What are the differences between classical liberalism and neoliberalism are they simi

sounds like you're doing politics A2
classical liberalism is based on adam smith, jefferson, locke, etc which was mostly based on the philosophy of rights more than economic prosperity~ (obviously it has a bit to do with "the market works best when left alone" and "that government which governs least governs best", some good/relevant quotes I remember having to memorise) but mostly it's about liberty and all that jazz, not strictly the collectivistic outcome that is in neo-liberalism which was its argument against socialism in the cold war context where socialism was failing to deliver on a community level. so classical liberalism, is about limited government, constitutionalism, separation of powers, freedom, etc
neo-liberalism is based on new economic globalisation and "world market" competition mostly (and focusing on the prosperity aspect, at least that's how it appears from my point of view), e.g. the philosophies of milton friedman. so neo-liberalism is about the world economy and its relevance to the national economy, internationalism, free trade globally, supply side/trickle down theories, lower taxes, less tariffs/protectionism and that kind of thing in focus. it's basically milton friedman's views as an ideology, while classical liberalism isn't so much based on economics, but people like thatcher and reagan would be mentionable as well as just friedman. neoliberalism, therefore, is about the consequential aspects of economic liberalism/laissez faire, while classical liberalism is about the individualistic aspect of it and freedom as the goal in itself, not the means etc; neoliberalism isn't really a "new philosophy", it's simply (in my view) a new way of approaching/looking at classical liberalism

What are the differences between classical liberalism and neoliberalism and Libertarianism are they similar in regards to their economic policies? Do Libertarian think tanks like the Institute of Economic Affairs and the Adam Smith Institute prescribe to all these ideologies?

sounds like you're doing politics A2
classical liberalism is based on adam smith, jefferson, locke, etc which was mostly based on the philosophy of rights more than economic prosperity~ (obviously it has a bit to do with "the market works best when left alone" and "that government which governs least governs best", some good/relevant quotes I remember having to memorise) but mostly it's about liberty and all that jazz, not strictly the collectivistic outcome that is in neo-liberalism which was its argument against socialism in the cold war context where socialism was failing to deliver on a community level. so classical liberalism, is about limited government, constitutionalism, separation of powers, freedom, etc
neo-liberalism is based on new economic globalisation and "world market" competition mostly (and focusing on the prosperity aspect, at least that's how it appears from my point of view), e.g. the philosophies of milton friedman. so neo-liberalism is about the world economy and its relevance to the national economy, internationalism, free trade globally, supply side/trickle down theories, lower taxes, less tariffs/protectionism and that kind of thing in focus. it's basically milton friedman's views as an ideology, while classical liberalism isn't so much based on economics, but people like thatcher and reagan would be mentionable as well as just friedman. neoliberalism, therefore, is about the consequential aspects of economic liberalism/laissez faire, while classical liberalism is about the individualistic aspect of it and freedom as the goal in itself, not the means etc; neoliberalism isn't really a "new philosophy", it's simply (in my view) a new way of approaching/looking at classical liberalism