I prefer the term “Heteronormative Socialist”!
All this post shows is that you don’t understand liberalism.
Liberalism is when you smash everything required for liberalism
the last panel would also have worked great with the “dirty commie”-part :D
Talking to an older, conservative acquaintance and he says to me “I’m glad you’re not a liberal like everyone else your age”
Me, stifling a smirk, “I am certainly not a liberal”
Certainly not a liberal…
Liberal is shorthand for economically liberal aka free market capitalists, any other definition is wrong, fuck liberals
Words mean what people use them to mean, and the definition of “liberal” as being “the opposite of conservative” is well established in general usage. You’re allowed to be annoyed by it, but saying that it’s wrong just makes other people take nothing you say seriously.
It’s a losing battle in here my dude.
I’ve made the same point so many times on Lemmy and it gets so much bitterness in return. The fact that I’m not the only one pointing this out repeatedly should be proof enough but noooooo.
ThAtS nOt ThE dEfInItIoN… I GET IT, IT’S COMMONLY USED THAT WAY THOUGH!!!
Stupid people stop taking true things serious all the time, since when is this the golden standard of whether information is true lmao? Ya’ll so desperate for socialization it’s genuinely pathetic.
Why are you being mean? Does that help make your point?
Telling other people saying “liberal” has a definition will make people not take you seriously isn’t nice either lmao. But since it’s status quo that’s fine right?
But since it’s status quo that’s fine right?
No.
I saw their statement as broad and untargeted. Saying people won’t take you seriously doesn’t really “ding” on my mean-dar.
You calling someone pathetic does though.
Why you angry? Why does it matter if there’s a different usage of a word that you disagree with?
well established in general usage.
Only in the US. The “Liberal Democrats” in the UK are not understood to be the opposite of the Tories, and there are many similar cases in countries around the world.
The reason liberal is understood to mean the opposite of conservative in the US is only because historically socialism became such a dirty word, liberals did everything they could to distance themselves from it, and there was no major socialist party or movement.
Since socialism has become resurgent, it makes more sense, especially on an international platform like this one, to adopt the internationally understood meaning.
Only in the US.
Not really. We don’t use the word liberal in the UK anywhere near so much, but any average person (as opposed to a person well into polsci) describing themselves as “liberal” would be understood to be saying that they are progressive on social issues, not that they are in favour of free markets (though that may or may not be the case).
The “Liberal Democrats” in the UK are not understood to be the opposite of the Tories
Eh, yes and no. It is historically correct that the Liberal in Liberal Democrats refers to capital L Liberalism, being a merger of the Liberal Party and the Social Democratic Party, but the fact that the Lib Dems and the Tories are basically aligned on economic policy and only differ on how much they hate multiculturalism and trans people only serves to give the impression to people not well read in theory that that is what makes them “liberal”, if anything.
The reason liberal is understood to mean the opposite of conservative in the US is only because historically socialism became such a dirty word, liberals did everything they could to distance themselves from it, and there was no major socialist party or movement.
Perhaps. I’m not actually from the US.
Since socialism has become resurgent, it makes more sense, especially on an international platform like this one, to adopt the internationally understood meaning.
No, it doesn’t, because there isn’t one single internationally understood meaning. That is why the word has multiple definitions in the dictionary; some of them relate to liberalism as a political ideology, and some of them don’t. You aren’t going to succeed in building community or solidarity with anyone if the first thing you do is tell them that they’ll aren’t using their words correctly because they aren’t using it according to your list of acceptable definitions.
It means lack of government involvement.
Yes, economic is included but it also includes everything else.
Having no government at all is liberal. The issue socialists find is that there’s no one to protect against oppressors but anarchists and communists believe in a liberal society where there are no oppressors.
Words can have more than one meaning. Liberalism means one thing politically and another philosophically. Arguing it means only one thing is misleading and wrong.
But yes American liberals are not helpful at best
The classical definition is actually free markets with protection from harm, which is very different
They still believe in the concept of a free market and capitalism being good. What we’ve seen with attempts to regulate is either the companies ignore it because the fines are less than what it’d cost to follow the law, skirt around it in some way, or just buy up people to then strike it.
Then you’re not regulating it properly are you?.. there are tons of regulations in play that do work.
Companies still dump untreated waste water right into water ways even with regulation. I just see it an endless chase of the capitalists one step ahead at all times at least, often more because it takes time to draft regulation. Capitalism has only brought “prosperity” to a few from the continued exploitation of others. It still believes growth infinite in a closed system.
I think punishments of anything to that degree of bad should be immediate bankruptcy with a ban on holding any C suite position for the rest of your life or face that ban in prison. We’re not harsh enough on them, and so they feel like its not a problem even if they get caught.
It will always be a fight of capital in politics that the c-suite would push to prevent this.
No matter what, if you can buy and sell ownership as a shareholder, then you have a fundamental misalignment from the direct stakeholders of a firm. This is why I find unions and regulations to be band-aids.
A capitalist system is fundamentally misaligned and it will always work to undo those regulations with capital accumulation and regulatory capture. The only way to fix that is to require direct stakeholder ownership whether that be worker-consumer coöps, syndicates, public ownership, or what have you. The ownership and decision-making must needs be aligned with the people benefitting or who are otherwise impacted by the operations of a firm. That is Socialism and that is not the regulation bandaids that Liberalism trys to paste over Capitalism’s flaws and cracks.
You’ve seen attempts to regulate that are generally company-sponsored and ineffective in preventing the harms the regulations are intended to prevent. Or you’ve seen out and out corruption which buys democracy and breaks it. Liberalism, as I understand it (as a European) allows state ownership and a free market, in different goods and dependent upon conditions in that market, to prioritise people over capital
Yeah, Liberalism doesn’t align companies with their direct stakeholders at all and so any attempt to regulate will be under tension like trying to push two magnets together.
The definition I’d go with is: “Anyone who is in favor of both free market capitalism and individual rights.”
Which, yeah, would be kind of neat if you could have both. But the former tends to erode the latter quite badly over time.
That’s called a classical liberal fyi
Great! Welcome to now
If the market involve buying and selling shares, then that is still capitalism, just with social safety nets.
Usually its the people who actually ARE liberals calling you a liberal.
What the actual fuck are yall on about
Nitpicking words and making broad, unfounded generalizations.
High quality Lemmy past time! Crack a cold one open and grab a seat!
Leftist politics.
As usual, seeing how this is lemmy
There’s always 4chan if you want the opposite.
Ew, you made me throw up a bit in my mouth
To any Americans actually confused, let me give you to the bite sized introduction of what liberalism actually means from Philosophy Tube.
Liberalism in america and liberalism in Europe, etc are different. We have libertarianism which is closer to classic liberalism others refer to.
Nah, even in America, liberalism is defined by still being capitalist.
Yes but can include alot of socialism/social components. It is a very broad term in the US. It is more left than center but not far left. Strong social support but more fiscally central.
Socialism is not “social components” though. As clearly defined by the separation between social democrats (capitalism supporters but large welfare net) and democratic socialists (anticapitalists who believe reform is helpful but will not save us from capitalism, only bringing down the system will).
Liberalism is still tied to the belief in free market because that’s how the philosophy started.
I cannot stand how shitpost is literally just a place for people to shoehorn all sorts of edgy political takes. And when I say edgy, I mean the same loudmouth shit we hear all the time here.
when I say edgy, I mean the same loudmouth shit we hear all the time here
This is the real issue. Edgy is fine. “”““Edgy””“”" is tiring as fucking fuck
At least it’s after the election; the pre-election circle-jerking about how Democrats/liberals are the worst thing to happen to humanity were… suspicious.
The leftist memes never change, the only difference is we’re only allowed to speak when Liberals don’t find it inconvenient.
Spoken like someone who’s never been accused of wrongspeak in .ml.
Can you please tell me the difference between leftist and liberal?
Neo-Liberals are basically capitalists pretending to be anarchists. They love capitalism, and the freedoms they fight for are meant for corporations; not people.
Liberals enshrine property rights which include land, labor (people) and capital (machinary). Thereby, the owner dominates land, labor and capital.
There are many flavors of Leftist. Proudhon stated it best as, “Property is Theft!”. Property rights are inconsistent with freedom. The owners derive their living from the labor of workers on land that was held in common with machines created by other exploited workers. Anarchy is an effort to end such domination.
Ok got it. If you dont know, when American media says “left” or “the left”, they mean liberal by your definition.
Leftists don’t believe in a (free) market, while liberals do.
In other words, leftists generally believe buying and selling, currency, etc. should be eradicated.
There’s countless differences between leftists.
The unifying differences are anti-capitalism and being against private ownership - which in leftist thinking is differentiated from personal ownership (toothbrushes, personal housing, etc). Generally there’s some degree of anti-hierarchical values.
There’s countless differences between leftists.
They asked for the difference between leftists and liberals, not whether or not there are differences between leftists.
The unifying differences are anti-capitalism and being against private ownership - which in leftist thinking is differentiated from personal ownership (toothbrushes, personal housing, etc).
Correct.
Generally there’s some degree of anti-hierarchical values.
Same with liberals, so generally incorrect.
C-
Liberals do not want to do away with representative democracy?
Not part of any definition of “liberal” I’ve heard of, no.
Another shitty anarchist take.
No one wants to be blue maga and that’s what we got
What does that mean?
It means you burned up on re-entry
No true Scotsman, eh?
Failing to see how that applies here
In the USA liberal is the term used to describe progressives. I believe that’s what they mean.
Any Joe Schmoe on the street in the USA will use it that way. They do not know the dictionary/philosophical definition of the term, that people on Lemmy beat on relentlessly.
In the USA liberal is the term used to describe progressives.
No we don’t. We use that to describe democrats who pretend to lean left while being conservative in all but name. Actual progressives get called other things like anarchists, dirty commies, or unamerican.
That may be true for you, but not most Americans. Your corporeal body may exist in the US, but you live online.
Hey dude, right here with you. So many arm chair revolutionaries online.
People so stuck on a single meaning of a word, completely ignoring the facts.
Words have multiple meanings sometimes. Whether that’s cultural or just from misuse. Doesn’t matter.
The majority gets to decide so many things for you. You ever get tired of that?
Do I get tired of the majority deciding what words mean? Not really. That’s how language has always worked, and the only way it can work as far as I can tell.
I’m talking about this part doofus:
That may be true for you, but not most Americans.
I don’t let the shit the dumbest people in the country do determine what’s right for me, except perhaps as a negative example.
Don’t forget the most damning and horrific title of “socialist”
Eh. If you’re in the know, then yes, you’re correct, but your average American probably doesn’t even understand that there’s any distinction at all, and so for those people “liberal” is the catch-all term for progressives.
If someone who actually understands politics calls me a liberal, I’m gonna protest. If my dumbfuck uncle calls me a liberal, I’ll let it lie, because that’s as close as he’s reasonably going to get to understanding my political views.
progressives understand the difference, not our fault the rest of the nation is uneducated,fuck it’s their fault schools are underfunded and refuse to learn
You don’t actually understand the difference.
Like class, political philosophy is tied to who owns things. Who controls the means of production.
“Progressive” is a meaningless term for those who think capitalism can be reformed, but think enough activity can make neoliberalsim not do what capitalism always does, accumulate for the private holders.
Basically in the Midwest anyone who is not conservative/GOP is called liberal. From center to Marx himself, all libs. It is confusing being on Lemmy where classic liberalism is used.
Yeah, cause that’s how those on the right view anyone left of them. The Overton Window has shifted way too far right that both capitalist neoliberals and socialists get called liberal socialists by the right despite that literally being an oxymoron.
Neo-liberalism as well. The foundation of discussion of politics is so uprooted it takes an entire other discussion to explain and use proper terminology.
K
bullshit. I hang out in progressives circles, every single American progressive world be insulted if I they are called liberal.
K
Liberals are conservatives, they want the status quo. Progressives seek to fix broken liberal policies and structures.
There is this thing where conservatives call Democratic people liberals as a pejorative. This is nonsense though as most conservatives very much support liberal structures like the system of law.
I swear. You get on the Internet and people just want to be angry and espouse their views without understanding what they’ve read in the first place.
I explained what I believe the reasoning behind the parent comment is. Nothing more. I’m not stating my personal belief or understanding of the word.
I KNOW what a liberal is by definition. It’s NOT USED THAT WAY in the USA common discourse.
People talking about their progressive circles and how the word “liberal” gets used are missing my point too. I’m not talking about correct usage, I’m taking about common usage. The news, day to day conversation with people outside your bubble.
What you refer to as the common usage in the US is not common amongst anyone but ignorant conservatives. I clarified that for you.
Amongst many Democratic people the word is generally viewed as positive.
The people this meme is talking about typically would not consider themselves progressive either. That it is a flavor of liberal
Take it easy on him – he can’t imagine anyone being further left than a ‘progressive’.
Just because someone is using a term with its own meanings and definition horribly incorrectly doesn’t mean it’s acceptable to perpetrate it.
My god, I’m merely explaining the original comment someone else made.
I know the pedantry is expected, but maybe we can take a step back and read intent before smashing faces into our respective keyboards?
The rest of the world uses the actual dictionary definition. “America uses its own definition so that must be more correct” is pretty damn yankee
Never argued that it was more correct…
I’m merely explaining the original comment someone else made.
I know the pedantry is expected, but maybe we can take a step back and read intent before smashing faces into our respective keyboards?
Your intent isn’t easily demonstrable.
In the first statement, I have 2 clauses.
I say “I believe that’s what they mean” in the second clause…
I’m my second statement, I expand on that. I explain WHY that’s what I BELIEVE they mean. I point out that a lot of people in the USA don’t know the actual definition. Implying I KNOW THE DEFINITION. BUT words have different meaning in different cultures. Which is why I explain it in the first place…
I never say it’s correct. I’m stating a fact.
“They do not know the dictionary/philosophical definition of the term, that people on Lemmy beat on relentlessly.”
This frames average americans as victims of Lemmy users explaining the definition of words to them. The average american is a dip sniffing, catcalling, big truck driving asshole with a chip on their shoulder because they have to live next to people that are different from them. I’m an American who’s lived here my whole life all across the country. What you’re saying doesn’t hit AT ALL
The term progressive was invented to literally differentiate from liberals along the conservative to progressive axis. Liberals by definition don’t want systemic change, they just want to be liberal in spending towards social services and regulations, but keep the capitalist structure underneath.
You see that explanation you gave? I’m going to assume it’s correct.
But that doesn’t change the fact that those terms get used as synonyms by a lot of people in the USA.
And besides that point… I was only trying to explain what the original comment was pointing to.
Liberals want freedom of some kind: liberalism; liberty. That may be freedom for individuals or for companies. It may be a negative “freedom from interference” or positive “freedom to achieve ones desires”. That variety is what gives it its many practical meanings
No, liberals actively fight against progressives in the US.
Uh I’m greek?
