A ver te muestro lo que he encontrado.
Liberalism - 1. a political orientation that favors social progress by reform and by changing laws rather than by revolution. an economic theory advocating free competition and a self-regulating market.
Libertarianism - an ideological belief in freedom of thought and speech.
Esa es en una página americana.
Otra:
Libertarianism
The single rule of governance for libertarians: "In a free society individuals may not initiate the use of force against another individual or group" Let's just broaden the word "force" to "coerce." All party members must take an oath to this pledge.
Thus, according to
libertarian principle,
the above maxim is the MEANS, and liberalism's principles of equality, freedom, self-rule, justice, fairness, etc., are the ENDS. That is false!
Liberalism
According to
liberalism, the liberal principles of equality, freedom, self-rule, justice, fairness, etc. are not the ends in themselves, but the MEANS, and
maximal human flourishing in society is its END.
Equality serves
human flourishing,
not that
non-coercion serves
equality. In liberal society, human flourishing is
achieved through equality, freedom, fairness, autonomy, justice, due process, etc.
Confusing MEANS for ENDS is a corruption of 18th C.
liberalism which has come to be named libertarianism. Liberal principles are the MEANS in liberalism to maximal human flourishing; liberal principles are the ENDS for libertarians.
Examples
For example, the
freedom to exchange requires an ability to do so. To claim it, but to give no evidence of it, is just empty rhetoric. So, if the
freedom to exchange meets a cartel of monopolistic holders of the terms and conditions of the contract (e.g., "sign or else") or is the sole supplier, any semblance of "freedom" under such a conditions is bogus. Any claim to "contract" with non-negotiable terms and conditions, or with a sole supplier, or both, is not
freedom of exchange in any meaningful sense. Thus, the free and fair market are MEANS to the END of human flourishing, not the ENDS in themselves as CATO Institute repeatedly claims falsely.
As another example, what value or meaning has "freedom to exchange" if one is ill, starving, or homeless? None!
Basic goods (i.e., primary goods) are antecedent to
political goods -- ontologically, historically, and of modal necessity. Liberalism recognizes the preemptive privilege of basic goods over political goods, while espousing both, not either/or. Thus, those with surplus basic goods are obligated by the social contract of liberalism to support the weak, infirm, or needy not of their own making. Not, so, claims libertarians. Confiscating surplus wealth to redistribute to the needy is theft (but hoarding surplus wealth from the needy is not?). Again, confusion of means for ends.
Lamento que sea un poco largo pero lo pego porque a mí me resulto muy útil. Esta página también es americana. Más bien, habiendo leído esto, me parece que no es tanto una diferencia de significados sino un MAL USO de términos el que te llevó a plantearte esta duda.
¡Saludos!
