In this setting, liberals face a conundrum. How far should they maintain traditional liberal ideals, and how far should they move towards non-liberal, and potentially illiberal, ideologies if these seem more promising for the purposes of social change?

  • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Liberals are devout capitalists, and the majority of people on the planet are getting fucked by capitalism in some way. It’s not complicated.

  • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    As I commented elsewhere 20 mins ago, the context of the term depends on the context of the OP/meme/audience. All of them are derision.

    If they are NOT a fascist then “Liberals” means the neoliberal, DNC, “white moderate” types who arguably run as counterintelligence against the left, and help the right “sow the seeds of fascism”.

    If they’re a fascist “Liberals” refers to EVERYONE left of fascism, as it is used interchangeably with communist, marxist, woke; whatever they don’t like.

    • cabbage@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 minute ago

      I’m an outsider because I’m a European who has studied politics, but I’m pretty far left and consider myself rather liberal.

      I don’t believe in strong private property rights, and I consider liberal market economies to be complete failures. But I am a strong believer in political equality, consent of the governed, human rights, rule of law, secularism, and freedom of speech/press/assembly/religion.

      It’s not primarily a theory of how to organize our economy. Neoliberalism fucking sucks.

      To me, values like human rights and political equality cannot be guaranteed without heavy redistribution and some form of socialism.