I mean, sure, the term can be misused. But “neoliberal” was adopted by Hayek, Mises, Friedman et. al. to describe their philosophy of liberty, capitalism, and free market policies. So it’s not completely inappropriate to associate “neoliberal” with those principles.
Do you have sources on this? I did a quick research and the only thing that I found was this article that argues that Neoliberalism definition changed over time and it would be an anachronism to take how the therm is used today (for example in this post) to define what they mean at the time, and the closest definition for them would be liberals, not neoliberals anymore. Which is totally fine given the time that has passed, and specially how political definitions are hard to define without context (example on how we consider left and right nowadays and 200 years ago for example, its not the same ideas)
This entry explicates neoliberalism by examining the political concepts, principles, and policies shared by F. A. Hayek, Milton Friedman, and James Buchanan, all of whom play leading roles in the new historical research on neoliberalism, and all of whom wrote in political philosophy as well as political economy. Identifying common themes in their work provides an illuminating picture of neoliberalism as a coherent political doctrine.
…
But several recent book-length treatments of neoliberalism (Burgin 2012; Biebricher 2018; Slobodian 2018; Whyte 2019) have helped give form to an arguably inchoate political concept. As Quinn Slobodian argues,
in the last decade, extraordinary efforts have been made to historicize neoliberalism and its prescriptions for global governance, and to transform the “political swearword” or “anti-liberal slogan” into a subject of rigorous archival research. (2018: 3)
Along similar lines, Thomas Biebricher (2018: 8–9) argues that neoliberalism no longer faces greater analytic hurdles than other political positions like conservatism or socialism.
In light of this recent historical work, we are now in a position to understand neoliberalism as a distinctive political theory. Neoliberalism holds that a society’s political and economic institutions should be robustly liberal and capitalist, but supplemented by a constitutionally limited democracy and a modest welfare state. Neoliberals endorse liberal rights and the free-market economy to protect freedom and promote economic prosperity. Neoliberals are broadly democratic, but stress the limitations of democracy as much as its necessity. And while neoliberals typically think government should provide social insurance and public goods, they are skeptical of the regulatory state, extensive government spending, and government-led countercyclical policy. Thus, neoliberalism is no mere economic doctrine.
I mean, sure, the term can be misused. But “neoliberal” was adopted by Hayek, Mises, Friedman et. al. to describe their philosophy of liberty, capitalism, and free market policies. So it’s not completely inappropriate to associate “neoliberal” with those principles.
Do you have sources on this? I did a quick research and the only thing that I found was this article that argues that Neoliberalism definition changed over time and it would be an anachronism to take how the therm is used today (for example in this post) to define what they mean at the time, and the closest definition for them would be liberals, not neoliberals anymore. Which is totally fine given the time that has passed, and specially how political definitions are hard to define without context (example on how we consider left and right nowadays and 200 years ago for example, its not the same ideas)
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/05/history-of-neoliberal-meaning/528276/
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/neoliberalism/
…
… etc …
The actual work of Milton Friedman and co. should work best for that, they don’t hide it! ;)
“Neoliberalism and Its Prospects”. 1951
https://digitalcollections.hoover.org/objects/57816