Liberalism in America refers to social liberalism. IE: justice, government management of social services(health, education, welfare, infrastructure). In this scenario, the government looking after its citizens.
Liberalism in the rest of the world refers to Neoliberalism. IE: capitalism on a pedestal, privatization of public services, limited government intervention in all areas(business, labour, environment, health, education). In this scenario, private business and “the free market” determine what is and isn’t good(IE profit is the greatest good).
That over-simplifies the definition of neoliberalism, and the contested nature of definitions of that term. It also ignores the differences between the liberalism that Thatcher claimed and her actual policies (although I’m not claiming that Hayak, for example, wasn’t part of the then-current definition of liberalism), particularly her social policies.
I promise you, despite what Wikipedia claims, if a British newspaper were to refer to a liberal politician, they would not include Thatcher and Johnson.
Firstly, the social aspect of the term liberalism is more prominant than the economic. And secondly, it would be rare in the modern age to see it applied to Hayakian economics as opposed to Keyensian.
Neoliberalism, as a term, is to liberalism as Libertarian is to liberalism. They share a root and you can point to similarites, but once you scratch beneath the surface they aren’t all that similar and have important areas of opposition.
Liberalism in America refers to social liberalism. IE: justice, government management of social services(health, education, welfare, infrastructure). In this scenario, the government looking after its citizens.
Liberalism in the rest of the world refers to Neoliberalism. IE: capitalism on a pedestal, privatization of public services, limited government intervention in all areas(business, labour, environment, health, education). In this scenario, private business and “the free market” determine what is and isn’t good(IE profit is the greatest good).
Liberal in the UK definitely doesn’t mean neoliberal
Not entirely no.
"
Scholars primarily use the term to refer to classical liberalism.
British liberalism is now organised between two schools;
Neoliberalism is a more contemporary version of classical liberalism
That over-simplifies the definition of neoliberalism, and the contested nature of definitions of that term. It also ignores the differences between the liberalism that Thatcher claimed and her actual policies (although I’m not claiming that Hayak, for example, wasn’t part of the then-current definition of liberalism), particularly her social policies.
I promise you, despite what Wikipedia claims, if a British newspaper were to refer to a liberal politician, they would not include Thatcher and Johnson.
Firstly, the social aspect of the term liberalism is more prominant than the economic. And secondly, it would be rare in the modern age to see it applied to Hayakian economics as opposed to Keyensian.
Neoliberalism, as a term, is to liberalism as Libertarian is to liberalism. They share a root and you can point to similarites, but once you scratch beneath the surface they aren’t all that similar and have important areas of opposition.
Nope. Some political parties use it as neoliberal but ordinary people don’t.