https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/97/01/19/r...

>In defending this ''union of desire and esteem,'' Lasch reveals himself as a true puritan -- not in the pejorative sense of being prudish, but in the sense of believing that good societies (on the small scale of families and the large scale of political communities) can be sustained only if desire is sanctified by respect. This is why the New England Puritans (to whom Lasch grew increasingly sympathetic as he grew older) thought of marriage as a ''miniature commonwealth,'' a model for human relations in which

  appetite and obligations are held in delicate balance. Lasch agrees, which is why he may be fairly described as an economic liberal and a cultural conservative

-- a liberal who thinks that humane societies must curb excesses of wealth and poverty, a conservative who thinks that individual members of such societies should be held accountable to a standard of personal responsibility.

Emphasis mine: Edwardian Liberal

But also:

"The feminist movement,..., far from civilizing corporate capitalism, has been corrupted by it. It has adopted mercantile habits of thought as its own.