I’m not sure why you think liberals are the solution. They’re just as much a part of the problem and not in a “liberals have slowly shifted to the right” way.
Keep in mind, Eugenics received pretty heavy support from liberals. Liberals are just as responsible for the corporate hellscape we’re currently entering, they’re just the parent in the abusive household that comes in and makes sure you don’t make problems for the other one that just got done beating you.
Idk what the solution is, but something makes me doubt it’s liberals teaming up.
The various trolls infesting lemmy love to play on the nearly opposite meaning of “liberal” in the global political sense vs the US political sense.
In other countries, they use “liberal” or “liberalism” to refer to a right wing ideology. In the US, “liberal” means a left wing ideology, like social democracy.
I think the misalignment in meaning actually has more to do with the 1-dimensional binary you just pointed to than to a reversal of meanings.
Liberalism is an ideology of individualism, which has some overlap with both left and right US political categories, but is certainly not “left” in the poly-sci sense of the word.
You’re still talking about European liberalism. Liberalism in the United States is more collectivist. Liberals in the US believe that improving the common good makes all our lives better, and believe that those more fortunate should be made to help those less fortunate.
I understand the US political category and the normalized usage of it, but liberalism has a very distinct meaning in polysci. There are aspects of liberalism (in the classical use of the word) within the US political category ‘liberal’, especially when it comes to fiscal policy. People who castigate liberals from the left are those who primarily take issue with that particular quality of US Democratic policy, not the qualities you’re speaking fondly of here.
Edit: I should say - it is still just a term that describes a particular thing, so if that term isn’t adequately describing what you’re talking about, then maybe a different word should be used
Lol, they absolutely do not generally mean opposite things. Liberalism includes letting the market regulate itself and abdicating economic authority to capital; US Democratic policy fits that description with sparse exceptions.
The people you’re talking about are criticizing exactly those aspects of US democratic policy that classical ‘liberalism’ describes.
They’re not trolling you, you’re just self-identifying yourself with something you might not actually agree with (or you do agree with it, but you take offense with the disparagement)
I’m not a troll. Liberals haven’t saved us, I’m not sure why you would think a Liberal is going to. I’m voting Biden because a U.S. under Trump is worse, but if you think stifling any conversation about what happens next with “the libs will save us” is contributing anything then you’re just as fucking dumb as the pugs that frequent hexbear.
The libs could save us, if we could ever get enough in power.
Of course the libs haven’t saved us, they haven’t had the numbers. It’s been neck and neck with the fascists for 20 years.
Imagine what we could do if the Dems had a 20 year supermajority. Universal healthcare, UBI, free college, wealth tax, these are all things that standard-issue Dems would love to do if it were feasible. The reason centrist Dems take baby steps isn’t because that’s all they want, it’s because that’s all they can do. Give em the power and they’ll do more.
We did. They had a comfortable majority in congress and a Democratic president for years. Best we got out of it was the ACA which was more of a corporate love letter than anything else. Not to mention, would’ve been the perfect time to throw a few bankers in jail but no. Couldn’t be bothered to do that.
That’s pathetic. So pathetic I suspect they never intended to wield so much power because they have no real interest in working for the American people.
I’m voting Biden because Trump is demonstrably worse.
That being said, if you think that Biden is going to prevent the next conservative candidate from gaining steam: you are simply fucking dumb. If you think that the libs are going to prevent the next conservative candidate from gaining steam: you are simply fucking dumb. You stifling any conversation because you don’t like the context matter and are predispositioned to assume you’re unable to reach any consensus with the person on the other side is, guess what? BAD.
tell me how you’re going to fix the “corporate hellscape”.
I can’t. I would need the help of the people that are around me, the people that I can communicate to with words.
Let’s see, half of the country is religious. So that’s obviously an uphill battle, the other half… oh that would probably be the side that has people like you and the other people downvoting me.
Gonna go ahead and say it’s an uphill battle on both sides. Imagine actually demanding an entire plan that requires both uniting the country, which includes eradicating white supremacy and the various inequalities in the U.S., and then solving climate change.
My long term solution would be uniting the under 50 vote to add the 28th amendment.
The 28th amendment needs to eliminate money/donations/bribes/grifts from the election process. It also needs to eliminate any form of augmented monetary enrichment for elected officials.
Until corruption via monetary gain can be somewhat controlled, we can never achieve a legitimate democracy.
How much time is your plan going to take? Because we’re on a clock.
There are plenty of conservatives in the under 50 bracket, obviously that will change as more babies are born; but how is your plan going to play out with population replacement rates falling globally?
I’m not intentionally poking holes, your suggestion is great and it is absolutely a step that needs to be taken. I just think that we’ve entered unfamiliar territory and I fear that old strategies may not be applicable. The conservatives have basically been waging a whisper campaign on the people of the U.S. and we’re seeing the effects of that coming to a head. We will not simply “unite the people under 50”.
deleted by creator
I’m not sure why you think liberals are the solution. They’re just as much a part of the problem and not in a “liberals have slowly shifted to the right” way.
Keep in mind, Eugenics received pretty heavy support from liberals. Liberals are just as responsible for the corporate hellscape we’re currently entering, they’re just the parent in the abusive household that comes in and makes sure you don’t make problems for the other one that just got done beating you.
Idk what the solution is, but something makes me doubt it’s liberals teaming up.
Clearly we’re not talking about the same “liberals” if you think the liberals I’m referring to would support Eugenics.
I deleted my post btw since I read the article and realized my comment had nothing to do when it.
The various trolls infesting lemmy love to play on the nearly opposite meaning of “liberal” in the global political sense vs the US political sense.
In other countries, they use “liberal” or “liberalism” to refer to a right wing ideology. In the US, “liberal” means a left wing ideology, like social democracy.
I think the misalignment in meaning actually has more to do with the 1-dimensional binary you just pointed to than to a reversal of meanings.
Liberalism is an ideology of individualism, which has some overlap with both left and right US political categories, but is certainly not “left” in the poly-sci sense of the word.
You’re still talking about European liberalism. Liberalism in the United States is more collectivist. Liberals in the US believe that improving the common good makes all our lives better, and believe that those more fortunate should be made to help those less fortunate.
I understand the US political category and the normalized usage of it, but liberalism has a very distinct meaning in polysci. There are aspects of liberalism (in the classical use of the word) within the US political category ‘liberal’, especially when it comes to fiscal policy. People who castigate liberals from the left are those who primarily take issue with that particular quality of US Democratic policy, not the qualities you’re speaking fondly of here.
Edit: I should say - it is still just a term that describes a particular thing, so if that term isn’t adequately describing what you’re talking about, then maybe a different word should be used
…which doesn’t matter outside of academic discussions.
Sure, but they still generally mean opposite things. And trolls are still exploiting that.
Lol, they absolutely do not generally mean opposite things. Liberalism includes letting the market regulate itself and abdicating economic authority to capital; US Democratic policy fits that description with sparse exceptions.
The people you’re talking about are criticizing exactly those aspects of US democratic policy that classical ‘liberalism’ describes.
They’re not trolling you, you’re just self-identifying yourself with something you might not actually agree with (or you do agree with it, but you take offense with the disparagement)
I’m not a troll. Liberals haven’t saved us, I’m not sure why you would think a Liberal is going to. I’m voting Biden because a U.S. under Trump is worse, but if you think stifling any conversation about what happens next with “the libs will save us” is contributing anything then you’re just as fucking dumb as the pugs that frequent hexbear.
Do you consider Biden to be a liberal?
Yes.
The libs could save us, if we could ever get enough in power.
Of course the libs haven’t saved us, they haven’t had the numbers. It’s been neck and neck with the fascists for 20 years.
Imagine what we could do if the Dems had a 20 year supermajority. Universal healthcare, UBI, free college, wealth tax, these are all things that standard-issue Dems would love to do if it were feasible. The reason centrist Dems take baby steps isn’t because that’s all they want, it’s because that’s all they can do. Give em the power and they’ll do more.
As I’ve said, I will be voting Biden. I’m inclined to believe things will not change.
Give Dems the power, and we’ll prove you wrong. You’ll love it.
Don’t forget to vote downballot! And in non Presidential elections!
We did. They had a comfortable majority in congress and a Democratic president for years. Best we got out of it was the ACA which was more of a corporate love letter than anything else. Not to mention, would’ve been the perfect time to throw a few bankers in jail but no. Couldn’t be bothered to do that.
We were.
For a few months, and in that time they passed legislation that saved thousands of lives and brought us closer to universal health care.
That’s pathetic. So pathetic I suspect they never intended to wield so much power because they have no real interest in working for the American people.
What’s your strategy?
I’m not saying you’re wrong on some points, but tell me how you’re going to fix the “corporate hellscape.”
And not a simple, “vote for a 3rd party” response. Provide a viable, long-term strategy for getting out of this mess.
Then tell me which candidate gives you the highest likelihood of executing your strategy.
Biden.
I’m voting Biden because Trump is demonstrably worse.
That being said, if you think that Biden is going to prevent the next conservative candidate from gaining steam: you are simply fucking dumb. If you think that the libs are going to prevent the next conservative candidate from gaining steam: you are simply fucking dumb. You stifling any conversation because you don’t like the context matter and are predispositioned to assume you’re unable to reach any consensus with the person on the other side is, guess what? BAD.
I can’t. I would need the help of the people that are around me, the people that I can communicate to with words.
Let’s see, half of the country is religious. So that’s obviously an uphill battle, the other half… oh that would probably be the side that has people like you and the other people downvoting me.
Gonna go ahead and say it’s an uphill battle on both sides. Imagine actually demanding an entire plan that requires both uniting the country, which includes eradicating white supremacy and the various inequalities in the U.S., and then solving climate change.
God it’s like half the people here are children.
My long term solution would be uniting the under 50 vote to add the 28th amendment.
The 28th amendment needs to eliminate money/donations/bribes/grifts from the election process. It also needs to eliminate any form of augmented monetary enrichment for elected officials.
Until corruption via monetary gain can be somewhat controlled, we can never achieve a legitimate democracy.
How many Democrat senators would you say we’d need for that? 50? 60? 70? 80?
Sure, absolutely.
How much time is your plan going to take? Because we’re on a clock.
There are plenty of conservatives in the under 50 bracket, obviously that will change as more babies are born; but how is your plan going to play out with population replacement rates falling globally?
I’m not intentionally poking holes, your suggestion is great and it is absolutely a step that needs to be taken. I just think that we’ve entered unfamiliar territory and I fear that old strategies may not be applicable. The conservatives have basically been waging a whisper campaign on the people of the U.S. and we’re seeing the effects of that coming to a head. We will not simply “unite the people under 50”.