ntrepreneurial freedoms and skills.” Neoliberalism rose to prominence in the 1970s and 80s as a policy reaction to economic downturns that plagued U.S. and European states (Prasad 2006). Saad-Filho and Johnston (2005: 2) term neoliberalism as “a hegemonic system of enhanced exploitation of the majority, a global system of minority power, plunder of nations and despoilment of the environment which tramples upon the poor, undermines rights and entitlements, and defeats resistance through a combination of domestic political, economic, legal, ideological and media pressures, backed up by international blackmail and military force if necessary.” Gotham (2008: 1042) describes it as a “political ideology that advocates market-based solutions to social problems and has influenced a range of policies to engineer economic growth, privatize public services and assets, and intensify inter-urban competition for capital investment.” Thorsen and Amund (2006) contend that neoliberalism is “a loosely demarcated set of political beliefs which include the conviction that the only legitimate purpose of the state is to safeguard individual, especially commercial, liberty, as well as strong private property rights” (Mises 1962; Nozick 1974; Hayek 1979). Neoliberalism generally also includes the belief that freely adopted market mechanisms is the optimal way of organising all exchanges of goods and services (Friedman 1962; 1980; Norberg 2001). Free markets and free trade will, it is believed, set free the creative potential and the entrepreneurial spirit which is built into the spontaneous order of any human society, and thereby lead to more individual liberty and well-being, and a more efficient allocation of resources (Hayek 1973; Rothbard 2004). Neoliberalism could also include a perspective on moral virtue: the good and virtuous person is one who is able to access the relevant markets and function as a competent actor in these markets (Thorsen and Amund 2006). He or she is willing to accept the risks associated with participating in free markets, and to adapt to rapid changes arising from such participation (Friedman 1980). Individuals are also seen as being solely responsible for the consequences of the choices and decisions they freely make: instances of inequality and glaring social injustice are morally acceptable, at least to the degree in which they could be seen as the result of freely made decisions (Nozick 1974; Hayek 1976). If a person demands that the state should regulate the market or make reparations to the unfortunate who has been caught at the losing end of a freely initiated market transaction, this is viewed as an indication that the person in question is morally depraved and underdeveloped, and scarc