patrick.net

EvolutionWiki calls bullshit on the term as well.

Neoliberalism is an extreme form of capitalism which is supported by many (but not all) conservatives. Despite being called "neoliberal", neoliberalism is often paired with social conservatism and repression. The ambiguous term liberal in the world Neoliberalism refers to the type of extreme laissez-faire capitalism that was practised originally in the late 19th century. There were little or no restrictions on corporations so they were free to do what they pleased. Neoliberalism refers to the return to those conditions.

Liberalism has many angles.

Civil Liberalism, which is about free speech and religion, maximizing the rights and free expression of the individual
Social Liberalism, which is about removing barriers for people to excel (Ie Poverty, racial barriers, lack of education) which is what most Americans think of when talking about Liberalism. It usually involves curbing the power of some overmighty subjects like large banks via regulation. Sometimes called Modern Liberalism. This is the Liberalism that American Conservatives can't stand.
Economic Liberalism, which is about freeing capital to do whatever it wants. Neoliberalism emphasizes the latter and is far less concerned with the first two, in fact it would like to clamp down on them in the name of Economic Liberty. This is the liberalism that Modern Conservatives and the Clinton/Blair wings of Dems/Labour are in love with. Extreme neoliberals, like FA Hayek, would even back a dictator who guaranteed this one in order to shut down Social Liberalism, even if it involved restriciting Civil Liberalism. Hence the FA Hayek (and Freidman) support of Pinochet.

To me, a plain Liberal would blend all 3 together.

Some resources:

Best short description, fairly neutral encyclopedia source, that especially compares the Social Liberalism, aka Modern Liberalism, of 1910s to the 1970s to Neoliberalism:
https://www.britannica.com/topic/neoliberalism

Podcasts on Neoliberalism from Oxford:
https://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/keywords/neoliberalism

Short pamphlet/cheat sheet on Neoliberalism from University of Oslo:
folk.uio.no/daget/neoliberalism.pdf

Very Left Wing source, but details the "How and Why Neoliberalism replaced Social/Modern Liberalism" in an article:
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/07/david-harvey-neoliberalism-capitalism-labor-crisis-resistance/

Neoliberalism, for example, wanted a Life + 140 year Copyright rule written into the TPP, or guaranteeing copyright for about 200 years. If this had existed in the past, Mark Twain's books, as well as Sherlock Holmes, Alice in Wonderland, etc. would still be under copyright.

As always, a word about Adam Smith: He was quite happy with modest regulations and indeed said at several points they were necessary to good order and preventing gross inequity. Wealth of Nations is full of observations about how merchants/"Masters" can collude to raise prices with impunity, but workers doing so could be jailed or sent to Australia for "Colluding to raise wages" (ie Unions, or simply informally coming to the boss as a group and asking for high wages). The "Riot Act" was originally intended to stop workers from collaberating to raise their wages, more than 5 people meeting at a time I believe. It was never enforced at the Honorable Society of Maritime Insurance Club, only at the Green Dragon Inn where the loom operators met.

Neoliberalism is a term rarely if ever used by the people who practice it. It's a term used by CRITICS of these practices.

thunderlips11 says

Economic Liberalism, which is about freeing capital to do whatever it wants.

No such thing. People who advocate "economic liberalism" don't. Specifically, they don't allow people the freedom to
- buy and sell various goods and services like drugs and sex
- modify intellectual property to create new goods and then sell those
- allow the masses to exercise economic freedom by purchasing Canadian pharmaceuticals, or imitation clothes/purses, or a NY Giants sports jersey created by an entrepreneur in his garage
- compete with former employers

So called economic liberalism is only valued if the freedom benefits the advocate's self-interest. In any situation where such economic freedom decreases the person's or corporation's profits and increases competition, it is strongly opposed using both civil and criminal law.

Of course, Dan.

But it's economic liberals who came up with IP, which disallows the making of Giants Fan Jackets in somebody's garage. It's neoliberalism/economic liberal fanatics who insisted the TPP have 70+Life copyrights and want huge fines for violating IP. Who want to make Internet Service Companies responsible for piracy of users and pony up their identity without a warrant.

Given the vast quantity of cash involved in drugs, it's impossible that the vast majority of it isn't banked away. Otherwise Columbia and Mexico would have all their roads paved with US $20 Bills. A great boon to banks, like HSBC.

A Liberal is somebody who balances all three kinds of Liberalism. A Neoliberal is somebody who pushes Economic Liberalism at the expense of Civil and Social Liberalism. Obviously, extreme IP protection is anathema to both Civil and Social Liberals, because it imposes restrictions on creating derivative works, and sometimes even satire or criticism. For example, many states have produce laws that ban criticism of the state's produce. Texas, I believe.

thunderlips11 says

For example, many states have produce laws that ban criticism of the state's produce.

Another example is making it a felony to video animal cruelty crimes by farms and calling such whistleblowers terrorists.

But a dozen or so state legislatures have had a different reaction: They proposed or enacted bills that would make it illegal to covertly videotape livestock farms, or apply for a job at one without disclosing ties to animal rights groups. They have also drafted measures to require such videos to be given to the authorities almost immediately, which activists say would thwart any meaningful undercover investigation of large factory farms.

Critics call them “Ag-Gag” bills.

Some of the legislation appears inspired by the American Legislative Exchange Council, a business advocacy group with hundreds of state representatives from farm states as members. The group creates model bills, drafted by lobbyists and lawmakers, that in the past have included such things as “stand your ground” gun laws and tighter voter identification rules.

One of the group’s model bills, “The Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act,” prohibits filming or taking pictures on livestock farms to “defame the facility or its owner.” Violators would be placed on a “terrorist registry.”

I see no reason to call people any kind of liberal who think corporations should be allowed to bribe politicians into passing such draconian and anti-free-speech laws. It's the anti-thesis of liberty.