37
Liberals are catalysts to catastrophe, again (www.aljazeera.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/usa@lemmy.ml
105 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 1 year ago (13 children)

Good point. I guess I still have not gotten used to the meaning of that word here, and keep thinking people are somehow hating on liberal ideals like equality, etc.

Also seeing Trump et al. hating on "libs" (meaning people who want equality and accept people of color/lgbt, etc) makes this a really nice mess.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 16 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Liberals == moderates, not followers of human rights

    Same people as King described 50 years ago

    I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    That I totally understand. Fuck moderates.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Those moderates include AOC, Sanders, Omar, Jayapal etc

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    So basically fuck the US, I guess? I'm not from there, so I have no dog in that race, but for me it sounds like AOC/Sanders/etc would be very good for at least US citizens.

    I have not heard of any true "leftist" politicians in the US.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Equality isn't really a liberal idea. Liberalism is primarily about individualism and free flow of capital, people here tend to be leftists that support socialism and are against capitalism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    That's your definition. I understand it's a common definition here. But even the first chapter of wikipedia has a much wider definition of liberalism. If you are hating on capitalism or moderates, why not say so?

    Literally from wikipedia: Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, the right to private property, and equality before the law.

    I support socialism and hate capitalism, but I still don't consider liberalism to be "all bad.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    The extent to which the "virtues" of liberalism exist is that which facilitates the free flow of capital. Capitalists sell to workers the idea that capitalism sees everyone as equal, but that's in contrast to feudalism. Technically, anyone with the money can be a capitalist, but in practice those with money keep it and grow it while those without sell their labor-power to survive. Liberalism is a superstructural element of capitalism, it cannot be truly severed from it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Care to explain why liberalism is so tightly nit with capitalism in your opinion? I cannot see a good reason.

    I hate late-stage capitalism as much as the next guy, obviously.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Liberalism emerged as the ideological justification for capitalism, the two are intrinsically linked. The basic principles of liberalism are insividualism and free flow of capital. People have used liberalism to justify more progressive social views, but those social views are better represented by ideologies like Marxism-Leninism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    They may be better represented by marxis-leninism, but that does not mean they cannot be represented by liberalism. It's not so black and white.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    I didn't suggest that they were black and white, my point is that liberalism's ties to capitalism are because that's the purpose of liberalism. It emerged as the capitalist class was rising as future justification for the transition from feudalism to capitalism. You cannot have a "liberal socialism," as liberalism is focused on private property rights.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent