George Monbiot's otherwise fine article consistently calls neo-conservative "neo-liberal"

[EVDebs]

How the Neoliberals Stitched Up the Wealth of Nations for Themselves
By George Monbiot
The Guardian UK

Tuesday 28 August 2007

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/083007H.shtml

"When the Mont Pelerin Society first met, in 1947, its political project did not have a name. But it knew where it was going. The society's founder, Friedrich von Hayek, remarked that the battle for ideas would take at least a generation to win, but he knew that his intellectual army would attract powerful backers. Its philosophy, which later came to be known as neoliberalism, accorded with the interests of the ultra-rich, so the ultra-rich would pay for it.

Neoliberalism claims that we are best served by maximum market freedom and minimum intervention by the state. The role of government should be confined to creating and defending markets, protecting private property and defending the realm. All other functions are better discharged by private enterprise, which will be prompted by the profit motive to supply essential services. By this means, enterprise is liberated, rational decisions are made and citizens are freed from the dehumanising hand of the state."

The article is otherwise o.k. with me but I find this SOOOOO irritating ! They're neo-Conservatives not neo-liberals !

[LearnedHand]

1. Actually, this isn't one of CNN's "Obama/Osama" thing

Neo-liberal is the correct term for these people, although neo-conservative is the term we use. I've read a number of articles by reputable (i.e., not pukes) people who explained why they are neo-conservatives. I don't remember the reasoning right off hand, but I'll google it and try to find some of the articles I read. It's definitely not a slap at liberals, or an attempt to paint us all with the same brush.

(Edit)

Neoliberalism from WikiPedia: "Neoliberalism refers to a political movement that espouses economic liberalism as a means of promoting economic development and securing political liberty."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

[Viva_La_Revolution]

2. neo-liberal to the rest of the world is the same as our neo-cons

I never understood how it got twisted around that way, but it's true. :shrug:

[John Q. Citizen]

3. The Neo-conservatives differ from the Neo liberals in that they espouse

projecting American military power to promote "democracy and capitalism."

Neo-liberalism sprang up during the cold war and was basically an economic model. The Neo-conservatives came to prominace after the fall of the Soviet Union.

There is some overlap but there are also many fundamental differences.

[lvx35]

4. It must be refering to classic liberalism. But why the "neo" prefix? It annoys me too.

neo-classic-liberalism is probably what they mean, though it sounds too dumb.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

[scarletwoman]

5. No. Neoliberal is a very specific term that's been around for decades, it's an economic term, not

a political term.

The founding of the WTO was a neoliberal project, among many other globalist economic institutions.

sw

[lvx35]

6. Classical Liberalism is an economic term.

The "normative core" of classical liberalism is the idea that laissez-faire economics will bring about a spontaneous order or invisible hand that benefits the society.

from the link.

[EVDebs]

7. Dr Thickfinger and his invisible hand need to stay outta the working man's arse eom

[lvx35]

8. hee hee. nt

[On the Road]

9. "Neoconservative" Tends to be Used for Hegemonistic Foreign Policy

"Neoliberal" for laissez-faire economic policy.