Abstract
In this paper two basic policy paradigms are distinguished: updated liberalism that is fully aware of the limits to markets and therefore aims at their active regulation, and neo-liberalism that is based on market fundamentalism and aims at privatisation, deregulation and budgetary austerity. The paper discusses how updated liberalism emerged after W.W.II, became hegemonic in the 1950s and 1960s and started to decline in the 1970s, while neo-liberalism gathered momentum in the 1970s and became hegemonic in the 1980s and 1990s. This historical examination suggests that neo-liberalism is inconsistent not only with the updated liberalism of Keynes and Pigou (and their followers) but also with the classical liberalism of Adam Smith and Stuart Mill, resembling rather the simplistic and over-optimistic laisser-faire of Say and Bastiat. Concluding remarks discuss the connections between the historical pattern observed in the evolution of markets and the parallel evolution of paradigms of liberalism observed in the history of economic thought.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
