Second part of a series entitled Global Ideology and Human Value by Sunny Lee, Founder and President at CGPS (Center for Global Peace and Security), and Director at IKUPD (Institute for Korea-U.S. Political Development), Washington DC.
Compared to current democracy, liberalism surely seems more advanced ideology, considering individual freedom and rights as the prime condition by evolving democratic core values. Liberalism emphasizes market economy based on free competition while limiting government intervention in the opposite concept of authoritarianism. As focusing on individual rights, it also propels capital globalism for economic prosperity from individual to global stage.
Furthermore, in the 1980s, neoliberalism—an offshoot of liberalism—was widespread throughout the world, minimizing the role of the state to maximize the effectiveness of the free-market economy, with notable results in the United States and the United Kingdom.
However, overwhelming free markets and individual negligence out of responsibility have caused aggravation of inequality between the rich and poor, environmental disaster due to excessive development and monetary crisis without government’s pertinent control. They would destroy social welfare systems as well as a dilapidated national economy so that many countries struggled to recover their economies while discarding such a monstrous phantom of neoliberalism. Nonetheless, liberalism and neoliberalism became an important opportunity to rethink the government’s role and responsibility to reinforce individual rights and economic prosperity. Currently, the tariff war agitates global free markets and trade but it subsequently turns to reorganize the global economy with potentially independent architecture.
On September 18, 2025, Dina Sherif at MIT Kuo Sharper Center presented ‘the New Calculus of Prosperity’ signifying the rise of global growth markets as the new engine of progress. Although economic development has been measured through GDP and macroeconomic indicators across global growth markets, rising growth rates would be increased by expanding infrastructure and deeper integration into the global economy. She initiated a new paradigm as a core concept of liberalism for economic prosperity not by the size of economies but by the equal opportunities created for people, the resilience of systems, and the fairness of outcomes. For a better process, it would be driven by entrepreneurs, anchored in innovation, and built on sustainability and inclusion as non-negotiables.
The IMF’s 2025 World Economic Outlook also indicates that emerging markets and developing economies are projected to grow at 3.7% in 2026, nearly three times the pace of advanced economies. As well, World Economics reports a sharper contrast of 5.7% growth with a structural, long-term shift as growth markets leapfrog outdated systems and pioneer new development pathways. For example, the GCC (the Gulf Cooperation Council) countries such as the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Oman control over $4.2 trillion in sovereign wealth assets. They operate the world’s most advanced trade hubs with rapid non-oil GDP growth at rates above 4% per year. It potentially guarantees the fast recovery after the Iran War to foster independent global markets.
Liberalism versus Neoliberalism
As a distinct political ideology reshaping international order, liberalism and neoliberalism both emphasize not only individual freedom but also limited government intervention. However, their approach to economic policies comes with different aspects. For example, liberalism represents a mixed economy with a pertinent balance between free markets and government regulation, ensuring social welfare and equal opportunities. In contrast, neoliberalism prioritizes absolute laissez-faire economics, signifying extreme functions of free markets, deregulation, and privatization beyond government intervention or control. With a greater preference on economic efficiency, neoliberalism advocates that free market capitalism drives economic growth and development by diminishing government social welfare.
First, it is the critical difference of economic policy. Liberalism favors government regulation to protect workers, consumers and the entrepreneur environment in addition to the market economy. But neoliberalism promotes free trade, privatization and deregulation to stimulate economic prosperity. As a result, neoliberalism propels monopoly and inequality in global markets as well as capital flow so that giant global companies dominate the world economy.
Second, it is a fair income distribution to boost equal rights. While liberalism reduces income inequality through progressive taxation and social welfare programs, neoliberalism prefers trickle-down effect to benefit all lower levels of society but its outcome is not much considerable. For example, tax reduction would enhance not only the government’s tax loss as hampering welfare policies but also inequality without incentivizing reinvestment, consumption or job creation. In addition, mitigation of regulations and barriers to trade wouldn’t lead to increased competition and efficiency in the markets.
Third, it is social justice that liberalism emphasizes social equality and opportunities for all individuals on the condition of freedom and rights. On the other hand, neoliberalism focuses on economic efficiency while pursuing simple interests rather than social justice. As a result, severe ignorance and non-responsibility related to entrepreneur ethics and human rights deteriorate global standards of social justice.
Fourth, it is globalization that liberalism supports international cooperation and global institutions to cope with variable challenges. In contrast, neoliberalism takes globalization and free trade as a means to promote economic growth no matter what critical obstacles damage the global scale of the economic environment. In particular, Trump’s excessive tariffs to other countries would mess up global trade and free markets as it would overturn the economic order and system. The Iran War in the Middle East also suffocates oil supply routes and freezes world markets.
Liberalism advocates international cooperation, multilateralism, and the establishment of international institutions to explore the importance of diplomacy, human rights, and the rule of law in shaping international relations. As a result, free trade agreements have become a priority for global efforts to fulfil sustainable development. Neoliberalism also poses a stronger emphasis on market forces and economic integration so that their benefits return to participating countries by increasing efficiency and expanding markets.
Especially, reducing trade barriers such as tariffs and quotas propels global economic growth and solidarity. At this point, free trade agreements to flourish global economic prosperity have effectively conducted their missions in the secure environment of globalization. Liberalism and neoliberalism both would signify the shortest pathway in global trade and free markets beyond national boundaries, surpassing governments’ direct control or intervention.
Capital Globalism for Economic Prosperity
Capital globalism is the main concept of liberalism and neoliberalism at the same time as the most important element. Neoliberalism is a political and economic ideology based on worldwide syndrome of ‘globalization of capital’ rising in the 1970s. To achieve economic prosperity through capital globalism, international trade agreements to enhance market access have been primary strategies by investing technology and innovation to drive productivity. While promoting foreign direct investment to stimulate local economies, collaboration between governments and private sectors would be also encouraged to implement sustainable practices to ensure long-term growth.
Capital globalization is a critical factor for a prospective dynamic revealing bidirectional relationship with economic growth and expansion of economies across various regions. It has been proved through a comprehensive analysis of 97 countries over 51 years in Asia, Africa, Europe, North/South America, and Oceania, enhancing regional integration and sustainable development. In particular, the use of technology and the development of comprehensive globalization strategies would leverage the globalization-growth stance.
Nonetheless, future challenges of the capital world should be considered for global economic prosperity. The path of economic growth can be signified by the prospects of innovation but simultaneously shadowed by the challenges of sustainability and inequality. While the powerful capitalist engine has driven economic expansion, disparities and exhausting natural resources would be enhanced subsequently. The future of economic growth in such a parallel condition could be vulnerable to navigate complex dynamics.
Technological advancement unlocks new frontiers of economic activity that the rise of artificial intelligence(AI) and automation leads to significant productivity achievement. However, it also poses the risk of job displacement and requires a rethinking of labor markets and educational systems. As well, environmental sustainability is an additional factor as the climate crisis becomes more handicap for sustainable growth. Nonetheless, the transition to a green economy offers opportunities for innovation through the development of renewable energy technologies while demanding a reconfiguration of existing industries and energy infrastructures.
Globalization through the interconnectedness of global markets would bear a double-edged effect in future. Unless the efficient allocation of resources and access to broader markets are guaranteed, it might also expose economies to global shocks and competitive pressures leading to economic instability. Especially, inequality of the capitalist system exacerbates income and wealth disparities undermining social cohesion and consumer demand. Nonetheless, effective governance facilitates innovation, manages risks, and ensures that benefits of growth are shared to address economic stagnation or crisis.
First of all, toward the successful route of capital globalization, the quality of human capital and education is a fundamental condition to propel economic growth. In particular, investing education and training high technologies become crucial to equip individuals with the skills needed for economic prosperity of the future. At this point, Korea is the most successful case of technological leap in the 21st century. With a sufficient national budget in education and technology, Korea has been transformed from a war-torn country to a leading global innovator with the top first industrial as well as military technologies to take over global markets. Global technologies such as semiconductor, OLED display, shipbuilding, 5G network and AI exemplify how targeted national policies can explore the potential of economic growth within a capitalist framework.
Neoliberalism and Liberal Democracy
Neoliberalism derived from European liberal ideology during the 1930s gives way to a social liberal desire to control markets. This shift was shaped by the Great Depression on the purpose to mitigate the volatility of capitalist free markets and later, to address the stagflation of the 1970s through oil crisis. The dissolution of the Soviet Union and the termination of the Cold War also propelled the rise of neoliberalism in the U.S., the UK and around the world. Those countries adapted economic liberalization policies such as owner taxes, privatization, labor market flexibilization, economic globalization, free trade, and monetarism.
Since neoliberalism mainly influenced by Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan shifted economic control from government to the private sector, it has advocated lesser government intervention, focusing on free-market capitalism and fiscal austerity. During the mid-1980s, neoliberalism became a worldwide syndrome impacting on economies and societies that many countries applied to reform their economic systems and policies. As a result, multinational enterprises: for example, Apple Inc., Coca Cola Company and Macdonald’s corporation rapidly emerged as expanding production and sales simultaneously in the global markets.
Three major countries have explored neoliberalism as experiencing economic prosperity and decline at the same time, fully exposing such a national crisis of liberal democracy. Although neoliberalism has led the world economy, it finally encounters drastic dilemmas and obstacles with excessive belief related to the free market’s self-function so that government’s role and responsibility would be highlighted through its original function again.
First, it is the UK which initiated neoliberalism with the U.S in the 1980s. Over the last 40 years so far, its successive governments are categorized by New Labor (1997–2010) and the Conservative/Liberal Democrats coalition (2010–2015). Even after 2015, the conservative government remained committed to a form of neoliberalism based on outdated concepts, particularly during the financial crisis of 2007–2009. In 2020, the coronavirus crisis paradoxically led to excessive increases in the minimum wage, triggering an economic collapse.
From the mid-1980s, British neoliberalism widely spread beyond the UK’s borders, especially in the context of EU integration. However, the UK left the EU in January 2020 to focus on a ‘Global Britain’ strategy for a free-market open to the wider world. Since then, the British government has eagerly and pragmatically integrated the neoliberal model into the country’s political and economic policies, incorporating social aspects to assign them a more significant role and function. In the 42 years since the start of the liberal counterrevolution, economic neoliberalism has remained the guiding principle of the British economy.
Second, it is the U.S. in the decline of neoliberalism and the battle for economic democracy. For decades, economic policy in the United States was relatively shaped by a stable neoliberal consensus. As a result, trade liberalization, deregulation, market primacy, private capital, and financial interests were treated as economic inevitabilities rather than as political choices. However, such a neoliberal consensus would be recently fractured by Trump’s dogmatic nationalism with an economic crisis including trade, monetary policy and public ownership. This shift in US policy has caused countries and regions to respond to their own trade-related countermeasures, forcing them to rethink their dependence on global supply chains and imports in an increasingly unstable economic and political world.
Nevertheless, the United States still considers a genuine opening to fully break the failed neoliberal past and move toward a future originated in economic democracy, shared prosperity, and ecological sustainability as a global leader. Free trade and globalization in the global stage have been a cornerstone of the neoliberal initiatives and the U.S. will keep up such a leading stance in future as signifying liberal democracy.
Third, it is France as the Europe’s second-largest economy which struggles with the incredible public debit of Debit/GDP 115.16% and total debt of $4 trillion, initiating IMF’s bailout. Such a financial crisis basically comes from excessive social welfare spending, aging population, incompetent pandemic response, energy crisis and high interest rate. France has been filled with severe demonstrations caused by angry people against fiscal austerity to cut down the welfare budget. As a result, Macron keeping up neoliberal vision in France would be cautious about the American economic model with overwhelming market preference.
On August 25, 2025, Prime Minister Bayrou stunned political allies that he would call for a vote in the National Assembly for neoliberal budget proposals. He affirmed that it is the only way to rescue France from its ailing finances, avoiding the collapse of urgent government. Bayrou exploited such distressful images by invoking the Greek debt crisis of the early 2010s as a warning of what would happen to France. However, through typical neoliberal policies, Bayrou failed all along to realize that average French citizens recognize the realities running a budget deficit of 5.8% of GDP. They are socially frustrated because of neoliberal economic measures proposed for addressing their financial distress. If principles of neoliberal capitalism brought France’s financial crisis, then neoliberalism couldn’t be the right answer in France.
Individual Freedom and Rights in Liberal Society
Liberalism shaped modern Western thought, institutions and societies as one of the most influential and perennial political ideologies. Emerging from ideological enlightenment, liberalism considers the individual as the heart of its core value, emphasizing rationality, liberty, and equality. The critical ideas and principles of liberalism signify how they relate to human nature, state, society and economy to explore individual freedom and rights.
Liberalism advocates that liberal society is composed of autonomous individuals, each with their own distinct interests and aspirations, boosting economic prosperity for better opportunities. As well, neoliberalism prefers minimal interference, laissez-faire economics, and the belief that society flourishes when individuals are free to act within the legal boundaries. It affirms that all individuals are of equal value, and should be treated fairly before the law with the liberal vision of society.
Nonetheless, liberalism would explode the fiscal crisis with gigantic national debt in many countries due to excessive wealth spending and social discrepancy in the process of interest distribution. Neoliberalism has also initiated economic monopoly in global markets and trade beyond government’s role and responsibility. Ironically, the free market economy brought out not only the Great Depression but also the 2008 financial crisis, agitating the global economic system itself that global financial groups were forced into bankruptcy such as Lehman Brothers. Currently, the global economy faces another symptom of collapse caused by the tariff war demolishing free markets and trade.
Free market economy based on liberalism and neoliberalism should be compensated by enhancing the government’s role for endurable resilience and sustainability. Governments must reinforce Antitrust Law and practice the Monopoly Regulation and Fair-Trade Acts in global markets. Moreover, redistribution of wealth and minimum wage system will reduce income gap and protect socially disadvantaged groups. Environmental crises can be also resolved by balancing market interests and protection of ecosystems with technological investment. Through business ethics management and stronger standard indicators, the triple strategy of environment, market and governance should advance toward sustainable growth.
Therefore, liberalism and neoliberalism focusing on a free market economy that most countries still pursue for economic growth and prosperity will achieve individual freedom and rights in liberal society. It is possible when the market and government share their value and simultaneously cooperate with each other to conduct their role and function.
Author: Sunny Lee – Founder and President at CGPS (Center for Global Peace and Security), and Director at IKUPD (Institute for Korea – U.S. Political Development), Washington DC. Sunny Lee is the author of 115 academic books in politics (original English and in German, French, Russian, Polish, Dutch, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese). She is a bestseller writer not only in politics but also in literature on Amazon. Her recent book is titled: “The Influence on Humankind’s Peace through Korean Reunification: Creating new paradigm in social science by interdisciplinary research.”
(The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of World Geostrategic Insights).
READ ALSO: Part 1 Democracy and Human Value – Ideological Transformation for Human Society