SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 19 Mar 2013 14:48:00 -0700
Reply-To:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: Political use of the word "liberals"
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
In-Reply-To:
<49038DD273B2DA4CA5F728C9393DD36C3441AE40@vmwin209>
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From:
michael perelman <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines) 
Franklin Roosevelt renamed liberal to mean progressive as opposed to
the European form of liberalism.

On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Leonidas Montes <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I was reading a book by Stedman Jones ("Masters of the Universe") and somewhere he mentions that the word liberal acquired a political connotation (Republican versus Liberals) in the early 20th century. After reading Scgumpeter and Hayek on this issue,  I had the impression that this conflation emerged during the second world war.
>
> Does anyone know when and how it actually happened?
>
> Leonidas Montes



-- 
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA
95929

530 898 5321
fax 530 898 5901
http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com

ATOM RSS1 RSS2