Good point: I had exactly the same reaction. But maybe we need a new term (although in fact neo-classical and neoliberal are distinguished, sort of, in practice), and it seems that the ‘neoliberal’ era was some kind of stealth black magic grafted onto an already sophistical arcana of economic science fiction, viz. marginalism and equilibrium theory.
I think the author gets a lot of the history of economic thought wrong, especially the history of neoclassical economics, which has been around since the late 19th century, starting with the work of Jevons, Walras, Marshall, and Pareto. Some of these folk were reactionaries, like Pareto. But Walras was a socialist. And in the first half of the 20th century, many neoclassical economics leaned decidedly to the left. That’s why someone like Oskar Lange could consider himself to be both a neoclassical economist and a Marxist at the same time.