如果我们用哈维(Harvey, D.， 2007，第21页)的话来说，新自由主义可以被看作是创造性的破坏。全球化和新自由主义是影响人类发展的两个时代现象。新自由主义也被认为是对以发达国家和发展中国家占主导地位的阶级的思想和习惯为基础的战后协定的破坏。所述的明显结果是紧缩和市场放松管制，而这两个结果都对人类社会不利。(纳瓦罗,2007)
新自由主义意识形态通过大力提倡市场经济，极大地削弱了政府的作用。这一概念使各国处于采纳社会达尔文主义的边缘。在撒切尔和里根执政时期，新自由主义导致了国家经济的自由化。它在废除福利国家的同时确保了国营部门的改组。美国和英国的这些变化带来了诸如取消补贴和关税、对工会的持续攻击、国营贸易部门的公司化和私有化以及卫生、福利和教育的个体化等影响。正如苏珊•乔治(1999)所言，市场应该完全支配政府的观点在过去几十年里会给人留下荒谬的印象，但布迪厄(1999b, 94)认为，新自由主义作为国家治理已成为一种doxa，或一种全球范围内毫无疑问、简单接受的理念。资本主义的影响现在已经渗透到州一级的文化、政治和社会机构中(Harvey, 2005)。通过引入社会生活的数学质量和量化(布迪厄，1999a，第29页)，新自由主义使政府退化为刑罚国家，甚至把竞争、生产和利润看得比社会问题和公共福利更重要。
The key points of neo-liberalism consist of the following:
The complete rule of the market. Making enterprises free from government bonds and making international markets open in domestic sectors. Allowing trade and investments from global market. Deregulating the price control and abolishing workers’ rights. Making movement of capital, services and goods more flexible. Overall deregularization of market increases global competition and ensures economic growth.
Reducing public expenditure for social services. Just like health and education. Decreasing government’s role in public issues and expenses.
Deregulation. Diminish government by laws of everything that could reduce profits.
Privatisation. Selling government owned enterprises like railroads, electricity, hospitals, key industries, toll highways, schools, banks, etc., to private investors.
Abolishing the concept of community and public welfare. This ideology believes in placing “individual responsibility” with the people. (Martinez & Garcia, 1997)
If we go by the words of Harvey, D. (2007, p. 21), neoliberalism can be seen as creative destruction. The globalization and neo-liberalism are two phenomenons of our times which are negatively affecting human development. Neoliberalism is also considered as destroyer of the post-war agreement that was based on the idea and custom of the dominant classes of the developed and developing countries alike. The visible results being stated retrenchment and market deregulation, and both of the results are unfavourable for human society. (Navarro, 2007)
The neo-liberal ideology drastically hanged governments’ role by strongly advocating market oriented economies. This concept has brought the countries on verge of adopting social Darwinism. In the regime of Thatcher and Reagan, neo-liberalism led to the economic liberalization of the state. It ensured restructuring of state sectors along with abolishing of the welfare state. These changes in United States and United Kingdom brought in effects like abolishment of subsidies and tariffs, sustained attack on unions, corporatization and privatization of state trading departments and individualization of health, welfare, and education .(Peters, 2001). As per Susan George (1999), the idea that markets should wholly dictate governments would have given the absurd impression in past decades but Bourdieu (1999b, 94) argue that neo-liberalism as national governance has become a doxa, or an unquestioned and simply accepted globally. The effect of capitalism is now infused into cultural, political, and social institutions at the state-level (Harvey, 2005). By introducing a mathematical quality and quantization of social life (Bourdieu, 1999a, p. 29), neo-liberalism has made governments to degrade into penal states, valuing competition, production, and profit even above social issues and public welfare.