Thank you for providing an excellent example of how people react once that “enemy” box that I was talking about gets triggered. “It’s not my fault you were raised” etc is a perfect example of how people talk when they think they’re talking to an “enemy,” and attacking is more important than anything else.
(Mao also thought that killing all the birds would help the agriculture, I don’t really take him as any kind of authority on how stuff works. MLK Jr. would have been a better example.)
very specific academic definition that most people use
Definitely not lol. Almost nothing in political philosophy works this way, where everyone generally agrees on what the big and heavy loaded words mean, that have been in use worldwide and for centuries in all kinds of situations.
Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, the right to private property, and equality before the law.[1][2] Liberals espouse various and sometimes conflicting views depending on their understanding of these principles but generally support private property, market economies, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), liberal democracy, secularism, rule of law, economic and political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion.[3] Liberalism is frequently cited as the dominant ideology of modern history.[4][5]: 11
So that’s the definition that everyone agrees on – so any liberal would strongly oppose Israel, because they’re violating any number of those principles (basically all of them), right? You’d agree with that? Or no? I have a feeling you’re about to educate me again.
Thank you for providing an excellent example of how people react once that “enemy” box that I was talking about gets triggered. “It’s not my fault you were raised” etc is a perfect example of how people talk when they think they’re talking to an “enemy,” and attacking is more important than anything else.
(Mao also thought that killing all the birds would help the agriculture, I don’t really take him as any kind of authority on how stuff works. MLK Jr. would have been a better example.)
“liberal” has a very specific academic definition that most people use. It’s not my fault if you don’t understand that.
Definitely not lol. Almost nothing in political philosophy works this way, where everyone generally agrees on what the big and heavy loaded words mean, that have been in use worldwide and for centuries in all kinds of situations.
So that’s the definition that everyone agrees on – so any liberal would strongly oppose Israel, because they’re violating any number of those principles (basically all of them), right? You’d agree with that? Or no? I have a feeling you’re about to educate me again.