this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2025
59 points (100.0% liked)

El Chisme

518 readers
1 users here now

Place for posting about the dumb shit public figures say.

Rules:

Rule 1: The subject of a post must be a public person.

Rule 2: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 3: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 4: No sectarianism.

Rule 5: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 6: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 7: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 8: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Lots of funny, bad takes in here.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] abc@hexbear.net 37 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

Great question. I think the word "liberal" has been abused for so long that one way to get large swaths of Americans to turn against you is to call you "a liberal." In 2009 some researches asked this question: why do Americans largely support liberal policies (medicare, a strong social security network, economic redistribution, etc) but refuse to call themselves "liberal"? The answer is what I detail in my book--it was a character assassination--they were attacked from the right, the left, civil rights activists, and lots more. This splintered the unity of the left and the center-left, meaning they are not as unified as those on the right. The right has been so successful because of their remarkable unity, despite the fact that much of what they propose polls unfavorably. Plus, there's just something wishy washy about the liberal tradition of talking things through and not having deep principles founded in religious faith or national identity.

Great question. A liberal is one who espouses liberalism, which of course provokes the next question: what is liberalism? It's a political philosophy deriving from the Latin word "Liber," which means "free." So liberalism is about protecting and expanding individual freedoms against anything that seeks to diminish them. The bad guys have changed over time, meaning the focus of liberalism has changed over time. When it was the yoke of the Catholic Church that was denying individual freedom (say starting in the 16th and 17th centuries), liberals attacked it, favoring religious tolerance and free expression. When it was kings and queens (in say the 18th and 19th centuries), liberal attacked them, favoring democracy and representative governments and the protection of individual rights. In the 20th and 21st centuries (since the rise of the Industrial Revolution) it has been big business and oligarchs who are denying widespread individual freedoms, so liberals have focused their attacks on redistributing the economy and regulating capitalism. As some posters have commented here, that brought it closer to socialism then ever before, and that's true. So liberals are those who evoke the spirit of protecting individual freedom, while being well aware that because those in power are so strong there will be some collective efforts required (taxation, social security floors, etc.). It's a spirit, though, not a set of policies--a fact that is both a great strength and a great weakness.

very-smart no

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 29 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Plus, there's just something wishy washy about the liberal tradition of talking things through and not having deep principles founded in religious faith or national identity.

This person is just granting a huge amount of legitimacy to fascism for no reason, completely uncritical of the wishy-washy nature of religious dogma or national identity.

[–] CommunistCuddlefish@hexbear.net 34 points 6 months ago

This person is just granting a huge amount of legitimacy to fascism for no reason

Yep, sounds like a liberal.

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 17 points 6 months ago (1 children)

But they don't talk things through, they just pat themselves on the back after trading cliches to reaffirm what they already believe.

[–] AmarkuntheGatherer@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The notion that liberals actually engage in discourse regarding the policies they advocate for was invented by liberals to sell books and adspace.

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

In reality they would love to go WH40K on everyone with shouting "HERESY!" and burning people, but this way is less tiring, more profitable and don't require so much organising.

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

They coyly dipped their toes into it with all that 'orc' shit, that's for sure

[–] CommunistCuddlefish@hexbear.net 26 points 6 months ago (1 children)

lmfao. Can't take this dude seriously. Thank you for sifting through that garbage so I didn't have to fidel-salute-big

[–] ButtBidet@hexbear.net 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)

To add some nuance, the author seems to be a progressive liberal. He vaguely understands that leftists hate capitalism and liberals often don't. Still I wouldn't read him, though.

When the left hates on liberals for being beards of capitalism who love banks more than people

[–] CommunistCuddlefish@hexbear.net 13 points 6 months ago

Ok, very slightly redeeming.