All this does is alienate anarcho-curious liberals.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

This is something I've been kinda bewildered to see in the wild, especially amongst MLs circles. Like, surely a tremendous amount of people were Liberal before coming across some solid Anarchist stuff which made too much sense to ignore?

Speaking for myself, I certainly didn't start out Anarchist. It took a long path going from following my religious parent's ideas and traditional values, to questioning religion and becoming atheist, to investigating political ideas, where I came across right-wing libertarian concepts which seemed like the best idea at the time.

It wasn't until coming across Chomsky that I ultimately went down the road to Anarchism proper, and finally all the pieces clicked into place.

Nothing wrong with calling things out as liberal as a descriptor and to accurately point out all of its many many downfalls, but could be quite offputting to use as an insult to people reading who consider themselves liberal still.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    @ProdigalFrog @A404 Not that you should do that but i think it makes way more sense to use it against Marxists and Anarchist if you feel they are arguing in favour of a liberal tactics.If i call somebody liberal after we discussed "The German Ideology" its a deep cut, if i call a liberal a liberal i sound like alex jones.In which case using liberal as an insult is extra self defeating in furthering dialogue.

  • source
  • parent