I don’t mean to be rude but I think you’re confused.
Liberalism doesn’t represent an axis on any political compass, it’s a loose collection of political ideals that more-or-less follow a Locke-ian philosophy of ‘personal liberty’.
“Authority” is very commonly the Y axis on most of those compass memes, and generally speaking it describes an abstract concept of power over others. Liberalism’s placement on that axis is pretty dependent on the poster’s understanding of what authority is and who wields it.
Anarchists see authority far more broadly than simply power as exercised through the state, but any type of power wielded by any person/group over another including capital’s authority over workers. We reject ‘liberalism’ because it not only permits authority to be exercised through the recognition of private ownership, but it enforces that authority by lending its monopoly on violence on behalf of capital. Some liberals might acknowledge this dynamic but they’ll still reject abolishing those structures. That’s why ‘liberal’ isn’t really coherent as an axiom, because in the best of cases it represents a middling position on ‘authority’.
Maybe we’re actually using the ‘generous in amount; ample’ definition of liberal instead of the ‘not strict or literal’ definition - as in, ‘we’re exercising a liberal amount of authority’ 🤷♂️. I guess we’ll never know
Yes, anarchy is extremely liberal
I even gave you an apolitical example (sort of, the politics of sport and interpersonal connections is a different discussion)
I don’t mean to be rude but I think you’re confused.
Liberalism doesn’t represent an axis on any political compass, it’s a loose collection of political ideals that more-or-less follow a Locke-ian philosophy of ‘personal liberty’.
“Authority” is very commonly the Y axis on most of those compass memes, and generally speaking it describes an abstract concept of power over others. Liberalism’s placement on that axis is pretty dependent on the poster’s understanding of what authority is and who wields it.
Anarchists see authority far more broadly than simply power as exercised through the state, but any type of power wielded by any person/group over another including capital’s authority over workers. We reject ‘liberalism’ because it not only permits authority to be exercised through the recognition of private ownership, but it enforces that authority by lending its monopoly on violence on behalf of capital. Some liberals might acknowledge this dynamic but they’ll still reject abolishing those structures. That’s why ‘liberal’ isn’t really coherent as an axiom, because in the best of cases it represents a middling position on ‘authority’.
See, you are really confused because even when I demonstrated that it’s apolitical, you still insist it is
Maybe we’re actually using the ‘generous in amount; ample’ definition of liberal instead of the ‘not strict or literal’ definition - as in, ‘we’re exercising a liberal amount of authority’ 🤷♂️. I guess we’ll never know