To the first point, I don't think the abuses of industrial-era capitalism were necessarily inevitable. However, it seems the author's thesis is that liberalism has, thus far, been flexible enough to respond to the socio-historical trends that it has faced, rather than be overwhelmed by them. Monopolies and abuse of laborers was simply the crisis that emerged as classical liberalism came to its maturity.

I would argue that monopolism and government favoritism are once again some of the primary challenges facing liberalism in our day; if there is a difference, it is that we are now dealing with these problems on a global, rather than national, scale.

The drive to perpetual self-creation described in the article has as many causes as there are authors. I'd contend it has as much to with the popular decline of religious belief as it does with economic factors or the fashionable intellectual trends of the elites.

Where I think the article is strongest is in identifying the challenges present-day liberalism faces, and in sketching some of the considerations we must account for if the liberal order is to be maintained in the face of such headwinds.