Because the technical definition of ‘liberal’ is somebody who has buy in to the idealogy of liberalism1. According to the original left vs. right wing of the French National Assembly “liberals” were left wing and “conservatives”, aka monarchists, were right wing.
That was nearly 250 years ago.
In the modern era where monarchies are mostly extinct the way that an individual achieves the modern equivalent of the “divine right of kings” is via the “right to private property”. So both it and conservatism are fighting to fill the niche that once held the monarchists, the fight is whether it should be wealthy corporations or a religious monarchy that fills it. It should go without saying that these are both extremely far right positions.
1 also worth reading a bit about the technical definition/understandings of neoliberalism
Because the technical definition of ‘liberal’ is somebody who has buy in to the idealogy of liberalism1. According to the original left vs. right wing of the French National Assembly “liberals” were left wing and “conservatives”, aka monarchists, were right wing.
That was nearly 250 years ago.
In the modern era where monarchies are mostly extinct the way that an individual achieves the modern equivalent of the “divine right of kings” is via the “right to private property”. So both it and conservatism are fighting to fill the niche that once held the monarchists, the fight is whether it should be wealthy corporations or a religious monarchy that fills it. It should go without saying that these are both extremely far right positions.
1 also worth reading a bit about the technical definition/understandings of neoliberalism