What is wrong with the term "neoliberalism"?

By -
I frequently see libertarians objecting to the term "neoliberalism." And yet they boast that they are the real liberals, and that liberalism underwent a revival after WWII, due to events like the founding of the Mount Pelerin society.

So what is wrong with calling this the new liberalism?

Comments

  1. Samson Corwell11:25 PM

    As I understand it, "neoliberalism" is not a term that is widely used in the United States.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous5:19 PM

    I don't much pay attention to this sort of stuff, but if I were to guess I would say it is because of who that word is typically associated with, e.g. Milton Friedman, Ronald Reagan, Mags Thatcher, etc, as well as it's links to American conservatism. These aren't generally things that a libertarian would wish to be associated with (unlike classical liberalism).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah8:51 PM

      No, Joe, that's not gonna do it, as I repeatedly here objections to the term *period*, not just the term applied to libertarians.

      Delete
    2. gcallah8:54 PM

      Also the idea that most libertarians would not wish to be associated with Milton Friedman illustrates that your definition of "libertarian" encompasses only a couple of percent of those who self-identify as libertarian!

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more