Timeline for Classical liberalism and neo-liberalism
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 4, 2017 at 11:41 | comment | added | MonkeyBonkey | isn't neoliberalism more concerned about unrestricted global free trade and privatization and markets - rather than social justice and "collectivism"? The description @Dave wrote here sounds almost opposite to that in some points. | |
| Aug 22, 2016 at 0:43 | comment | added | user9166 | @Lukas The merger of global and corporate interests into liberalism does reflect a middle way between free markets and a partial socialism (which is implicitly protectionist), so I am not sure the current use is in any way an abuse of the term. Traditionally, no one insults liberalism more than the left, so any term for any specific kind of liberalism is probably a slur during the period when it is popular. | |
| Aug 21, 2016 at 23:22 | comment | added | user9166 | Both what you call Modern Liberalism and neo-Liberalism survive in current liberal thought. We elected Bill Clinton after all, and we are about to elect his wife. They are both clearly neo-Liberal at least in economic terms, and not 'Modern Liberals' as would be represented by Bernie Sanders and several parties farther left. | |
| Aug 20, 2016 at 18:15 | comment | added | Dave | @ig0774 I was trying to keep it simple. You are correct, I added the qualification. | |
| Aug 20, 2016 at 18:13 | history | edited | Dave | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
disambiguation of terms
|
| Aug 20, 2016 at 18:02 | history | edited | Dave | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
undo a minor correction
|
| Aug 20, 2016 at 17:53 | history | edited | Dave | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
clarifying terms
|
| Aug 20, 2016 at 17:46 | comment | added | Dave | @Lukas I disagree. From a linguistic perspective, this is just a term to reflect a set of beliefs relative to another perspective. The meaning of words tend to change over time based on their usage. If this is to narrow the accuracy it's normal, if it is to change the meaning for unethical reasons, aka. "Rhetoric" they "ought" to be ridiculed since they are unethical from a classical philosophical perspective (see Aristotle, Plato, etc.). | |
| Aug 20, 2016 at 9:18 | comment | added | Lukas | i guess the problem is that neo-liberalism is more of a slurr term used by both left- and right-wing media to attack the current establishment. One thing that could be ment by neo-liberalism, although it's far form the original meaning, is the intertwining of multinational corporations and politics. | |
| Aug 20, 2016 at 9:13 | comment | added | ig0774 | Neo-liberalism is not "modern liberalism" in the sense you lay out here | |
| Aug 20, 2016 at 7:33 | history | answered | Dave | CC BY-SA 3.0 |