Liberalism cannot even protect their own liberal values so let’s not protend they’d really try and fix broken systems
The Great Man just decided it should collapse.
I wish it were more difficult to go through your life while refusing to understand that cause and effect apply to politics just like everything else.
Some liberals don’t even think there’s a problem. They think movements like MAGA and Brexit are just low information voters being riled up by algorithms and populists.
deleted by creator
Holy fuck this is spot on.
I’m so tired of hearing “they’re so racist”
It’s such a terminating clause. Like we don’t need to actually understand at a deeper level why guy born a Mexican, still is Mexican but is voting for Trump because… They’re racist against Mexicans???
I’m so done with the left. It’s so tiring. They even adapt their messages. I can go back 15 years and still see the exact comments of “they’re racist” while right wing dominate spaces seem to come up with new things every 6 months. Soy cuck Wojack probably conjures up a whole era all our minds right? What about “man they’re racist” what does that conjure up?
The left should lose the right to call anyone low information voters until they sort themselves the fuck out
I think you’re confused, liberals aren’t left. The commenter you are replying to is complaining about liberals, ie “moderate” right wingers, failing to understand far-right wingers.
Liberals are left
deleted by creator
Only if you are eurocentric and accept liberalism as a default state. I would argue eurocentric perspectives are inherently problematic.
deleted by creator
Neoliberalism is absolutely not the default when we look at the whole world. If we look at the developed world it is the default. That is not the case for everyone.
Your binary only makes sense for some of the world. That’s why I keep pointing to how eurocentric it us.
Someone hearing for the first time that Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher are staunch liberals.
Are you guys being serious right now? This is insane. Liberal values are left of center.
Liberals -> want the means of production to remain privatized aka capitalism
Leftists -> want the means of production to be publicly owned aka socialismThat presumes the binary is focused on economy when most nations are still debating freedom from the government and thus liberalism should be the start of the left.
My girlfriend thinks capitalism is fine and doesn’t care about billionaires existing.
She’s never had a minimum wage job or worked in the service industry 🙄
99% of the people that think capitalism is awesome, are not remotely aware of what capitalism is.
Every citizen should have to do a year waiting tables just to know not to be a dick.
Just curious, what is the alternative you propose? We have seen communism, that doesn’t work either.
In my country we also have capatalism but we still have workers rights and all of that. It is just in America that employers managed to get everything their way. Other countries have free markets without abusing their workers.
This is wrong on several accounts.
-
“Communism” the economic system has not been realized. Communist parties have led socialist countries, but communism as a mode of production is a product of the future.
-
Socialism works, the largest economy on the planet is the PRC, which is seeing rapid and comprehensive improvements in the living standards of its people. Even the USSR, now no longer here, achieved impressive economic growth, provided free healthcare and education, and much more.
-
Capitalism, by definition, requires that the capitalists be in charge and the workers exploited. It isn’t just the US.
-
Socialized Democracy.
Basically democracy with robust safety nets, strong regulation on business, strong labor unions, and socialized healthcare and higher education OPTIONS.
Capitalism is good for competition and innovation so we can’t really ditch it completely, but we live in society, not the jungle, so we should have safety nets and socialized options for poor people to gain independence and social mobility.
Social Democracy is just capitalism with welfare, and as such either funds itself via imperialism like the Nordic Countries, or is ultimately going to see capital use its political power to erase the gains of workers. Markets can play a useful role in spurring development of small and medium firms, but the larger firms and key industries should be publicly owned and planned, as market mechanics begin to lose all benefit towards higher development.
Really, it sounds like you just want Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.
I want democracy that works for the people and not just the people with the most money.
Gotcha, so some form of socialism at minimum. You should check out the link to how the PRC functions.
The problem with outright socialism is it always gets toppled, because your success is a threat to the entire world order, and foreign governments can make offensive decisions at a faster rate than you can make defensive ones, since your big decisions have to filter through more eyes and hands in the name of fairness.
When we’re talking about entire countries, we have to be more pragmatic than idealistic, or our plans just don’t work sadly.
China is still here, and still socialist, and it isn’t leaving. This is because of Democratic Centralism, a fast and cohesive way to adapt to changing conditions while retaining democratic input. For less urgent decisions, the PRC has slower, more comprehensive, bottom-up systems, while it focuses more on a top-down approach for system-wide changes and direction. It’s kinda like “top down, from the bottom up.”
I agree with pragmatism over idealism, that’s why I’m a communist and push for socialism. Socialism is immensely practical.
