this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2025
210 points (96.1% liked)

Memes

55839 readers
701 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 30 points 9 months ago (1 children)

the smugness is always the worst part.

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 4 points 9 months ago

berdly-smug "Um, have you considered (facile bullshit we all heard ten thousand times before even becoming leftists)?"

[–] BeefandSquints@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I've never encountered this type of liberal. Neolib, sure.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 27 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Liberalism is an ideology with two main parts. First is political liberalism which focuses on individual freedoms, democracy, and human rights. Second is economic liberalism which centers around free markets, private property, and wealth accumulation. These two aspects form a contradiction. Political liberalism purports to support everyone’s freedom, while economic liberalism enshrines private property rights as sacred in laws and constitutions, effectively removing them from political debate.

Liberalism justifies the use of state violence to safeguard property rights even when they come into direct conflict with providing necessities such as food, shelter, and healthcare. The idea that private property is a key part of individual freedom provides the foundational justification for the rich to keep their wealth while ignoring the needs of everyone else. Thus, all the talk of promoting freedom and democracy is nothing more than a fig leaf to provide cover for justifying capitalist relations.

This is an excellent primer on the subject https://orgrad.wordpress.com/articles/liberalism-the-two-faced-tyranny-of-wealth/

[–] BeefandSquints@lemmy.dbzer0.com -5 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I very much understand all of this. Do you truly prefer maga? You would rather have ICE raids than student loan forgiveness? You would rather have Medicaid cuts than the CHIPS act. I am not a liberal but I have to admit I am extremely embarrassed by the short sightedness and lack of care from modern leftists. Letting Trump won is causing so much harm to people who don't deserve it. Is the DNC the answer, fuck no. But letting republicans win everything is clearly pushing America to the far right.

[–] Nojustice@lemmy.ml 13 points 9 months ago

How on earth did you come to the conclusion the comment you were responding to was supporting MAGA? Honestly baffling

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 9 points 9 months ago

Not only are you creating a false dichotomy here, but you're ignoring the fact that Trump coming to power is itself is a direct product of decades of liberal policies.

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Exhibit number 6,631 of liberals refusing to process the existence of people to their left and just pretending everyone who disagrees with their preferred form of polite fascism must secretly just be a different type of fascist.

Also lol if you think the dems are ever going to do student loan forgiveness. They'll be dangling that scrap over your head to get you to vote for the next bipartisan genocide until the day you die.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 24 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Neolibs are just a subcategory of liberal, though.

[–] sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works -4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I'm not actually sure that's true.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Why wouldn't it be? Liberalism is the ideological superstructure of capitalism, Neoliberals are a particular type.

[–] jorge@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

You said liberalism is the ideological supersyrucyure of capitalism, as if it was the only one. But there is also fascism, right? Were you imprecise, or am I missing something?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I'd say imprecise, for the sake of short convo. Liberalism in my view is the "normal" ideological superstructure of capitalism, and fascism is the ideological superstructure of capitalism in crisis, when capital needs to violently assert itself to maintain the existing way of things. It's what happens when the rulers can't rule in the old way, and/or the people can't live in the old way, but when the proletariat is without a vanguard, or a weak one.

[–] WindAqueduct@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

Yes, people should have that, but it's not that simple. Some liberals, particularly classical liberals, think a free market would bring those things to everyone. I don't necessarily disagree, though I think free markets can only ever be free under communism/socialism, not capitalism. The issue with centrally planned, universal healthcare is that a hostile government could refuse to provide you care, much like insurance companies that don't approve coverage for many things. Additionally, there needs to be strong medical privacy protections.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 14 points 9 months ago

Markets are fundamentally profit driven, and services like healthcare or housing need to be provided regardless of the profit motive. These are a natural fit for the state owned industries. Where markets can have a role is providing nice to have things that improve general quality of life, but aren't living essentials.

[–] Vingst@hexbear.net 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Market-based healthcare favors perpetual treatment over permanent cures or preventative medicine, like dialysis over kidney transplants, insulin instead of diet and exercise. If you have a rare disease than you are just fucked, because pharmaceutical companies just want to sell dick pills. A market's purpose is to maximize revenue, not patient well-being.

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 3 points 9 months ago

I mean that's the potential problem with any service: that the faction running it could decide they don't like you. I don't think that's a good enough reason not to build things that help society though. A government could decide not to let you on a train, i still think there should be trains