The US, looking at it from here, is an insanely radically liberal country. Barely any regulations, but heavily regulated unions and collective action, widespread regulatory capture, insane megacorps, and so on.
Wait… That’s not liberal at all. That’s extremely conservative, actually. Wanting to deregulate everything and repressing collective action and late stage capitalism is the very opposite of liberal.
What the article wants to say is that Democrats should switch to Social Democratic values, but since the word social seems to be a swear word over there, there is not much hope for that. It’s like in 1984, if you control the language, you control the thoughts.
That’s what “liberal” means in the US. Liberal means left-leaning.
The point I’m making is that “liberal” is taken up as a name by people who would call themselves “socialist” everywhere else, except that’s a dirty word. So their very ways of thinking are constrained to a “non-socialist liberal” knot, where they must show that socialist issues and solutions are somehow not socialist but liberal, otherwise people won’t vote for it.
Liberal stands for late-stage capitalism around the world. Liberal parties are right wing everywhere. Only the US has this mind-broken thing where they must pretend they are not socialists but left-wing liberals.
Neoliberal is the oxymoron newspeak word for capitalists trying to pretend they’re not conservatives and authoritarian.
Regular liberals just lie on the opposing side if the spectrum of anything against freedoms, like hierarchies and authoritarianism, thus capitalism as well.
Americans think falsely that moderate right wingers are libs (maybe Brits, Canadians, Aussies have similarly lingo). “Classic liberalism” and “libertarianism” are similar rebrands – name promise freedom, actions bolster the current oppression system. Elsewhere a person has to be an anti-capitalist first and foremost to be considered a lib as it’s the biggest freedom limit our time has (of course there are other anti-capitalist alignments as well).
The latter is the reason both western and eastern fascism are united to hate the libs – it’s a counter to the oppression they support
My take on OP is that they used liberal correctly, and then again, so did you. Classical liberalism is a libertarian viewpoint. New Liberalism (different from neo-liberalism) is social economics based policy making.
Wait… That’s not liberal at all. That’s extremely conservative, actually. Wanting to deregulate everything and repressing collective action and late stage capitalism is the very opposite of liberal.
That’s what “liberal” means in the US. Liberal means left-leaning.
Maybe you’re confusing with neo-liberalism?
The point I’m making is that “liberal” is taken up as a name by people who would call themselves “socialist” everywhere else, except that’s a dirty word. So their very ways of thinking are constrained to a “non-socialist liberal” knot, where they must show that socialist issues and solutions are somehow not socialist but liberal, otherwise people won’t vote for it.
Liberal stands for late-stage capitalism around the world. Liberal parties are right wing everywhere. Only the US has this mind-broken thing where they must pretend they are not socialists but left-wing liberals.
Neoliberal is the oxymoron newspeak word for capitalists trying to pretend they’re not conservatives and authoritarian.
Regular liberals just lie on the opposing side if the spectrum of anything against freedoms, like hierarchies and authoritarianism, thus capitalism as well.
Americans think falsely that moderate right wingers are libs (maybe Brits, Canadians, Aussies have similarly lingo). “Classic liberalism” and “libertarianism” are similar rebrands – name promise freedom, actions bolster the current oppression system. Elsewhere a person has to be an anti-capitalist first and foremost to be considered a lib as it’s the biggest freedom limit our time has (of course there are other anti-capitalist alignments as well).
The latter is the reason both western and eastern fascism are united to hate the libs – it’s a counter to the oppression they support
My take on OP is that they used liberal correctly, and then again, so did you. Classical liberalism is a libertarian viewpoint. New Liberalism (different from neo-liberalism) is social economics based policy making.