ELI5: Difference between Classical Liberalism, Keynesian Liberalism and Neoliberalism.

McKoijion · 2時間前

Classical Liberalism

Political ideology that was started by a 17th century philosopher named John Locke.
Rejected the ideas of hereditary privilege, state religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings.
Supports civil liberties, political freedom, representative democracy, and economic freedom.
If that sounds familiar to Americans, it's because it's the philosophy that the Founding Fathers used when starting the United States.

Keynesian Economics (I don't think anyone calls it Keynesian liberalism.)

Economic theory that was started by 20th century economist John Maynard Keynes. The founder of modern macroeconomics, he is one of the most influential economists of all time.
Keynes was one of the first to extensively describe the business cycle. When demand is high, businesses grow and grow. More people start businesses in that industry. The economy booms. But then there's a point when too many people start businesses and the supply is too high. Then the weakest companies go out of business. This is called a recession.
Keynes argued that governments should save money when the economy booms and spend money on supporting people when there is a recession.
During the Great Depression, his policies became the basis of FDR's New Deal and a bunch of similar programs around the world.

Neoliberalism

Economic theory largely associated with Nobel Prize-winning economists Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman.
Supports laissez-faire (meaning let go or hands off) economics. This supports privatization, fiscal austerity, deregulation, free trade, and reductions in government spending in order to enhance the role of the private sector in the economy.
Friedman argued that the best way to end a recession wasn't to coddle the companies that were failing. Instead it was to let them quickly fail so that the people who worked there could move on to more efficient industries. It would be like ripping off the band-aid, more painful in the short term, but the recession would end quicker and would be better in the long term.
He also argued that if everyone acts in their own self interest, the economy would become larger and more efficient. Instead of hoarding their land and money, people would invest in others who are more able to effectively use it. This would lead to lower prices and a better quality of life for everyone.
Hayek and Friedman are also incredibly influential economists, and their work became the basis of Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, and many other prominent politicians' economic strategies.

Conclusion

Classic liberalism is a political ideology, and the other two are economic ideas. All modern democracies are founded on classical liberalism. The other two ideas are both popular economic ideas today. Keynesian ideas tend to be supported by left leaning politicians, and neoliberal ideas tend to be supported by right leaning politicians. Economists debate which one is better in academic journals and bars all the time. Many proponents of both ideas have won Nobel prizes for their work, so there isn't any clear cut winner. Modern day politicians tend to use elements of both theories in their economic strategies. For example, Donald Trump endorses the tax cuts associated with neoliberalism, but opposes free trade.

There are a bunch of other common meanings of these terms, but since you asked for the academic definitions, that's what I stuck with. There are also a lot of related terms such as libertarianism, social liberalism, etc., but since you didn't ask about them, I left them out.

ReluctantPatriot · 4時間前

Classical liberalism is about philosophy and is deeply rooted in social contract theory. John Locke is widely regarded as the father of Classical Liberalism and many of our founding principles are derived from his work, most notably natural rights to life, liberty, and property, although the concept of property rights was and still is very much debated among liberals and Jefferson replaced property with "the pursuit of happiness" in the DOI. Modern libertarians claim to be classical liberals but completely reject the concept of the social contract, which is quite hypocritical since it is the essence of liberalism. Classical Liberalism focuses on rights and has almost nothing to do with economics.

Keynesianism isn't really a form of liberalism, just an economic philosophy based on the work of John Maynard Keynes, who theorized that government spending during economic downturns would fuel demand. His theories were dismissed as nonsense for quite a while until he was later proven to be accurate after the Great Depression when war spending and New Deal policies pulled the economy back together.

Neoliberalism is a political and economic philosophy based on the work of Milton Friedman which focuses on privatization, small government, and a global economy. It is the prevailing philosophy of both parties, even though they try to hide it in their campaign rhetoric. Bill Clinton declared in his 1996 State of the Union address that "the era of big government is over" and proceeded to cut social programs and deregulate banks. The Democratic Party has been entrenched in neoliberalism ever since and this is the basis of criticism of them by the the progressive left.

liberalismizsocool · 5時間前

[removed]

Sharksfan97 · 1時間前

As a side note here for you, if you manage to find my comment in this mess.

Liberalism in general is a grouping of different concepts. A lot of debate that is going on in this post right now is because people understand this. For your own sake I want to make some things clear.

There are two sides to these arguments, SOCIAL and ECONOMIC.

Social liberalism - is rational actor based. It's the idea that two rational people(or states) can sit down and talk out disagreements with each other to come to some sort of consensus. This can be seen in institutions like the U.N. it's a place for the world to come together and make rational decisions and to talk differences out. (However affective that may be)

Economic Liberalism - this is much more complicated. Economic liberalism is where most of these debates are taking place from. Neoliberalism is much more economic orientated then is just normal liberalism and it is heavy on market economics. Most disagreement takes place in this arena.

littlefingerthebrave · 1時間前

Classical liberalism was focused on the restriction of monarchy contre Conservatives, who wanted to increase the power of the king. The big idea behind classical liberalism was that the government should act in the best interests of its citizens, instead of in the interest of the king or a small collection of nobles. Some classical liberals pushed for social welfare spending, most embraced free markets, all rejected the previous system of merchantalist monopoly charters. Classical liberals pushed hard for expanding the rights of the individual in the form of free speech, rule of law, social contract etc. It was so successful that today's conservatives have embraced all the ideas behind classical liberalism.

Old Keynesianism isn't a form of liberalism at all, but it's an economic theory based on the writings of John Manyard Keynes. Essentially that the government should manage aggregate demand downturns through deficit spending. The deficit spending creates a multiplier by putting money into peoples pockets and putting unused resources back to work. The government doesn't need to run anything in Old Keyensian theory, which makes it rather orthogonal to modern liberalism: for example, the government could just declare a tax cut during recessions and raise taxes during booms. There is also a "vulgar" version of this theory promulgated by people like Robert Reich which states that government spending creates a multiplier even in boom times. Modern Keyensians no longer believe the multiplier exists, and think central banks should be the first line of defense managing aggregate demand instead of Congress.

Neoliberalism is essentially the consensus of modern economists, which mostly began in the University of Chicago. The dominant theme is a rejection of old socialism. Neoliberals believe the government should not own the means of production, and recognize that there is an efficiency/fairness tradeoff on social welfare spending. Neoliberalism encompasses a wide range of politics, since each culture has a different view on optimal "fairness." Sweden is run by neoliberals as much as the US, even as the former reserves a much larger role for the government. On the other hand, Venezuela has totally rejected neoliberalism, since the state owns most major industries and their economy minister is an avowed marxist.

shuddup_leonard · 4時間前

Classical liberalism is the same as American libertarianism. It's based off of the notion that government has no right to tell people what to do.

Keynesian economics refers to the economic theory that says that increased government spending in times of economic hardship is good and is commonly what "liberal" American politicians support.

Neoliberalism is largely a derogatory term employed by left academics to describe the international process of installing democracies across the globe and promoting global capitalism and free-market ideology. It's used mostly to describe the ways that late/modern capitalism spreads internationally.

Liberal international theory covers the same concepts of neoliberalism, but is talked about in a positive manner, like talking about Democratic Peace Theory and whatnot.

HiveMindAlpha · 5時間前

Classical liberalism focuses on the freedom of individuals. It is closer related to liberal enlightenment than Keynes' liberalism. Keynes' economic theory puts into practice the act of spending to produce economic stimulus (spending by government rather than saving for capital). Neoliberalism is in favor globalist capitalism. Neoliberalism is often associated to be closer to Classical liberalism although that does not have to be the case.

TheCodeSamurai · 2時間前

Classical liberalism is centered in the idea that everyone has inalienable personal rights, and government's job is really to facilitate that without limiting people's freedom more than necessary.

Keynesianism is not really a political philosophy but an economic one. It's the idea that without people spending money, the economy can't function, and so the best way to help an economy that's struggling is to pour cash into the economy by creating more public jobs or subsidizing businesses, so they can hire more people, and those people can spend more money, and the cycle can resume.

Progressive liberalism (or variants thereof) is focused on the idea that freedom without opportunity isn't very free, and so one of the roles of government is to give people who don't have opportunity the resources they need to exercise their personal rights. However, such a system inherently requires a larger, more powerful government that restrict people's freedom more (for example, you don't have the freedom to pay people a dollar an hour).

Neoliberalism is more pejorative, but a pretty general description would be a form of classical liberalism that emphasizes global connections, essentially governments that are powerful but don't exercise a lot of that power domestically.

The real common points are social freedom and emphasis on personal rights, but the philosophies differ on how to best achieve those rights for everyone.

triscuitsrule · 4時間前

Classical Liberalism: developed during the enlightenment, based on idealism, that government and people are forces of good. Its easiest to understand the core of Classical Liberalism when comparing it to Realism, which states that humans are innately power hungry and selfish. Classical Liberalism rebukes that.

Keynesian Liberalism: the government can cause good economic consequences by being involved in the market (or economy in less academic terms). For example, in the 1930s Keynesian Economics (or Liberalism) was very popular and we saw huge government projects trying to spur the economy. Obama also did this in 2009 with the Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

NeoLiberalism: this is simply modernized liberalism. Conjoin it with Realism, acknowledging that, yes, people are innately selfish and power hungry, but we can also overcome those innate qualities and actually cooperate to be a force of good. NEO-anything is almost always just the modern version of an idea.

The term "liberal" to academics and ordinary people is very different. Academically, it is a political theory. Ordinarily it is a political ideology. Over time that political theory became the basis for politicos (and honestly most of the modern world) so it made sense to call people who believed in liberal principles, Liberals. However, given more time, we have forgotten where that word came from and now think its synonymous with Democrat. Save yourself some trouble, forget the word Liberal has anything to do exclusively with Democrats.

Political Science grad from Michigan State University. Feel free to shoot me any questions, love talking about this stuff.

cwen_bee · 5分前

Everyone has different opinions on specific terms; often seeing radical changes in what those terms actually mean as certain things come in and out of fad.

I can only provide my own personal interpretation which will undoubtedly be wrong in most people's eyes.

Classical liberalism was a rapid response to the fall of monarchism in favor among the masses. Many will try to claim that it is a rejection of government-rule because of this. Equating monarchy with government. These are usually Alt Right people and libertarians who want to imagine Classical Liberal/European thought was more right-wing than it actually was. Classical Liberalism doesn't reject the rule of government; only the rule of a monarch or oligarchy. It still very much respects the authority of the state. European thought actually has a lot of trouble eschewing state authority; even the most ardent right-wing anarchists who bemoan state aggression with pleas towards a 'non-aggression principle' express nothing but approval for the state aggression of the European powers' during the invasion of America.

Keynesian Liberalism is likely a sect of leftists who adhere to Keynesian Economics, which you can read about in better comments than mine.

Neoliberalism might be a bastardization of modern liberalism, in which case it is probably closely related to Keynesian Liberalism. Or alternatively a reference to Milton Friedman's economic philosophy as others have pointed out.

Modern liberalism is a distinction that Alt Right makes to seperate the liberalism from what they consider its golden age from what liberalism/leftism has become today. Most notably, liberalism supported slavery and aggressive expansion into 'barbarian' territory when it was apparently a good concept according to Alt Right philosophers and now that it is against those things(at least verbally to its voter base though its actions are quite similar) liberalism is 'evil'.

Politically, many people make the mistake of trying to be centrist or otherwise seeking an identity on one side or another. What you want to do is mold your politics to suit the problems you are currently facing. Go Left when you have to go to war or deal with some disaster(this is why the Left always pushes climate change as an extinction event; it sets a table in which liberalism will always win). You want a right wing government during peace time.

pantheismnow · 3時間前

Liberal has a bunch of different meanings (conservative more so even) but I'll explain some of the major ones.

Classical liberal: Essentially libertarians if you know what those are. Personal freedom is highly valued here, socially and economically.

Progressive Liberalism: People started thinking that classical liberalism was leading to unfair results, not leading to maximized freedom. They think that equality of opportunity is important and believe that if you start super poor you're not free to do whatever, essentially. So they're economically more leftist (taxes and regulations) but they're generally socially liberal (gay marriage, etc.)

Keynesianism isn't a form of liberalism

Neoliberalism is a bit like the old classical liberalism but on an international scale. It includes reducing barriers to free trade nationally and internationally and deregulation.

CooperArt · 3時間前

One thing to add specifically about Liberalism: liberalism is based on the idea that humans are rational and can best decide what is in their best interest. Government is artificial, according to a liberal. (According to a conservative, government is natural and necessary. This is why many, if not most classical conservatives are religious: it's a government supported by their higher power. Humans are naturally selfish, and "evil." Government, society, can make them better people. Obviously both the Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. are technically liberals, but you can see pieces of core conservative beliefs in the Republican party.)

roland00 · 28分前

Keynesian Liberalism believes an underactive economy is a market failure, and government intervention is necessary to promote demand and such in an underemployed economy. The Government has a place in the economy.
Neoliberalism, believes too much governmental intervention in the economy leads to a lack of innovation and misaligned incentives that hinders growth. Get the government out of my economy.
Classical Liberalism is more focused on economic property rights and does not really concern itself with is the economy working towards its full potential.

throwarambe · 4時間前

Classical liberalism is a playground with no parents around. It might be unsafe and other kids might get hurt, but you think it's pretty fun if you're not the one who fell off the swings and skinned their knee.

Keynes said we need a bit of balance. Maybe a parent there to yell at you when you go too far. They tell you to share the swings after you've had it for a while. Mostly everyone still gets to have fun and do what they want, but the parent makes it fairer and safer.

Neoliberalism is when the teenage bullies turn up and chase off the parents. They're bigger and stronger, but not because they have any particular talent or worked hard to get there. They change the rules to suit themselves; instead of sharing time on the swings whoever got there first gets to have it until someone stronger comes along.

Some of the kids (particularly the ones who skinned their knees or never get to play on the swings) think the teenagers getting rid of the parents will make it more fun and better for them.

Edit: removed socialism.

roland00 · 21分前

The stranger (a news media group in Seattle Washington) recently had a podcast where they discuss the origin of the term Neoliberal, and it is a great starting point to people unfamiliar with the term.

http://www.thestranger.com/blabbermouth/2016/08/24/24505892/this-week-on-the-blabbermouth-podcast-wtf-is-a-neoliberal

They start the conversation of what is a neoliberal at 9:50 and discuss how the term evolved from the former austrian economics and it became a serious idea in the 1970s

Beesfield · 1時間前

Classical Liberalism: individual rights, if you can enforce them. Capitalist market, Government does very little.

Keynesian Liberalism: Capitalist market, Government engages in countercyclical spending to smooth out booms & busts.

Neo-Liberalism: Capitalist market, Government engages in constant small-scale warfare to keep defense industry employed.

thetwigman21 · 22分前

"THEY ALL SUCK AND WANT TO BANG YOUR RIGHTS IN THE ASS WHILE KILLARY KILLS ALL YOUR FAMILY AND LAUGHS"- Trump Supporters, probably.

wumbotarian · 4時間前

Keynesian economics is a macroeconomics research program from the 40s through the 70s. It has nothing to do with political philosophy aside from policy recommendations (which economists do regardless of field).

unchartered12 · 1時間前

Many of the answers here seem to be missing the relationship between economic liberalism and political liberalism (i.e. the political theory known as liberalism which is developed by international relations theorists).

That is, there is a belief held by certain liberals (i.e. followers of the international relations theory known as liberalism) that economic interdependence between countries is (the best) means of lowering the likelihood of war.

The connection here between the political and economic philosophies is the focus on markets. For example, neoliberalism (the economic theory) emphasizes the power of markets to achieve economic success without government intervention. Similarly, liberal political theorists argue that markets achieve political peace and stability without government intervention. In both cases, markets are said to achieve good things on their own.

Related to both of these is the political liberal idea known as the democratic peace theory. This is the theory that democracies are less likely to go to war. Democracies can be understood as countries which have non-authoritarian governments (i.e. classical liberal principles). Put together, this means that countries which are less likely to intervene in their people and markets ('classical liberal'), are less likely to go to war.

Obviously, all of theories have had strong critiques, and come with many caveats.

Edit: Wrong word.

heyyoudvd · 2時間前

Neoliberalism doesn't exist.

It's a made-up term that recently became popular as a derogatory way to attack modern conservatism.

de_co · 16分前

What about Libertarianism ?

mike_pants · 2時間前

[removed]

itsfaygopop · 1時間前

Although this is an interesting question to me, how can this possibly be answered as an ELI5? Or have I misunderstood the point of this sub?

Sanders-Chomsky-Marx · 3時間前

I don't know if or not this is acceptable here, but linguist and intellectual Noam Chomsky has a video on liberalism.

timehorde · 18分前

Gary Oldman explains Keynesian economics https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=7zsl95ZUPTU

explainlikeimfive

Before posting

Category filters

調停者