▲ 473 ▼ Liberals be like (lemmy.ml) submitted 1 year ago by Comrade1917@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml 139 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (10 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (9 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (8 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (7 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (6 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (9 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (8 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (7 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (6 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (9 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (8 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (7 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (6 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (8 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (7 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (6 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (8 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (7 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (6 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (7 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (6 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (7 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (6 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (6 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (6 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (5 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (4 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] 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 replies: [+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] 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 permalink fedilink source parent
