I don't really see the difference between the criticisms you address towards the neolibs and the behaviour of the SD's in promoting the welfare state in the postwar period - TINA, institutionalization, delegtimization, and last, but really not least what could be called 'disaster social democracy' - the exploitation of the ur-disasters of twentieth century Europe to push radical socio-economic change (WWI, Communism, fascism, Great Depression, WWII). And I also don't really see these practices as somehow beyond the normal democratic game. The key difference between the neolibs is an acceptance of democratic legitimacy when push comes to shove. That's something you don't have with the extreme right nor with the classical communist movement.