Maybe, but we are talking about New Labour here. I was just pointing out, that your description of SDP fitted New Labour.
Only if you are absolutely determined to make it do so. Besides, the key point about the SDP is that those groups knitted together do not a halfway coherent political party make. It was an extreme
reaction to unusual circumstances, and did not foreshadow anything because it was not capable of thinking about the future.
You're missing the point; context is everything because meanings can (and so
do) change. The sort of Labour politicians who could be thought of as being liberals with a small 'l' in 1977 had remarkably little in common with the sort of Labour politicians who could be thought of as liberals with a small 'l' (as well as other things) in 1997, something that mostly reflects the different backgrounds (traditional Party establishment 'intellectuals' as opposed to former radicals; even if you ignore the age gap, these people won't even have socialised with each other much). But, with regards to the SDP and so on, what matters is that the former essentially comprised an identifiable faction within the Party, while the latter could be found anywhere (so more a matter of attitudes on certain issues).