Catallaxy ® Institute - Classical Liberalism

though I have all my life described myself as a liberal, I have done so more recently with increasing misgivings (...). If liberalism still meant what it meant to an English historian who in 1827 could speak of the revolution of 1688 as 'the triumph of those principles which in the language of the present day are denominated liberal or constitutional' or if one could still, with Lord Acton, speak of Burke, Macaulay, and Gladstone as the three greatest liberals, or if one could still, with Harold Laski, regard Tocqueville and Lord Acton as 'the essential liberals of the nineteenth century', I should be only too proud to describe myself by that name. But, much as I am tempted to call their liberalism true liberalism, I must recognize that the majority of Continental liberals stood for ideas to which these men were strongly opposed, and that they were led more by a desire to impose upon the world a preconceived rational pattern than to provide opportunity for free growth. The same is largely true for what has called itself Liberalism in England at least since the time of Lloyd George. It is thus necessary to recognize that what I have called 'liberalism' has little to do with any political movement that goes under that name today. (...) In the United States, where it has become almost impossible to use "liberal" in the sense in which I have used it, the term "libertarian" has been used instead.

Hayek, F.A.

The constitution of liberty

1999 , p. 407