They are really good at providing examples for why civilized society needs socialism.
This is written like a desperate list maker from Breitbart needs to make a deadline.
Why not just admit you vote right, hate a subset of people, and want to believe that you are the only person who can be trusted to break the rules?
My list of things I like about liberalism:
- It isn’t quite as bad as conservatism.
That’s it. That’s the list.
And following are my lists of things I like about conservatism and capitalism respectively:
Can’t say much about liberalism or capitalism, but classic Conservatism’s emphasis on environmental conservation has always been something I appreciate. It goes to show how far the quote-unquote "G"OP has strayed from its party’s original beliefs.
I like that they appear to be dying out. I just hope we outlast them.
I, weakly, believe capitalism for all its ills is still the best way to run our economies. With serious regulations and a social safety net to make life better for the have-nots. This arguably works “okay” in most places.
Mostly I have yet to see evidence or compelling arguments that other schemes can work well in our time. Go back 500 years, sure, pre-industrial economies worked fine without capitalism. Go forward 500 years, Star Trek, maybe? But not right now.
I think it was good to get our country to it’s most prosperous point, but there are obviously some huge flaws now causing a smaller middle class. It seems that a form of evolution is needed, and we are at a point where some change is needed, but capitalism was great at creating a large middle class before digressing from that.
Yep. I am not an economist, but I do read a lot of history and it seems to me Keynesianism worked quite well for most people at the time (1940s-1970s), and perhaps going back to it would help the middle class. Neoliberalism/Austrian-school/individualism have caused monumental inequalities since the 1970s. Sure, GDP growth has been spectacular (number goes up), but most people have not benefited. I don’t think this is a flaw of capitalism per-se.
Still, I also hope something better comes along and we won’t have to live under some future dystopian corporatocracy… Weyland-Yutani appreciates you
The levels of privilege and selfishness it takes to see the “benefit” for the American “middle class” (not a thing), while so willingly ignoring the cost that that came with to everyone else on the planet is both staggering and quite nauseating.
I am aware of the ugly side of capitalism. But I’m also a realist and I have not seen a better alternative for organizing industrialized economies than a market economy. It’s fine to shout “socialism!” but actual Socialist planned economies have not done well (and it is well understood why) while the many, many ideas for various utopian-sounding decentralized systems are so-far totally unproven.
Of course if you think we should give up on our lives with electric vehicles and PlayStation 5s, sure, you don’t need capitalism. There’s simply no need to exploit other people if everything you need is made locally with simple tools. But I’m not sure how many people will want to go back to this kind of lifestyle, though it would arguably be better for the planet and humanity.
Yeah I agree. I think the laws of supply and demand, when heavily regulated by a government that actually gives a shit about its people, is way more effective than any other way of running an economy.
I’m not sure what there is to like, honestly. Capitalism has done an excellent job at making sure that we have homeless and hungry people, despite having more homes than homeless people, and we throw away enough food to feed all of them too. conservative values led to suburban america, which is such an incredible failure in every single way. You can’t walk practically anywhere, we don’t design infrastructure for pedestrians, and we build anti-homeless architecture anywhere that we do happen to have areas people can take shelter from the elements or sit down in public (because having homeless people visible is bad for business!). You have to pay money to just exist anywhere. I’m fucking tired of it. It inconveniences those of us who have homes, and just want to be able to socialize in public places, and makes existence HELL for those of us without homes.
Liberalism, at best, wants to maintain the status quo, and is never willing to push for change fast enough to stop people from slipping through the cracks. Roe VS Wade was, quite literally, abolished while we had a liberal president. Biden is still funding Israel’s genocide.
Capitalism calls for infinite growth in order to please investors… which will stop eventually. Whether we want it to or not. They’ll just destroy the planet even more than they already before they get to that point. There’s not infinite resources, and the damage we’ve done to our planet because of industrialization and capitalism is irreversible.
So yeah.
Fuck liberalism, capitalism, and conservatism.Three flavors of dogshit
From WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) [wn]: liberalism n 1: a political orientation that favors social progress by reform and by changing laws rather than by revolution 2: an economic theory advocating free competition and a self- regulating marketSeems like the first definition is conservative-left. The second definition sounds like capitalism. Honest question here, but what am I missing?
We think that markets are by far the best way of organising most human affairs that involve scarce resources, because they align people’s incentives in ways that communicate where resources can be be used most efficiently, and give people reasons to come up with new ways of using existing resources.
A system is justified if it is the one that best allows people to live the lives that they want to live, or makes them happiest or more satisfied than any other.
Ø (the empty set)
(This, of course, assumes you mean economic liberalism. Social liberalism is all right.)
deleted by creator
Does conservatism mean “preserve the way things are”? Things are bad. Things are really bad for a lot of people. Trying to preserve things in such a state is difficult to justify.
Is it “outgroups to bind, in groups to defend”? Well that’s obviously a bad framework.
Not one blessed thing. Conservatives are psychotic morons, liberals are boot lickers, and capitalism is destroying the world.
Liberalism: Human flourishing, the expansion of scientific knowledge, recognition of human rights
Capitalism: More resilient to corruption than planned economies
Conservatism: Prevents backsliding and cultural loss, encourages social stability
human flourishing
is alex “only cares about humans” epstein ._.
I think you should explain what you mean, because I’m lacking the context to infer it on my own.
Thanks for explaining, that’s fucking gross. Would have used a different phrase had I known this was out there.
Cultural loss is thinly veiled white supremacy.
Sometimes it is, yes. It’s no secret that white supremacists, whatever their stances on political or economic issues, will hide their social views behind the label of conservatism. Thankfully, society has started to move past them, and they can rightfully be decried as regressive.
Okay, having read both articles just now, I have serious critiques.
The first fails to either prove it’s thesis or, somehow, understand the ethos of liberalism. Very good write-up of the rise of fascism and its causes, though. Overall not a bad article but unconvincing.
The second conflates capitalism and liberalism and jumps between one and the other nonsensically, making it essentially all noise.
