Quite, I refer to mainstream American contempary "Liberalism" that has become a new label for leftist. It has become attatched to the ideology of the Socialists, it undermines the more important aspects of liberalism such as minimal role of government and true universal human rights, contempary liberalism embraces state welfare and interference into peoples lives, control of economics and seeks to increase the role of government than reduce it. I see this as a threat to individual liberty, by making the people dependent on the state it adds unwarrented interference into peoples lives and increases the role of the state, both things I do not like. Government is a neccisary evil, I am not an anarchist however I have no love for government.
I subscribe to the concepts that the ideal state of man is freedom. That the only way to guarantee a lasting peace is through removing despotism the world over, that when given the option (in a stable environment) people will rather live free. I couple this with a strong distrust of government, government in any form is there to maintain control over society however over time it grows, the controls become tighter and eventually the entire system shifts from libertarian to authoritarian, thats bad. Systems of government must be held to scrutiny and held to account for any actions, if you remove the right of the people to openly question their rulers then badness follows. Human rights and the rights of the individual are also very high on what I hold dear, I loath any system that removes individuality from the equation, that is one reason that I cannot stand authoritarian systems that demand total compliance and the expence of individuality. Freedom of religious expression and tollerance are also important, however I will make it quite clear that I have no tollerance of intollerance, if someone desires to exterminate me because of my beliefs and who I am then I will fight to protect them, there is nothing at all wrong with fighting to preserve freedom and standing up to despotism, if as a society we become complacent and allow our liberties to be undermined from an external threat or from within then the entire system is not worth protecting, it should be overthrown in a revolution and rebuilt from the ground up.
Communism, Fascism and Islamism are the three big bads in my book, they are all examples of systems where the state gains to much power and the rights of the individual are crushed, we vanquished Communism and Fascism and the world is better for it Islamism however is a very different problem. Unlike the two former it does not have a state entity to represent it, rather a loose collective of states that subsribe to its fundamentalist ideology to varying degrees, it is spread out all over the world and seeks to establish Islam or more specifically the fundamentalist authoritarian system that the Islamists desire as the only form of governence. A global Islamic superstate where there is no freedom. Take the Taliban in Afghanistan then apply the most vile elements of it and impose them upon the world in the form of a single superstate that would exterminate anybody who opposes them (this is of course a way off almost never gonna happen fantasy but it is most certainly the stated long term goal of the Islamists, they genuinely desire to see the entire world live under such a system, if they cant do that then they will do the next best thing, kill everybody who doesnt agree with them leaving only the "faithful" alive and making the surviving piece of humanity loyal to their God.) I think that it must be the stated goal of all pluralist liberal democracies to furthur the goal of peace by standing up to authoritarianism, by not cutting deals with dictators, if we banded together and abandoned the concepts of nationalism and embraced a common humanity and progress through technology then I have no doubt that the problems of the world can be overcome and all its inhabitants liberated, balance this utopian idealism with the problems of the real world and you will see quite a few zones, that is where realism meets idealism and creates compromise. I do not believe that we can ever see a proper peace until every individual is free from opression, poverty, disease and ignorance. The best countries on earth are those that have embraced the liberal democratic tradition of human rights and free trade ergo if every nation was a proper liberal democracy then war would be pointless because of economic and social codependence, as they say 'no two countries with McDonalds have ever gone to war with eachother' (I am genuinely sickened by the history and current course of (some) US Foreign policy, the realpolitik and some of the less honourable "sacrifices" made in the defence of freedom, I will however attempt to argue them simply to gain insight, the real world has an unfortunate habit of messing up the best of intentions)
In principle I advocate free market economics without interference of government, again this gets messed up in reality because of monopolies and cartels, this is where I am a litte uneasy: in principle I do not like to have regulation however the problems of Laissez Faire economics became self evident in the 19th Century when put into practice, the rich get richer and the poor lie dying in the gutters. This is a place where I am still learning and one of the reasons I dont subscribe to anarchism on a broader scale, neccissary evil of government you see. I am uneasy about living with it but cant live without it (im taking a course in economics next year to resolve some problems I have with this).
So, I would trace my thoughts back to the philosophical liberalism that was pioneered in The Age of Enlightenment, I spent a lot of time reading political works and shaped my own understanding and thoughts, elements of modernism mixed in there, loathing of authoritanism spawned by looking at the 20th Century, hatred of communism in practice and skepticism at the theory. The works of John Stuart Mill (On Liberty is quite good), John Locke and David Hume. Basically I desire Liberty and Peace, achieved through univeral human rights and free trade in a market economy. It is a different point of view than Contempary American Liberalism which is very much associated with Socialism, which is where the people become reliant on the state, it must always be the other way around or else true liberty cannot exist, very hard to strike the right balanance and I doubt we will see it until that dreamy utopian make believe world exists.
Also there are as you point out many ideologies that are "liberal" in principle however very distinct. I guess its just that I look at American "liberals" and I see a bunch of socialists who want to create a nanny-state and will mockingly call them "fake liberals", thats just my own personal bias, again liberalism could be any ideology that supports liberty from conservative liberalism to libertarianism, very very broad so I guess I will place myself on a Classical Liberalism with a touch of Interventionism and Liberal Internationalism. Also I will argue a point for arguments sake, especially when it is a difficult moral one, such as torture of terrorists, I do have my own opinions on the matter which I have kept to myself simply to see if I could advocate a more extreme view. Same goes for arguments about the need to enhance the role of the state in the fight against terrorism (I remember that "despise you and everything you stand for" remark, I dont take it personally though but I wont forget). I am still sorting out many problems, there are plenty of arguments I have with myself, contradictions and execptions, tough moral questions and hypotheticals that I run through, im still young and constructing a more complete picture of the world, I dont want to become a naive optimist because as soon as you loose that blind optimism you become a pessimistic realist very quickly. There is not a single political party that I want to be affiliated with, they are all a bunch of pretentious bastards looking out for their own interests, I wont engage in mindless bashing of politicians, I will try to argue the facts no matter how unsavoury a position I choose (there are points that I am unshakeable on, that is the defence of freedom from any form of despotism and support of Israeli defence against Arab agression.)