• InvisibleShoe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      Not entirely no.

      "

      Scholars primarily use the term to refer to classical liberalism.

      British liberalism is now organised between two schools;

      • the social liberalism of the Liberal Democrats (member LI, ALDE) and their counterpart the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland (member LI, ALDE),
      • and the classical liberalism of the Conservative Party which was adopted in the late 1970s by the late former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher " - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism_in_the_United_Kingdom

      Neoliberalism is a more contemporary version of classical liberalism

      • SaraTonin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        13 hours ago

        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.