 The use of the term “neoliberalism” in this entry does not fit all uses of the term. Thus, the goal is less to explain what “neoliberalism” really means in all its uses, but rather to proffer a meaning based on three criteria. First, the term “neoliberalism” should be used to denote a fairly coherent set of positions. Second, it should be used to capture the views of those figures most often associated with the position. Finally, we should focus on capturing the most serious and even-handed uses of the term, such as by academic historians, rather than more popular and pejorative uses of “neoliberalism”. This essay’s account of the meaning of the term satisfies all three criteria. It identifies a coherent doctrine understood in light of the views of its proponents, and its use of the term overlaps with the more careful uses of the term by recent academic historians. We pursue all three aims by locating common commitments in the thought of Hayek, Friedman, and Buchanan.