Wow, that is not what I expected Neoliberalism to mean. Thank you for the lesson. When I read about Neo-(x-political-term) I generally think of new ideas around it, not ideas reaching back to WWII. My biggest concern after reading your link is:

The term has multiple, competing definitions, and is often used pejoratively.

Also, the last few paragraphs of Current Usage emphasize it's use as a dog whistle:

"Several writers have criticized the term "neoliberal" as an insult or slur used by leftists against liberals and varieties of liberalism that leftists disagree with."

and

"the word is nothing more than a political slur, or a term without any analytic power"

I still think it would serve us all to be more precise about what exactly is failing us.

[–] RickRussell_CA@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

I think that in the minds of Friedman, Hayek, Mises et. al. (who coined the term neoliberal after WW2), it was meant to marry modern pro-market economic ideas (the "neo" part) with classically liberal social ideals, reaching back to the Enlightenment. I think they intended it as a counter to socialism, which combined anti-market ideas with regressive ideas around social and civil liberty (at least, in practical application in the wake of WW2).

But yes, in modern parlance it is often a slur aimed at pro-corporate capitalist kleptocracy.

[–] Piers@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

When I read about Neo-(x-political-term) I generally think of new ideas around it, not ideas reaching back to WWII.

Everything was new at some point. Things are named relative to when they happen, not relative to when you hear about them.