RaivoKulli comments on Liberals be like

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (16 children)

Monarchists, far right people etc. would probably react the same. Maybe discounting people on the right who are anti-capitalist but I'm not sure how large of a group that is

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 16 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago (16 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 16 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago (15 children)

I just meant that "liberal" doesn't cover all the people who would hold the sentiment pictured in the meme. A lot of ardent anti-communists are also against liberalism and can't be really described as liberal imo.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 15 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (15 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 15 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz -2 points 1 year ago (14 children)

There's all kinds of authoritarian ideologies that are incompatible with liberalism. Not unfortunately that uncommon, especially nowadays that that shit has had a resurgence

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 14 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago (14 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 14 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz -1 points 1 year ago* (13 children)

Well that's certainly a take. But I'm not talking about just monarchists, lots of other groups than monarchists that don't subscribe to ideas of liberalism. It's just not capitalism = liberalism.

And the point was just that this is directed at liberals for some reason when it could be directed at all the groups that do the same thing. That's all.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 13 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (13 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 13 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz -2 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Most authoritarian conservative right-wing movements gaining popularity right now are far away from the values that make up liberalism. There's no shortage of those. In Europe they're likely going to sweep most of the continent, if the recent polls hold true.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 12 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (12 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 12 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 year ago (11 children)

I think you're using a much wider definition for liberalism than is common or at least what I'm familiar with. And it's a big tent to begin with. Many of those movements are against most of what are typically considered core values of liberalism, so that's why they're often not included, as a subsection or otherwise.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 11 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (11 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 11 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 year ago (10 children)

I'm using basically what's

here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_parties_by_country

And the subsets too get a wider view

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalism#Parties_and_organisations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#Classical_liberal_parties_worldwide

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_liberalism

Etc.

Their definitions don't include the parties I was thinking about, that are doing the "alt-right" wave right now for example. So for that reason I think we're working from different definitions.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 10 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (10 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 10 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Idk the Wikipedia definition that I commonly see people use doesn't seem to agree with that. If you throw in fascism, alt-right, all of that under liberalism then the meme of course covers more ground but it can get more confusing to those not using the same definition of liberalism as you seem to use.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 9 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (9 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 9 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 year ago (8 children)

Wikipedia itself (and fwiw commonly others don't either in my experience) doesn't the talked about movements and parties as fitting under that umbrella, since they're conflicting with too much of the basic defining principles. Imo that makes sense, but if you were to use a broader definition or going "if it fits even one part then it counts", then I guess I could see them fitting under it.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 8 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (8 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 year ago (7 children)

It just doesn't seem like the sort of Wikipedia definition and the common interpretation I usually encounter agree with you on this one since the mentioned movements aren't counted. But of course it's not one interpretation to rule them all, just using Wikipedia as representative of the common viewpoint.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (7 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 year ago (6 children)

In that it doesn't count those movements as part of liberalism or those parties under that umbrella. It's the reason I posted those lists above.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (6 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

Sure and it could be a salient point if it left out a few. It does tell you something when none of the parties in those movements are included though. Even in the articles for those particular ideologies you don't see the claim that they're subsets of liberalism, but a few mentions how they're trying to counter liberal values.

I don't think it's an accidental omission.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I mean I'm not sure if Wikipedia actually counts MAGA part of the party as liberals. I don't think it does. That's more along the lines of movements I was talking about. European alt-right the same deal.

But if you're working from a specifically Marxist viewpoint I'm guessing it uses a broader definition that includes those movements.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

I'm not sure it counts at Wikipedia, with how they describe it (they call it "Trumpism")

comprises ideologies such as right-wing populism, right-wing antiglobalism, national conservatism and neo-nationalism, and features significant illiberal, authoritarian[7][8] and at times autocratic beliefs.[b] Trumpists and Trumpians are terms that refer to individuals exhibiting its characteristics. There is significant academic debate over the prevalence of neo-fascist[a] elements of Trumpism.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I mean the whole point of bringing up Wikipedia was to show a common definition and what sort of movements are counted. If you use wider Marxist definition it covers a lot more, from what I've understood. The common Wikipedia counting doesn't cover as much, so it leaves out some pretty popular movements, in which case the meme just mentioning liberals doesn't make as much sense. But this being on .ml I think using the Marxist definition makes sense

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz -1 points 1 year ago (1 child)

I think you and Wikipedia disagree here. But that's neither here nor there really. By their counting, there's plenty of non-liberals who would fit the meme. In your view there aren't. So that explains the difference.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 year ago*

I meant the original topic of this discussion about non-liberal movements. Why you and Wikipedia consider MAGA (Trumpism) differently is, yeah that's a discussion for some other day. The original topic is cleared up