I should maybe have been clearer and said the political science definition? What I described is at least what liberalism means in a more formal context. Other definitions are more informal and will vary based on region and context.

Slander implies it isn’t true!

I’m talking about the dictionary definition of liberalism. Real implementations of ideologies ofc will diverge from the definitions. Again, the part of my comment about how liberalism isn’t compatible with democracy and how liberalism is also defined by democracy should tell you a bit about why liberalism isn’t always as good as the ideal :P

Additionally liberalism is a broader definition and there are more specific versions of it as well. A liberal party might not specifically claim to be a specific kind of liberalism, but they are likely not the most general version

Also! Liberalism varies from country to country. I’m not american and liberalism here is different from your liberalism. That should also be noted. It’s a just as flawed ideology here mind you, but they aren’t putting people in camps (but they are perfectly willing to work with the populists ofc).

Liberalism is not synonymous with democracy and refers to a democratic government that isn’t too powerful, doesn’t decide too much what people may or may not do (religious freedom, socially liberal, free speech, etc), has open borders, and a very free capitalist market (only minimal involvement by the government to ensure no monopolies). It should be more or less something like this, it’s been a while since I last checked the definitions.

In a leftist context the criticisms against liberalism are usually aimed at the capitalist aspects of liberalism while conservatives are opposed to the socially liberal parts (and any part that is supposed to counteract corruption). Leftists in general dislike liberalism and feel it ultimately ends in fascism because of the incentives and structures in capitalist societies. The main goal in captitalism after all is greed; that the few should amass wealth and property via exploiting others. Monopolization and hierarchies is built into capitalism at its very core and we consider this to not be compatible with democracy (at the very least in the long run).

There are more criticisms and I’m sure others are better at explaining them, but the main thing is that we don’t believe liberalism is capable of implementing true lasting democracy, and that when it temporarily does it’s at the expense of people elsewhere.

Fuck the BBC. They’ve been consistently transphobic for a long time

Yeah I tried really hard to like it but it was simply too slow and dry. Like I found the plot intriguing, but gosh I get why what most editors do for the first draft is cut a whole bunch out (to the dismay of authors)

Busy! I’m currently in the middle of a cell biology test thingy that I need to complete to qualify for exams. My legal name and gender has finally changed and as a result lots of things are no longer valid and will need to be renewed with my new details. My mom will be visiting next week also, and I’ll likely be coming out to her then. Too many things :P

They walk into their office

That’s not true

?? I am saying that the people who believe in equality also mean equity and justice. Other people who have been conditioned to hate equality misinterpreting it as only being the first image is the thing that annoys me.

I hate the original so much :P

No one who wants equality means that they blindly want to treat people as if they are cardboard copies of each other

Please. Yes ofc the dems are to blame. They suck. And ofc they will lead to fascism down the line. Let’s just not make things worse than they have to in the moment.

One post implied voting blue was voting for fascism, implying you shouldn’t for the dems in the US. My point is that this is shortsighted and harmful. People should vote for the dems unless a third party is a viable alternative, they should also build up third parties to make them viable options, and they should also join political orgs and unionize, and do direct action.

Ofc more than voting is needed, but the republicans are causing more harm than the dems would have by miles and contributing to more voter apathy is not the answer.

Phrased like that it sounds super sinister 👀
or maybe just dramatic?

He did in an earlier post posted shortly before this one, and the title seems to reinforce this. The image itself doesn’t.

What I’m saying is that not voting is foolish, not that voting is the only thing that should be done. In fact I’m saying that other things should be done. We clearly agree, I just think it is harmful to spread anti voting rhetoric because while it can’t fix things it is still a meaningful thing that can be done with immediate consequences for many.

Socialism is built on the idea that we are better at enforcing our rights together, not on putting anyone else above yourself. I have no idea where this notion comes from. Again, you people have no idea what socialism is.

Almost every single good thing that has happened in the west has been achieved through unions and socialist or socially democratic parties. It hasn’t been achieved by liberals or conservatives.

Having their needs met means it’s not something to care about and so won’t care about it.

A big part of why the US is struggling so much is people don’t have the time and energy to care because they are too busy working.

Protests and riots also either happen either because A: people have time to do them, or B: people have time to do them because working no longer provides enough money to live off of.

You are right however that misinformation isn’t being countered and that any would be free society would need to work on ways to help people see through such things, and to not allow misinfo to be freely spread the way it is now. It’s another core part of the problems we face now, but it’s made worse by people literally not having the time to get involved in any way with politics, and with news being motivated purely by profits. Writing good articles isn’t profitable anymore, but eye-catching headlines is, regardless of how true they are. If you are concerned about the quality of information today you should also be concerned about news being profit driven.

Within a system where you can hoard wealth and property. You can’t under socialism. Really the big problem is wealth inequality. The less inequality there is the less corruption there is too.

Have you seen crypts other posts and comments? He is not in favor of voting. Also see the title

??