It is one up to cast neoliberalism in the vein of utopianism where the standard line is to reserve the charge for the legacy marxist social construct, forgetting perhaps marx’s own critique of utopian schemes. Apart from one liners about piecemeal reform the result in fact negates is negation and (not speaking dialectically) leaves with no answers at all.
Here hedges has simply cashiered the term ‘utopian’ altogether but absorbed the warning against total social constructs. The revolution and founding of the american republic is a reminder that democracy, long thought for millennia to be impossible, before the term ‘utopian’ became current was a great success or so it seemed.
We have attempted here to is to adopt a constructivist model of a socialist system that can work. It is no harder to realize that simple so-called democracy, despite greater complexity: democratic market neo-communism. Such a system is neither utopian nor perfect,but, like the american revolution, a practical system that can be create without the confusions of the marxist legacy.
This cannot be charged with utopianism because it is eminently realizable and contains a hybrid of economic and political constructs. The point is that a revolution can, like american revolution, create quite easily a novel, yet familiar system.
It is as if we remoprh liberalism as communism, and communism as liberalism.
Neoliberalism, the latest utopian project, aims at concentrating wealth in the hands of the few while reducing the many to peonage.