Liberalism - what’s in a name?

Abstract

[Introduction]: Like the play, this paper disputes the answer given by Juliet’s fantasy. It does so in the context of academic debate by showing that the use of a name, ‘liberalism’ in this case, can have significant implications for political and historical analysis. My aim, in fact, is to question conventional academic characterisations of liberalism and to suggest that the adoption of a different usage not only serves to clarify liberal governmental practice – including many of the recent developments which, for want of a better name, tend to be grouped together under the label of neo-liberalism – but also to provide a fuller and more powerful account of the work of central figures in the liberal tradition. Specifically, the characterisations I wish to dispute present liberalism as focused essentially on one or more of the following concerns: - relations between the state and its subjects; - the promotion and defense of individual liberty; - and, as a special case of the second, the promotion and defense of private property.