No wait. That's not it at all. Liberalism is the whole thing. It contains within it the myths and propaganda to motivate the masses to its defense, but it is not identical with those things.

Liberalism is, fundamentally, a political movement of, by, and for commercial interests. Commercial interests were international and thus could have greater span of control than national interests. But commercial interests could not be totalizing because national interests were locked into monarchical/noble/aristocratic structures that explicitly locked out commercial interests.

The idea of personal autonomy was absolutely felt earnestly and genuinely by the merchant class because they had gone out, many risking their own lives, and managed to find that one deal that made them an eye-watering fortune and then they had to work politics tirelessly to keep their wealth. They genuinely felt that they should be free by virtue of their wealth, so when they said men should be free to pursue their interests, they genuinely meant it.

They weren't being devious by defining men to be white European men. That was in-built to their culture already. The Overton Window, so to speak, didn't include a position that black people were men.

But yes, they ALSO said to the peasants "you can one day be as rich as us" and they sort of meant it

Capitalism and extreme poverty by Jason Hickel

The Great Transformation by Polanyi (About England)

"What about the Poor?" From France

There's a bunch more I am not familiar with regarding Latin American liberal transitions and there are others about different European countries.

But also, this is why Marx and Engels got anywhere at all