After Failure: A Second Stage of Neoliberalism http://www.social-europe.eu/2011/04/after-failure-a-second-stage-of-neoliberalism/

In Germany, postliberal intellectuals, including the philosophers Peter Sloterdijk and Norbert Bolz as well as Thilo Sarrazin, use the following arguments to justify the increase of social inequality: First, social differences have to be unquestionably accepted. Inequalities have to be accepted, a passive-enduring stance has to be assumed towards the twist and turns of ‘fate’. Norbert Bolz refers to this stance as ‘reasonable fatalism’ (“vernünftiger Fatalismus”) (Bolz 2009: 36). Whatever happens is good. Instead of focusing on differences, one should concentrate on the appropriateness of the state and situation of an individual person – regardless of the situation of other persons.

The emphasis on acceptance, sufferance, acquiescence and fatalism, however, puts the core value of liberalism at risk: its concept of liberty. Second, social inequalities are justified as grounded in characteristics like ethnicity, cultural affiliation, religious affiliation, or genetic potential. Accordingly, market success is related to certain cultural or natural characteristics. Inequality is affiliated to characteristics that are essentially unalterable. In this context, one may refer to biological, but also to cultural characteristics that have a long tradition (advanced civilizations, religions, ethnicities). By renouncing the value of merit and its role as a central means of justification for the market, the vindication of the market goes off the rails and turns to criticism of Islam – and to Biologism.