Lipsman – Mud – Rich – Bruich, 2012). This paper presents a couple of cases in the online field and focuses basically on online communicative activities, in which a brand’s negative properties come to discussion. Both Hungarian and foreign examples are easy to find and they all demonstrate the growing power of consumers. This observation led marketing experts to start talking about the ‘smooth seizure of power by consumers’. Whilst the critic of this concept is considered to be relevant, this paper describes the elements and methods of the ‘seizure’ – from an online social point of view. The key of handling brand destruction cases efficiently lies in the role of social media users. They are not only consumers, but the opportunity for producing online contents is in their hands as well – this fact results in the idea of ‘prosumers’. Thus customers on social media platforms must be handled as a ‘critical mass’: as civic warriors with strong weapons in their armoury. No companies are allowed to feel safe, as the slightest error may well be punished by the crowd.