Chris Burford wrote:
>
>
> My understanding is that the term neo-liberalism is used widely in Europe
> and Latin America as a banner of resistance to the market fundamentalism
> with which the IMF and the international finance trader imposed their
> interests on most of the world.
>
Neo-Liberalism in Latin America is associated with IMF policies towards LDCs. Traditionally, the left has fougth against what we (latinos) call "neo-liberals" (i.e. the conservative right). Neo-liberals are pro-market fundamentalism. I do not know where our concept of "liberals" began to differentiate from what our "northen brothers" think about liberalism.
On the other hand, those "liberals" close to Milton Friedman. et.al do not even want international institutions such IMF, WB, etc. because they (the institutions.....) are a threat to individual freedom to decide whatever one wants to do.
My country (Uruguay) traditionally has had "non-liberal" policies. Once we were called the "Latin American Swistzerland (sp?)" due to our pro-social economic policies. The State still have a lot of relevance in terms of being the owner of companies operating in such fields as energy, cement production, telephones, etc.
Juan
> "Liberal" is a term with many contradictory meanings, which can only be
> analysed through a historical materialist approach.
>
> Chris Burford
>
> London