As I said, that's the US sense of it. Liberal means 'literally' freedom for all. Though, liberals being the ideology of the Enlightment, all three of "liberty, equality, fraternity" were present, even if with changing weights.

The converse is privilege for some. Sometimes it is simple plutocracy, but other times there is a hint of the "philosopher king" or wise ruler model.

And sometimes it is a delusion of meritocracy, as in the case of many 18th-19th century British and not just British liberals.

I think I see too much of the top down model of governance in the various versions of "liberalism" for comfort. I think this blurring of the fundamental axiom of democracy is deliberate.

It definitely discomforts me, too, but it's easy from my position :-) However, I suggest that the same top-down attitude is reflected in the US Founding Fathers' fears of direct democracy, ideas about the Senate and the electoral college, and the lack of universal suffrage they had initially in most (all?) states.

_{*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.}