Do any of them know what the word “liberal” actually means?

  • pjwestin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I’m on the left, but I’m far from a communist, much less an authoritarian one, and I 100% use lib or liberal as an insult. I think to most people younger than 50, Liberal refers to a certain type of Democratic voter. They’ll hang a BLM sign in their window but support NIMBY policies that keep people of color out of their neighborhoods. They’ll talk a good game about labor rights and unions, but still go to Starbucks and throw a shit-fit if their order is wrong. They cared very deeply about Iraq and Guantanamo when Bush was President, but stopped bringing it up once Obama was in office.

    The Third Way Democrats of the 90s basically turned American Liberals into Neo-Liberals. I will still support them when I have to, since they hold all the levers of power over the only ostensibly progressive party in America, and not siding with them at this point basically ensures the rise of fascism, but I have no love for Liberals.

  • db2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    don’t usually agree on that much

    Where have you been the last 8 years

    • Queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah Tankies/AuthComs are just such an odd mixture of accelerationists, “own the libs” and just general stupidity of “a strong man makes strong men” bullshit that they support any fascist if it means maybe someday they might not be on the chopping block.

      If Tankies were an actual voting bloc they’d be somewhat impactful for the first time since maybe 1949. That would imply going outside however.

    • Queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      It’s really funny how no one really likes liberals but liberals.

      Conservatives: “They’re too freedom loving for my tastes! Why can’t they just stay and home and be good corporate stooges like us?”

      Auth-Communists: “They claim to like freedom but still willingly use the capitalist forces to oppress who they like. Liberals are okay with personal freedom until it impacts the white moderates. That’s our job!

      Anarchists: “It’s literally weird to call yourself a liberal when all they do is oppose any movement against the status quo. If they can’t convert them to sell away their soul to the state or capitalism, they’re terrorists. They’re more like conservatives than any actual progressives, and even progressives admit 100% capitalism isn’t great.”

      Libertarian capitalists: “They claim to be for freedom but constantly require the state to check in on if people are enjoying their freedom like that Nanny’s they never had. I just wanna grill for god’s sake!”

      Like it’s just funny to me no matter where you are on the political spectrum, you have a somewhat decent reason to hate liberals (except conservatives are too stupid to tell liberals apart from “commies”).

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        You could build that list for every political party/perspective

        • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah but it’s funnier with liberals because they get all persecution complex-y when people left of them give them shit, just like conservatives do when libs give them shit

    • Melkath@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      “My party is committing genocide and lost all of its credibility and ethos. Boo hoo.”

      At least they aren’t using the word “progressive” anymore.

  • Cowbee@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yes, leftists absolutely know what the word “liberal” means. It refers to a pro-Capitalist ideology centered around the idea of individual freedoms via private property rights.

    Leftists disagree that allowing private property creates a freer population, and understand that Liberalism is the dominant ideology in developed Capitalist nations.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      “We’d like for our software to ThingDo. Our team has estimated 4 weeks for this work. What’s your estimate?”
      “Wait, you want to write it from scratch? Why not just plug in ThingDoer library?”
      “…ah, right. Damn libs.”

    • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      But I like my libs… Often enough produced with a pretty communistic and anti-authoritarian mindset… (And too often, lack of support for the workers… Ups) But I like them.

    • Rev. Layle@lemm.ee
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I thought I was in programmer humor for a sec when I first saw the image, then I died a little bit

      • orrk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        2 months ago

        look, tankies aren’t leftists, they are fascists wearing the skin of the lefties they killed

        • BakerBagel@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          2 months ago

          Fascism isn’t just authoritarianism. It is a certain set of conditions that can essentially be boiled down to as “colonial violence against the imperial core” but it is incredibly more complicated than that.

          Words have meaning, and you should look up those meanings before you start just throwing them around.

          • orrk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Words DO have meaning, and you just butchered so many of them it’s not even funny.

            fundamentally, fascism is the belief that social hierarchies are not only natural but preferable to any other social system that attempts to disrupt said natural order, all other aspects of fascism stem from this one line of understanding

            • BakerBagel@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Social hierarchies are always going to be present, even anarchists believe that. Fascism just assumes that they are natural and inherent, while leftists beleive that those hierarchies should be voluntary or chosen by the people.

              Just becauae you haven’t done any political reading doesn’t mean i don’t know what words read.

              • orrk@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                the entire idea of the progressive moment is to abolish these hierarchies, then again the American “leftist” understanding is so fucked at this point that I can see you believing this, as most “communists” in the states are tankies, that would also explain the horrible misunderstanding of fascism along imperial lines, because you literally don’t have any other larger critical lens in the states, as most of you aren’t upset about the existence of hierarchies, but just have the feeling that you are not in your deserved spot of said hierarchy

          • KarfiolosHus@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            2 months ago

            The political spectrum is not linear, but circular and fascism and communism sit on the join but with different lie.

            Coming from a country that experienced both several times in the past century, I hope the real people tankies would just shut up and move to Russia to learn a life lesson.

            • orrk@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              nope, the Marx Leninist idea of a vanguard party doesn’t even purport to be communism, rather the idea that you must go through a phase of state capitalism to grow the nation’s capital after a revolution (revolutions tend to destroy capital) before you can enact communism, it’s just that during the age of ML Fascism was the popular new political ideology, and Lenin did heavily base the idea of the vanguard party on a lot of the same basic understanding as the fascists did.

              and of course the fascists did what they do and killed the lefties

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Would him putting on the Darth Vader armor be an analogue to many “toxic” leftists using doxxing sites dominated by the far-right to try and ruin the lives of people that aren’t 100% into Stalin?

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        putting on the Darth Vader armor

        doxxing sites dominated by the far-right

        Yes. Becoming an unkillable cyborg space wizard and outting someone paying for a message board full of Nazi copypasta are the same.

  • febra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Republicans are also liberals. At least in the true sense of the word. So it’s low-key funny when they use the term liberal as an insult.

    I myself am not a liberal. Fiscally at least. Socially I’m a progressive.

    • mynameisigglepiggle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m just excited to see what happens when they find out their PC has been invaded by libs.

      And then proceeds to own them by deleting them all

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      In American political terminology, “liberal” means a different thing than in Europe. It implies being left-wing on social issues. Republicans by definition cannot be liberals (in the American sense of the term).

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        It would be like saying “it’s funny when Americans say they’re going to ‘wear their boot’, how are you going to wear part of your car?”

        They are using a different definition of the word, and pretending they aren’t is being wilfully ignorant at best. Pretending the other definition doesn’t exist just serves to alienate people who might actually agree with you.

  • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    2 months ago

    Lmao check out all the salty libs seeing themselves get called out in these comments.

    • sincerely, an anarcho-syndicalist
    • Baahb@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      Pretty much. “Lol why don’t you like libs?”

      …cause we don’t like things the way they are, and the only goal of the libs appears to be prevent any sort of progress. Maybe we are allowed relief from existing problems, but fuck you if you wanna fix em!

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        the only goal of the libs appears to be prevent any sort of progress.

        “Liberal” in America is literally synonymous with “progressive”. The entire point of the party is progress.

        @[email protected] here’s another one

        • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          “Liberal” in America is literally synonymous with “progressive”. The entire point of the party is progress.

          What are you even talking about? There are numerous Democrat politicians who don’t label themselves as progressive.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            I didn’t say “Democrat” at all in my comment.

            All progressives are Democrats, not all Democrats are progressives. The Democratic party is a coalition.

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                Yeah. Bernie Sanders himself is not a Democrat, but most of his supporters are Democrats who are socialist, not liberal.

                Then you’ve got your Joe Manchin types, who basically agree with Republicans but don’t like the racism etc. Blue Dogs.

                Then you’ve got the split between “progressives” and “centrists”. Biden being more of a centrist, AOC being more of a progressive. “Liberal” means different things to different people, but most Democrats would say progressives are liberals while centrists aren’t.

        • Baahb@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Lol which party is pushing for progress?

          The one throwing kids in jail for protesting genocide?

          The one funnelling money to Israel hand over foot?

          The one that let Republicans stack the judiciary while crying that it was “unfair” but not actually working to stop it?

          Fuck the D’s bunch of cowards.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yes.

            Fuck the GOP. They’re doing everything you criticise the Dems for, except worse. That’s what “progress” means. Not that everything is instantly perfect. That it’s less bad.

            • Baahb@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              That is absolutely NOT what progress means, you fucking dipshit.

              prog·ress noun /ˈpräɡrəs/

              forward or onward movement toward a destination.
              "the darkness did not stop my progress"
              

              Moving slightly slower on enshittofication than the other guys does not meet that definition.

              Improvement, actual improvement, is what is required by progress.

              I’m not asking for everything to instantly be better. I’m demanding that things stop slowly getting worse.

        • Cowbee@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          No, the entire point of liberalism is continued private property rights.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      The only time I ever see evidence of Anarcho types they are being literally as annoying as possible.

      Edit for clarity, it’s never “I started this charity/group/political campaign with signups/events/or public engagement.” Only ever “fuck everything, I can’t wait for society to fall apart such that the magic future can begin”

      Bro you gotta be constructive not destructive if you want to sway opinions

      • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        Anarchists are pretty active in their communities, with mutual aid and direct action being cornerstones of the ideology and whatnot. If you spent any time in activist spaces you’d know that

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          The point is they need to bring the nice side to public spaces, not be insular with the nice, and turn the mean to everything else.

          • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            I think what you’re describing is less of an anarchism problem and more of a “people in general” problem. I’m an anarchist and I’d like to think I conduct myself pretty well for the most part, even in political discussions. I won’t say I haven’t been an ass online or in person before but that’s not due to my ideology. I’m just an ass sometimes. Same as everyone else. I will concede that we can be a bit insular at times and that’s certainly a weak spot for many anarchists

            • GBU_28@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              I’ll level with you on that. Everyone is an ass sometimes for sure. I’ve been pretty facetious so far so I’ll try to be more legit in this comment, as you have been legit too.

              I’m of course discussing an anecdotal perspective. I totally get down with a lot of what leftists discuss, when they do so constructively.

              To clarify: much leftist discourse is about what’s wrong, and destruction of society (to build something better). Eventually it all smells of doomerism. I was anecdotally calling for leftists to talk about constructive things they are attempting, that “the rest of us” could see, and align with.

              I acknowledge the world is in a rough spot right now. I acknowledge liberals are not always right. I acknowledge many liberal policies need to go. But from the perspective of the observer… The skeptic… The dude just paying bills and living, liberals are trying to build things, and affect change. Leftists seem to just want to destroy.

              My hope would be that through constructive cooperation liberal “realistic” policy is brought closer to leftist idealistic goals.

              *Realistic in that the policy actually gets voted on and made into law

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I returned because I noticed your edit. I was being a bit snide, mostly because the meme is assuming everyone who calls someone a lib is authoritarian-aligned. If you’d like to know about the positive work I do as an organizer, I’d be happy to share. However, to me those actions are just the right thing to do and not worth bringing up randomly.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          That’s fair. Below I clarified as well, this is a meta.thread. of course no one is discussing their work here. Also my opinion is anecdotal. Of course there are leftists who work very hard to move the window, and help others.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        …you said, being literally as annoying as possible and contributing nothing constructive

        …he said, fully cognizant of the hypocrisy, which is why he decided to contribute a snarky editorial comic

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Bro you gotta be constructive not destructive if you want to sway opinions

            At least I admitted my hypocrisy and did something about it. You’re just doubling down on a lazy stereotype to avoid engaging with constructive criticism.

            To paraphrase your own claim, it wasn’t “I started this charity/group/political campaign with signups/events/or public engagement.” Only “fuck anarcho types always annoying me”

            • GBU_28@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              This is a thread about how folks act. So this is a “meta” politics thread.

              This isn’t the place I, or leftists would describe /do that. I’m describing other times and places where said behavior was observed.

              Critical thinking.

  • antifa@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    They agree on a lot more than you’d think, once you parse out each cult’s different groupspeak

    • BakerBagel@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      FDR, Churchill , Hitler, and Mussolini also had a lot in common when you get down to it. Same as humans and chimpanzees. It’s the differences that actually matter.

      • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        I mean they each protected capitalism in their own way:

        FDR, being old money who’d just seen MacArthur send in the tanks to raze a camp of rebellious soldiers and knew how these things tended to go, invested in guillotine insurance via the New Deal.

        Hitler and Mussolini used the other approach, privatizing/selling off state assets and applying colonial methods they’d perfected in Africa back home to buttress capitalism and protect profits.

        I’m not gonna get started on Churchill.

          • BakerBagel@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Hitler sold off nationalized companies to his buddies, and awarded military contracts to Germany’s ultra wealth like Ferdinand Porsche. Literally the first people Hitler killed were his brown shirts, the socialists he utilized to gain power, during the Night of the Long Knives. His entire schtick was that he wanted to kill all the slavs to rid Europe of “Cultural bolshevism” and all leftists thought.

            You know literally nothing about history, and actually have your knowledge reversed. You just think “Hitler = bad” and “communism= bad” so “Hitler = communism” I’m sorry to be a dick here, but you are either totally uninformed and are a moron who is just making shit up to feel smart, or you are intentionally spreading wrong information bevauae you want to associate socialism with fascism to push your own nefarious agenda. I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that your education system failed you.

            Edit: i found the issue. You actually have brain worms from eating so much raw pork.

            • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Fun fact, the word “privatization” first appeared to describe the policies of the Third Reich. It later became a rallying cry of Rageanonomics, Thacherism, and Pinochet. What now a days we often qualify as Neoliberism.

    • Cowbee@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s more that OP seems unable to fathom anyone to the left of them being both rational and uncool with liberalism. That’s why they specifically said “Authouritarian Communists,” the SpOoKiEsT LeFtIsTs.

  • fcSolar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    Almost like AuthComs are authoritarian before they are communist, and thus have more in common with the American Fascist Party than any actual leftists.

  • MrJameGumb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’d say they both agree on the main point of both philosophies “everyone has to follow every ridiculous rule I come up with except me

    • Queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      Conservatives, fascists, and Auth-Communists just disagree on what color the flag should be, and the name of the party in charge handing out the police to dispatch onto the people.

      • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Good things and bad things are exactly the same. A justice system that enforces the will of the capitalists is exactly as bad as a justice system that enforces the will of the people.

  • 🇰 🔵 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I used to think it just was synonymous with the left, but I’ve recently been seeing a lot of comments on Lemmy saying liberals aren’t leftist so now I am not sure if it means anything or if those Lemmings are just dumb.

    I’ve grown up with the term “bleeding heart liberals” being applied to groups like Green Peace and hippies that promote love and unity by people who are just complete pieces of shit, and in that context I was always like “I guess I’m a liberal 🤷🏻‍♂️”

    • bl_r@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Liberals are somewhere between center left and center right. In the US, the alternative to republicanism is the “liberal party” and because they often encompass people further left than the party line, they are seen as left wing. Generally, I associate people who are always in favor of slow electoral measures, a strong state, strong individualistic rights that are positively defined (the right to do rather than not having the right to do) and the view that capitalism is the only method that had worked so far and is therefore best with liberalism. But thats far from an academic definition.

      When you add in the fact that people usually end up seeing another person’s politics in relative to their own, things get unintelligible for someone trying to pinpoint an ideology.

      An anarchist like myself will probably point towards someone like Biden or Obama and say they are a liberal or neoliberal, which is probably accurate enough (if I do say so myself), but I’ll also call conservatives like Romney, Bush, and Raegan, liberals or neoliberal even though those are people most self titled liberals would hate. A staunch authoritarian communist might call AOC or Sanders a liberal because they aren’t revolutionary communists, even though I’d personally consider them somewhat socialist progressives. Heck, I’ve ben called a liberal by hardcore communists even though my views are more similar to their definition of communism than theirs, and I’ve been called a liberal by some alt right people even though their views are closer to liberalism than mine.

      Fox news, on the other hand, would call a pink haired person on a college campus a liberal for the pink hair alone. They might label a gay trump supporter who has a pride flag a liberal because of their homophobia combined with the association pride has with liberals to them. They might call someone who is genuinely far left a liberal because they either can’t comprehend their beliefs or because they don’t catch some of the indicators that they are looking at a communist, anarchist, etc.

      • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        US Dems and mainstream liberals are definitely right to far right by (mainland) European standards.

        The political window in the US is very different from the European ones.

        • bl_r@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah. The US is a shit show. At least the Overton window now includes antizionism, small victories!

          I do think a lot of liberals are further right than they realize. But I don’t think it’s accurate to call them far right unless you solely are considering their economic ideology (which is reductionist), or are lumping in people who would probably be more accurately described with a better label. Or your perspective is skewed from being far enough left.

    • FozzyOsbourne@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      My thoughts exactly! Every real-life human I’ve ever spoken to uses it to mean open-minded and every definition I look up agrees, yet for some reason half the people posting here think it exclusively means economically-neo-liberal capitalist.

      • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        The context is typically pretty important for how it is being used. The user of the term often provides more than enough context I find.

        If ‘liberal’ is being used in a derogatory sense, which isn’t going to be captured by an academic definition, it’s often aimed at neoliberalism in a pretty broad sense.

        Which is probably what this meme is referring to: the shared rejection of neoliberalism. The motivations are different but that’s immaterial to these things. I mean: it is specifically referencing an American political party here: so I wouldn’t be looking for a political science definition on ‘liberal’.

          • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Those statements are both true, but: Neoliberalism dominates both political parties in the United States and has for generations. The Democratic Party is also neoliberal, (often in spite of their voters.)

            The Republican Party’s neoliberalism has fostered fascist and christian nationalist factions to the point they may take over.

            The Democratic Party’s stance has been to try and absorb disaffected Republican neoliberal voters from the above.

            Which leaves ‘non-neoliberal American liberals’ with the choice of supporting… well it is and has been a successful right wing strategy to say the least.

            • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              The Democratic Party’s stance has been to try and absorb disaffected Republican neoliberal voters from the above.

              That’s a leftist idea that Leftists just made up and are running with due to their own echo chambers. Dems do like capturing centrists, especially now the GOP has gone off the rails, but the coalition is absolutely led by progressives who push progressive policies as much as they can. The theory is to capture disaffected centrists and win them over with clearly superior Democrat policies and positions. Doesn’t always work, but that’s the play. When the Democratic party allows oil leases or higher border funding, it doesn’t do so skipping with joy. It does so reluctantly as part of a compromise to win other gains.

              This is the part where you get out the tin foil hats and claim that despite all evidence to the contrary, Democrats actually secretly want every bad thing ever to happen. Because they’re just that evil.

              • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Dems do like capturing centrists,

                Doesn’t always work, but that’s the play.

                Sure doesn’t. Very strong arguments to my point.

                • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  You didn’t even read it did you lol

                  Just like “aha, everything you said actually supports me!” like you think it’s some sort of debate uno reverse card

      • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah these are old school definitions, like how a “liberal education” means you get a broad education in differing perspectives (ironically, this term is now associated with a Eurocentric take on topics). In the same sense, “liberal policies” would mean freedom of religion, sexuality, etc.

        All good things that progressives agree with, but it also entails more pernicious property rights, and the protection of the state/establishment against those who threaten those rights.

        It doesn’t necessarily have to be this way, but this is what I believe it’s come to mean in practice. It also has very little to do with how one votes, especially in a democracy like the U.S. where you’ve just got your “monkey loves you” and “monkey needs a hug” choices.

      • Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s easier than accepting nuance, and it’s usually from the same people who demonstrate that same lack of nuance in everything else they post.

      • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        1 favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.

        2 noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.

        3 of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism, especially the freedom of the individual and governmental guarantees of individual rights and liberties.

        4 favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.

        5 favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression:

        6 of or relating to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.

        7 free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant

        8 open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.

        Only 5,7 and 8 are “open minded” Being favorable to progress does not mean being open minded and what constitutes as progressive is in itself up to debate. Individual rights and liberties can be understood as neo-liberal capitalism of “well the law allows you, your economic situation doesn’t concern us, and now back to slaving 60 hours a week.” Or it could mean “We need to enable people to enjoy their liberties so we need to ensure their basic human dignity with healthcare, education and social welfare to empower them.”

        • kameecoding@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          what the fuck is number 1 then?

          favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.

          what is number 2 then?

          noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.

          I think if you go point by point and ignore the rest then you can argue semantics, but I don’t see how you can take all 8 together and argue what “progressive” means

          • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Being favorable to reform does not mean being open minded. Open minded means to respect different people and their life choices. People hostile to traditional family or religious values are also “progressive” but often not open minded as they criticize people who choose a traditional way of life.

            The same goes for economic aspects. Neoliberalism is highly authoritarian. Specifically it is embraced by neofeudalists who want to reestablish their old feudal privileges but not through formal aristocracy, but by the merit of “free contracts” and them holding on to wealth. These are technically “progressive” yet they want to reintroduce power structures from a time past.

    • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      ‘Liberal’ is one of those words that has so many definitions that it can have contradictory meanings. It can mean ‘open to / tolerant of’. It can denote a style of education that tries to be broad rather than deep. It can describe various political positions - the ‘Liberal Party’ is left-wing in Chile, centrist in the UK and Canada, and right-wing in Russia, Japan and Australia. This is also what OP is memeing about. At this point, to avoid confusion, I would just avoid using the word except in the purely academic / technical sense.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Some authoritarians strongly believe that they’re far left. But an authoritarian regime cannot be left. If you’re not liberal, you’re an authoritarian, not left, and it doesn’t matter what type of authoritarian bull shit you’re subscribing to.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I used to think it just was synonymous with the left, but I’ve recently been seeing a lot of comments on Lemmy saying liberals aren’t leftist so now I am not sure if it means anything or if those Lemmings are just dumb.

      @[email protected]

      I’ve been fucking telling you, insisting on a Eurocentric definition confuses people, and that confusion is exploited by fascists.

      American definition of liberal: socially liberal

      European definition of liberal: economically liberal