Thread by @shrikanth_krish

19th century liberalism (in Anglosphere) contained multiple strands, often contradicting each other

1. Gladstonian liberalism in UK
2. Jacksonian Democracy in US
3. Whig interventionism
4. Tory radicalism (Disraeli)

https://twitter.com/VVD_is_daddy/status/1189550814148186112

All these strands have impacted both 20th century liberalism and 20th cen conservatism

1. Gladstonian liberalism championed free trade, middle class values, religious liberty

2. Jacksonian Democracy: Populism, universal male suffrage, anti-elitism, laissez faire, states rights

3. Whigs in US : Protectionism, modernization, strong energetic central govt, economic interventionism

4. Tory Radicalism : A liberal, paternalistic strand within British conservative politics - protection for workers in factories, slum clearance, early signs of welfare

Now not all these strands self-identified as "liberal" back in the 19th century

Though each one of them had radical elements

And each of them have left an imprint on 20th century politics

E.g. The so-called "conservative" Politics of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher is in my view a curious mix of Jacksonian populism and Gladstonian liberalism

Talking points being free trade, laissez faire, limited government, anti-elitism

The big government radicalism of Roosevelt is in part influenced by Whig ideas from 1830s-40s US on one hand, and a paternalistic instinct first spotted among Tories of Disraeli's period

What's new in late 20th / early 21st century liberalism is a certain social radicalism that questions cultural norms / mores

That emerges more from Marxism and post-modernism, neither of which was anywhere close to the four 19th century strands I mentioned

So the social radicalism we see in say Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren has little in common with anything in Gladstone or Jackson, Henry Clay or Disraeli

It's got more to do with Marx, Foucault, Sartre than any figure from 19th century