The term liberal became corrupted in the US some time under FDR’s reign to mean the opposite of its classical definition. Is this something that is unique to the US, or has this corruption occured elsewhere?
To the best of my knowledge, the ‘new’ meaning is widespread in Europe, too. Welcome to Newspeak.
Im curious, in which countries does liberal still mean the 19th century definition?
Australia?
I would speculate that the liberal and socialist movements began to merge around the same time JS Mill’s utilitarian ethics got the best of him.
In Australia, the “Liberal Party” follows the doctrine of liberal conservatism, or conservative liberalism - take your pick.
Frequently one will have to identify themselves as a “small L liberal” to make the distinction. In this sense the word has the same definition as it does in the US and Europe.
Every mainstream political view in Germany, including the so-called liberals, supports the idea of a “social market economy” where government uses its beneficial powers to bust the trusts, regulate working hours and conditions or bail out some important players. “Market-conforming measures”, this is called.
If you’re a liberal, however, you promote especially those market-conforming measures that benefit big business or some other concentrated special interest like big farming or big medicine. And accordingly, liberalism means, for most common folks, “I support big everything”.
The liberal and socialist movements started out as one and the same fighting aristocratic conservatism. To be a liberal meant support for equal rights, translating into universal franchise democracy. It was only much later that the economic liberals and political liberals did not have the same ends in sight.
Yes, in Australia…
The Liberal Party is like the republican party… in all sense of the word and in policy mostly… They tow the conservative line.
Labor Party is the (democrats)… and the oldest Labor party in the world.