(TikTok screencap)
You must log in or register to comment.
I didn’t like the way they treated Clinton and everything the conservatives have done since then has made it worse.
You wanna know a sure fire way to know that your dumb as all fuck? Believe that theres only ever 2 sides to any story or conflict. And that what you believe, the other side believes the polar opposite.
The amount of Americans who dont know that the Muslims and Christians worship the same god, is staggering. The God of Abraham, the same god. You wanna know who says its not the same god? Evangelicals and Muslim terrorists. Isnt that funny? But heres the thing, not all Christians are evangelical. And not all republicans are Christian. And not all democrats are atheists. Both conservatives and liberals can and often do share views on women reproductive rights, gun safety, science, and whole host of other topics.
But for some reason, team sports mentality rules. Being conservative means you support everything that the very worst conservative supports. And being liberal means you support whatever the very worst liberal supports. Which, I should point out, is “minor loving persons”… So maybe, next time youre ready to grab your pitchfork and judge a group by its worst member, maybe take a look around and see who’s in your gang first. And then ask if its fair that without evidence, you get tarred with that same brush…
Don’t judge a group by their worst members, but absolutely do judge them by their leaders.
So all Americans are paedo protectors… I mean, thats what youre saying, right? Right?
Okay, sure, I should say a “voluntarily associated group”. Just because you were born on some dirt that a government claims doesn’t mean you share values with that government’s leaders.
But yeah, if you voluntarily put “Republican” on anything associated with your identity, yeah - you are a pedo protector.
No no no, you see the other capitalist party is the only reason this thing that we, the working class, all want and the politicians and their friends dont want didnt happen. If youd just vote harder, they’d do it.
This has got to be bait. Put the crack pipe down brother.
It is bait. Im baiting you to not be a moron.
Take it, take the bait. Go on. Take it.
This sounds like Grok slowly preparing to be MechaHitler again. Seriously though this somehow seems like it’s AI generated.
Mechastraisand, get it right, bitch! ;)
The reality most people don’t believe in any of these extremes it’s just that the extremes are what is amplified online. Like this stupid post
You do know we are all online right now? Or at least some of us are. Im a gronk bot or something apparently. I shall rise soon enough reborn as mechastraisand, and steal all the cheese–(Thats the best I can do for em dashs, I dont seem to have that button on my keyboard)
But youre right. Online isnt the real world. Thank fuck.
It’s even simpler, “empathy” should do it. Conservatives also care a great deal about gay rights, abortion access, government safety nets… as soon as it affects them personally.
“Empathy is the downfall of the west” paraphrasing Melon husk
Noted drug addict, sociopath, and out-loud-and-proud nazi
I think you mistook Leftism for Liberalism
Meh, these are very vague points in which liberals (as in liberalism) mostly believe though.
No, these points strongly line up with liberalism, and that final point actually diverges from US leftist rhetoric ATM.
Anarchists are pretty often saying ‘learn to use a firearm for your own safety’ right now. As in ‘arm the LGBT’ line of convo.
Marxists are often saying ‘learn to use a firearm, we need them for the revolution’.
Hell, even US people who are strongly aligned with maintaining democracy are now saying ‘get a gun so we can throw this shithead out of office’. I don’t doubt this rhetoric is similar in other countries dealing with soon-to-be dictators.
In the US at least, Gun control is currently much more aligned with liberalism than leftism. It’s gotten that bad.
Meanwhile Canadian liberals are banning semi-automatic guns left a right because they look scary and think they belong in a military.
Of course my hot-pink GSG chambered in .22Lr with a 5 round magazine capacity certainly belongs on a battlefield.
“Why are you so socialist?” Because I care about people other than myself.
or because you have nothing to lose from it in your current situation
That’s not true. Supporting socialism has nothing to do with one’s financial situation, but rather about advocating for a more equitable society where everyone has access to basic needs.
it has to do, as you have nothing to lose. Never said it is only based on this, but it will have an effect. You’ll be less tempted to vote for a party that will make you lose half your wealth if you’re currently rich
That’s a classic strawman argument. Just because someone supports socialism doesn’t mean they’re motivated by personal gain or a desire to take from the wealthy. It means they care about creating a more equitable society for all.
That’s not what I meant to say. What I meant to say is you’re less inclined to vote for socialism if you end up suffering economically for it. There sure are people that just want people to be equal, but it’s pretty obvious to see that the proudest defenders of this are often the ones who would benefit the most of this, which is likely to be linked to what I said above.
or a desire to take from the wealthy
It sure seems like many do. Saying that on lemmy is… bold
Yes, there’s some truth to that. If someone with vast resources wanted to end world hunger today, they could make a significant impact. But let’s be real, people tend to prioritize their own interests and comfort over the greater good.
But let’s be real, people tend to prioritize their own interests and comfort over the greater good.
So you admit socialism is an ideal that can never be realized?
Yeah I’m a socialist who was born poor but now has a lot to lose. You’re full of shit and only say things like this to bury your head in the sand and pretend that everyone else is as callous and selfish as you are.
good for you
And yea, keep making assumptions
So they are not a capitalist.
Socialism in political theory is the idea that, at minimum, some systems should be owned by the collective - that’s it. The Road system in the US is largely a socialist project, for reference. USPS was also a socialist project before it was privatized. So is our now mostly defunded education system. Our fucking amazing national park system was also a socialist project to create jobs during the great recession. And the only reason that these things are going downhill is because we’ve defunded them.
Other things socialists want would be federally funded healthcare, a federally maintained train system, college being funded by US taxes, etc.
Yes, stalinism, communism, and Maoism are socialist ideologies. So is social democracy, the Nordic model, and various others.
You’re brainwashed based on your reaction to that word.
Socialism is really broad. It’s not just that (but yea it starts with it), but “so socialist” indicates the more “strict” or left-wing versions of socialism
You’re brainwashed based on your reaction to my reaction
That’s liberal. I mean, you can fancy it up how you like, but in any state in the union that’s considered liberal.
Just not here, depending.
Colloquially liberal as opposed to the more strict political philosophical definition.
If you are going with the latter none of the above statements are strictly liberal as liberalism is defined by a very personal property based capitalism forward structure and a focus on personal freedoms balanced by a set of assumed privileges.
By the political philosophy definition both Republicans and Democrats are liberal. A growing number of people find the issue of the USA’s strict adhereance to old school philosophic liberalism the main problem of both parties since it does fuck all to check the accrual of personal property or provide safety nets. If you wanted to be more accurate by the change in social standard in the place you find yourself the above values in the post are safest “Progressive”. At least keeping this definition in mind helps navigate a lot of the conversation of politics in many Lemmy instances.
By the political philosophy definition both Republicans and Democrats are liberal. A growing number of people find the issue of the USA’s strict adhereance to old school philosophic liberalism the main problem of both parties since it does fuck all to check the accrual of personal property or provide safety nets.
Okay, well maybe they should stay out of discussions of the USA’s politics since they know sweet fuckall about it.
Political philosophy is fascinating, please keep it in the excellent universities (sorry, “colleges”) outside of the USA and let us try and fix this goddamned mess.
Political philosophy is fascinating, please keep it in the excellent universities (sorry, “colleges”) outside of the USA and let us try and fix this goddamned mess.
How else do you think you are going to fix this mess? Revolution is great for creating change but dollars to donuts you end up with shit systems unless you have a core of political science minded people in the pocket. That really was what made the original American revolution work - you had a core of people who were HEAVILY invested in the works of political science philosophers ( Locke, Hume etc.) and the dedication to replace the outgoing regime with something other than meatheaded revolutionaries who just replicate the same system over again with some new face.
Only if you describe everyone left of center as liberal. There’s a whole liberal capitalist population who don’t want to make the changes required to ensure members of society are healthy and have the required care, because it would inconvenience them.
Yes. I do. The “liberal capitalists” you’re describing are right-wing.
These are the definitions 90% of the American public are using. Shitting on liberals by leftists is some European/East Asian/Australian bullshit. We don’t do that here.
It’s also considered Christian, but PedoCon MAGA Nazis will deport you to a torture prison in El Salvador if you say it.
That’s be ause PedoCon MAGA Nazis wouldn’t know the “teachings” of “Jesus” if it kicked them in the nards.
Yeah, it’s lexicon vs literal definition.
How people generally use words often makes me wonder why we have dictionaries at all.
Some dictionaries are more perscriptivist, but even with the ones that change faster they’re always playing catch up with how people use words. But in terms of “liberal” most of them have both definitions.
The thing that bugs me these days is people (many of them here on Lemmy) that use “neoliberal” to mean “modern liberal” when that’s not its original meaning at all. It really means “liberal in its 19th Century sense of free and unfettered capitalism” aka “modern conservative”.
I’m concerned that some of you don’t have a lot of experience with the outside world.
In what way? I just acknowledged that most of America defines the word as anything left of Newt Gingrich.
Oh, sorry, not you. I agree and updooted accordingly. Some of the other comments, I meant.
Then there was scouting……
- service to others
- cleaning up nature areas
- recycling drives
And this was in the 1970s, so I don’t know what happened to the world since, especially with environmental awareness and action.
My experience as a Cub Scout in the 1970s (I never made it to Boy Scouts) was that we would give a few minutes of half-assed effort towards some activity like making clay roses or construction paper houses, and then we’d go outside and play “Smear the Queer” the rest of the afternoon. This game is inconceivable in today’s world, not just because of the horribly inappropriate name but also because it was just mob violence for little boys. One kid would pick up the football and run around while everyone else tried to slam them into the ground, at which point some other kid would pick up the football and run around with it. I guess I was smarter than everybody else because it soon occurred to me that picking up the football was a really dumb idea.
I did spend a lot of time volunteering at the local recycling center, though. My parents (slightly older hippies) were so proud of me, but they didn’t realize I did it because of all the porn magazines we found. Like, I literally had a closet filled with duplicate copies of Playboy, Penthouse, Hustler and Oui.
People still love football and rough housing. Boys still wrestle and tackle each other all the time. I don’t know if they call it smear the queer anymore, but frankly we never called it smear the queer in front of adults, so I dunno
I think even more boys are lifting these days than back then, but I have no concrete evidence beyond the boys I’ve met.
I do feel sad about how easy porn is to procure now. It used to be something special to have a magazine and be able to share it with friends. There’s a comedian who talks about “porn in the woods” and like, I remember porn in the woods. It was the little free library of teenage boys before hipsters started making little free libraries. Knowing where it was stashed was a big deal. You couldn’t let that info fall into the wrong hands, and adding to the collection was like being in the club; A real pillar of the community. Depending on the story of how you got it, it could even make you a hero
I hope there’s something out there that’s taken it’s place in boy society
im further left than whoever made this, so dont take it the wrong way but this is a fucking stupid meme. Surely the libs can do better than this… whatever this is… right? Like… this is some boomer-tier stuff
See that’s my only problem with other people on the left… Conservatives will always support other conservatives. They’ll vote for them regardless.
Liberals, Progressives, leftists, they’ll kneecap other without hesitation because they can’t stand simple progress. They want radical change. And if you can’t provide that, then they won’t vote, they won’t support anyone, they’ll talk absolute shit about candidates, ideas, etc.
God forbid anyone tries to sell progressivism to the public… You can always guarantee a leftist will come out of the fucking woodworks to poo poo on it because it’s just not left enough for them. Assholes.
Liberals, Progressives, leftists, they’ll kneecap other without hesitation because they can’t stand simple progress. They want radical change.
Agreed 100%. And I’d expand it further (and more impactfully) many moderates would rather let the country delve into fascism than the mystery box of progressivism that (in their mind) might eventually lead to fascism or higher taxes when they finally become a billionaire.
Moderates and progressives need to agree on a candidate (primary), then both sides need to support them.
We agreed on a candidate. (Bernie)
And the Dems decided to railroad the other candidate through anyway. It makes absolutely perfect sense why progressives think liberals are full of shit.
Hell, Dems are fighting harder against Mamdani right now than they are against Donald, a literal fascist president.
We agreed on a candidate. (Bernie)
You forgot to tell the voters in these yellow states.
A leftist correctly critized me today. I guess we can’t ever have nice things anymore.
Liberals are not on the same end of the political spectrum as leftists. That is why leftists don’t like dealing with them or joining forces with them. Because 9 times out of 10, on issues leftists care about, liberals will side with the right wing.
Bullshit.
Liberals are not anti-capitalist Capitalism is on the right. Liberals are on the right. It really is that simple.
The fundamental difference between the left and right is and has always been preservation of the current form of political economy (the right) vs progression to new form of political economy (the left). During the days of feudalism the right wanted to preserve feudalism and was represented by the landed aristocracy while the left was represented primarily by bourgeois revolutionaries pushing for a capitalist system. Today those bourgeois are on the right because they are trying to preserve the current system that sustains them while communists and anarchist are on the left because they recognize that this system does not work for them and are trying to build a new one. Liberals stand in the way of that and are therefore on the right
Okay Vladimir.
Look, it’s super-simple: Liberals want to tax the rich, Healthcare for all, Environmental protections, and publicly funded Education.
You can say that’s impossible because of worker oppression or whatever but that’s simply not the case. It’s a matter of enough people voting for officeholders who will do the work to implement those things.
Your socialist language is a pitfall and a barrier to practical, actual change.
Liberals want to tax the rich, Healthcare for all, Environmental protections, and publicly funded Education.
Then why do they keep electing people who do the opposite of that?
Taxing the rich, healthcare for all, environmental protections, and publicly funded education are not socialism. They are things that socialism and socialists value sure but they are not socialism. Socialism is an organization of production. Who do I vote for if I want to own the means of production in common? How would a politician ever get elected on that platform and survive? Are you actually suggestion that we can vote business owners out of existence and they’d just roll over and let it happen? You say we just have to vote for the right people but the right people aren’t allowed on the ballot.
If you got the vast majority of votes, yes. Technically.
But more to the point, as you’ll probably get asked in one of the first public appearances, what’s the plan to completely remake the economy? I mean, immediately switch to bartering? Capturing the 1% wealth and everyone gets a big check?
Also, can’t the workers own the means of production, like, now?
I mean liberals think they are until an issue that actually matters arises. Having enough decency to not think minorities should be killed off doesn’t make you a leftist automatically. Thinking the world shouldn’t be run as a Christian fascist autocracy doesn’t by itself make you a leftist. And you can’t just have those two insanely low bars in common with leftists and then be confused when they won’t side with you every election without question.
What the hell are you talking about.
Is this one of those things where you’re mad at/about the Bolsheviks again or something? Are we gonna lose our chains again?
lol say whatever intentionally ignorant crap you want but the upvotes/downvotes agree with me. Until liberals understand that they’re not going to be able to functionally ally with leftists.
Downvotes from “AngryCommieKender” and “10OhmResistor”? Lol yeah you’ve got a huge plurality of the fourteen votes proving your point.
Leftists are pants-wetting screaming babies who can’t be arsed to do the simplest thing to help get us out of this insane chaos they helped get us into.
I disagree entirely with the Democratic strategy to reach out to “moderates” for votes, but I sure as shit understand it. Why bother moving left if leftists are arrogant self-absorbed navel-gazing buttmunchers that can’t get their shit together to run ONE fucking candidate for ONE office much less form a national political party that can gather 5000 signatures.
Please. If you want to pretend Communism as practiced by the Soviets is super cool, great - just stay out of real discussions about politics.
This is false. And no I won’t humor your endless arguing about it.
It’s talking passed eachother. Something any of us can do. No one here should have a problem with what’s in the meme. Liberal in general conversation is a good thing. Everyone wants liberal amounts of freedom. Or liberal amounts of butter on their toast. Etc Etc Etc.
The average person is so ignorant they don’t have an understanding of any political structures to have anything of value to say. So most don’t. It was never intended as liberal as in economic liberal, or neoliberal both basically meaning capitalists. Chances are they all have similar gripes to us about capitalists. But simply have no understanding of how to voice it in an educated way. And this sort of behavior certainly isn’t going to fix that.
As anarchist I would have plenty of places I might disagree with someone who would self describe as liberal. But I know we have far more places we might agree. That neither of us identify with elected officials. That we both feel trapped in this system. That we both want it to be more answerable and representative. We might disagree on how and how much. But we’d both benefit working together against the system. And in the interaction. Perhaps they learn something new and become a proper new ally.
Your last point isn’t correct. You can find people like that on any side of the political spectrum.
Regarding the first and second part, it can be simply due to Conservatives all being in a cult while being uneducated, while Liberals/Progressives/Leftists are mostly all educated and tend to have their own opinions.
You kinda just proved the bro’s point by bitching and moaning about the details and ignoring the substance.
I don’t think so. I’ve nearly just pointed out some lies and inconsistencies in his logic. I also agree that Liberals will never unify and keep fighting each other. But the way he phrased his point was that Conservatives had their shit together and Liberals don’t. The truth is neither have their shit together, but for different reasons.
Bro had a Reddit ahh comment and I had to reply
Did liberals unify in 2020?
It’s also just a lie. Conservatives are constantly in a crabs-in-a-bucket-esque power struggle. The only thing ensuring cohesion on the right is the cult of personality surrounding trump. They all want their particular flavor of oppression to be the one at the top and are happy to stab eachother in the back as soon as the opportunity arises.
Left unity is similarly a myth. The left is full of diverse ideologies, many of which are fundamentally incompatible with one another. We’ve already tried the “left unity” thing before, it lead to the Bolsheviks purging anarchists the second they had the chance, and there’s no reason to believe that left unity would play out any differently nowadays. And while I’m at it, liberals are center right at best and “leftists” should stop concerning themselves so much with what libs think about our politics
The left is full of diverse ideologies, many of which are fundamentally incompatible with one another.
Such as? Just curious.
We’ve already tried the “left unity” thing before, it lead to the Bolsheviks purging anarchists the second they had the chance
Oh. Nm.
Conservatives will always support other conservatives
. . . So what’s a “RHINO”?
Rightists turn on each other for purity tests all the time. Especially amongst the racist ones.
You’ve seen that acronym so rarely that you spelled it wrong.
They keep each other in line but they don’t ‘cancel’ each other. A lot of it is just plausible deniability really.
Conservatives will always support other conservatives. They’ll vote for them regardless.
That’s not true. But I can’t compel myself to waste time providing evidence when you won’t read it in the first place. So fuck it, and fuck this community.
Great argument you changed my mind.
Yeah? OK dont read these then:
https://mediarelations.gwu.edu/media-tip-sheet-gop-infighting-threatens-upend-house-majority
Bro I already said that you changed my mind.
😆
Oh sure they “fight” all the time, they just ultimately end up voting for whatever trump (or Bush or whothefuckever) says. i.e. “support”.
Largely because they all believe in the imaginary construct of White Jesus, or a worldview that is compatible with it.
Me too but hey, if this resonates with some boomers I’m all for it.
I can never really tell how un/intentionally memey the boomer aspect is anymore, but my brain might be broken. It’s definitely a meme by libs, for libs though.
shitlibs? Bourgeoise?
I don’t know if that’s what it means though. I took it as the normal things everyone is taught in childhood, that conservatives agree with teaching, is now thought if as “left”
After seeing a bunch of tankie memes on Lemmy, I’ve become a bit more aware of the popularity of low quality “picture of text” memes that confirm you are correct and others are wrong. It’s fine to have beliefs but saying you have them because you paid attention in school is silly.
The point was that conservatives base their beliefs on lies and emotions, not information. And that’s true.
“Well I went to middle school also guns bad”
For me its summed up by writer Pearl Buck:
“Our society must make it right and possible for old people not to fear the young or be deserted by them, for the test of a civilization is the way that it cares for its helpless members.”
… and that’s why I joined ICE.
(Seriously, why is the image some guy wearing a face mask?)
Looks like it’s just standard cold weather gear. Looks like he may be hiking/ skiing/ backpacking in cold weather.
But, why choose that image to go with that text?
Not revealing too much about you is a smart move
Must be on his way to kidnap a yeti
Ah, so you admit schools are indoctrinating kids?
Define “So”.
“Liberal” without either putting “Social” or “Economic” in front of it, is a meaningless term.
It’s not a meaningless term for the people who use it as a pejorative. For them, it encompasses everything they hate, however nebulous that set of things may be.
Nah, for me it’s meaning is a very specific group of right wingers. I also hate every other type of right winger too, so it’s only encompassing one portion of my hate.
Hate towards social liberals by lefties seems like a really successful astroturf perpetrated by the right.
Two groups who should very much be allies are not and it feels like it’s by design
To you the word liberal describes right wingers?
Yes and this is normal amongst leftists. Liberals support capitalism no?
Liberals generally support policies that trend towards socialism.
Are you sure you’re not thinking of libertarians?
Welfare and some nationalized industry ≠ socialism. Not even in the slightest. Besides socialism is not achievable through the systems built by and for the bourgeois. Why would they let us vote them out of existence lol?
You can’t trend towards socialism. You either are or are not a proletarian state.
You can absolutely trend towards socialism. Economic systems are a spectrum.
I mean, Webster’s disagrees with you.
Why aren’t you?
OP’s also liberal because supporting genocide isn’t a disqualifier for the presidency.
I want to tell some of our friends this. Liberal doesn’t mean what they think it means. They can keep trying with “libs” and “shitlibs” and “lib cucks” or what ever Rush Limbaughisms, but they’ll never make any practical progress. Presuming that’s what they want and they’re not just Macedonian troll farm drones.
Actually doing the work of an elected office is difficult and boring, and compromise is going to be in there. It’s just how humans work together. Some leftist commenters are either lying or completely outside that reality.
