• @AngryRobot
    link
    English
    843 days ago

    On Monday, I was a liberal. On Wednesday, I became a leftist. I will not let my country slide into fascism without fighting back. I have a 73 year old mom who’s married to a woman. That woman is one of the most important people in my life. I’m 51 and have known her since I was 19. If anyone comes for them, there will be bloodshed.

    • Cowbee [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      113 hours ago

      Since you’re a new Leftist, I think you might be interested in my Read Theory, Darn it! introduction to Marxism reading list targeting new leftists. Let me know what you think if you check it out!

    • @Sweetpeaches69
      link
      English
      72 days ago

      Same here. I have a lot of people I care about in my life in the LGBTQ+ community. I’m armed and ready.

      • Cowbee [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        213 hours ago

        Since you’re a new Leftist, I think you might be interested in my Read Theory, Darn it! introduction to Marxism reading list targeting new leftists. Let me know what you think if you check it out! Getting armed is a good first step, the next is to read theory and get organized with your fellow comrades!

        • @Sweetpeaches69
          link
          English
          212 hours ago

          Not a new leftist myself, but I very much appreciate the post, and love what you’re doing. Plus, that gives me a couple more books to read. Cheers!

          • Cowbee [he/him]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            112 hours ago

            Ah, gotcha! You said “same” so I assumed that included the “new leftist” bit, my bad. Thanks for the kind words! Please feel free to leave any feedback you want on the post itself, it’s a living document that I intend on updating and tweaking as an easy-share link.

  • Ginny [they/she]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    48
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    ITT: People who think “liberal” means any one single thing.

    ITT: People who think “leftist” means any one single thing.

    • @ZILtoid1991
      link
      English
      32 days ago

      “Liberal” can mean centrism, capitalism with a human face, capitalism with some socially progressive elements, etc.

      “Leftist” can be anything from “liberal” (as the far-right likes to pretend left=evil), to any form of actual leftism, which also can range from libertarians to authoritarians, with the latter sometimes weirdly being pushed a lot by the right (Fidesz, the Hungarian far-right party masquerading as “moderate, center-right, christian democrats”, have paid off the election debts of Munkáspárt 2006, and now they’re one of their satellites).

  • Jo Miran
    link
    fedilink
    English
    963 days ago

    I just want women to feel happy and realized without fear of oppression or the need to partake in political violence, but what the fuck do I know.

  • @vzq
    link
    English
    713 days ago

    It’s both. Most people have no appetite or aptitude for political violence.

    • Cowbee [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      113 hours ago

      That’s just a difference in material conditions. We aren’t all at the same level of danger.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        143 days ago

        Aptitude is only discovered by doing, and most people don’t do a violence. So who knows how many savants are out there.

        • @vzq
          link
          English
          9
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Who knows! But I do reject the claim that you can’t be a leftist unless you engage in political violence.

          This is a very old controversy in Marxist circles, and it has been known to result in people getting shot. Make of that what you will.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            72 days ago

            As a Redneck who pulls most of his ideology from pre Marxism labor movements I propose we have those who do not fight smuggle, craft, feed, and heal.

  • @Agent641
    link
    English
    42 days ago

    Once more into the breach

  • @SeattleRain
    link
    English
    32 days ago

    The majority of women are libs. It was the majority of women that voted Trump. They’re not going to do anything.

      • @SeattleRain
        link
        English
        61 day ago

        Fair enough but 45% is nearly half. It my not be the majority but my point is Trump is WIDELY supported by women.

        • @leadore
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Yes, women didn’t show up for Harris to the expected degree. It’s really disappointing, especially considering the abortion issue. They voted for the abortion protection measures for their states (e.g. Missouri), and voted for trump at the same time. Idiots, thinking they would have their cake and eat it too, believing trump won’t sign a nation-wide ban. FAFO

    • @ZILtoid1991
      link
      English
      22 days ago
      1. A lot of them abstained due to the dems failing to do anything on the state level.
      2. A lot of them who voted just thought the Project 2025 was there to make the libs cry, and no human would be evil enough to execute them all.

      Also a lot of Trump voters in the swing states are already regretting, if it continues, it can very well lead to a civil war, especially if Project 2025 will be executed. Who knows, maybe even the military will have issues with it.

      • @dejected_warp_core
        link
        English
        22 days ago

        maybe even the military will have issues with it.

        As individuals that can vote, sure.

        As a whole-ass army… maybe? They’ll have an issue with it if ordered to do anything unconstitutional. The tricky bit is what the individual leader(s) in the military think about any such order. An additional complication is how the Supreme Court may or may not weigh in, as their responsibility is to interpret the constitution.

  • @FinishingDutch
    link
    English
    42 days ago

    Sooooo… better start learning the words to Bella Ciao huh?

      • @FinishingDutch
        link
        English
        12 days ago

        With respect to The Internationale, that’s just not a banger like Bella Ciao is. If I’m thinking of ‘let’s oppose a fascist regime and/or do some Operation Gladio shit in 1970’s Italy while carrying submachineguns, dressed in leather jackets and balaclavas’, Bella Ciao is a much more appropriate choice for a modern era.

        A lot of the versions of The Internationale that I’ve heard sound more like school plays. It’s not something one would describe as ‘rousing’.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 day ago

          Disagree. Watch Reds.

          Did you say “do Gladio shit”? Like enlist fascists, virulent anti-communists that they are, to carry out terrorist attacks against civilian populations to then blame on communists in order to crush the influence of socialists in government and justify purges of socialists and communists from every sphere of life? That gladio shit?

          The revolution will not be won by beautiful dead, tears in their eyes, clutching their rifles. It will be won by a political revolution of the working class for the benefit of all. There will certainly be fighting, of which the internationale sings about explicitly:

          No more deluded by reaction
          On tyrants only we’ll make war
          The soldiers too will take strike action
          They’ll break ranks and fight no more.
          And if those cannibals keep trying
          To sacrifice us to their pride
          They soon shall hear the bullets flying
          We’ll shoot the generals on our own side.

          • @FinishingDutch
            link
            English
            11 day ago

            Re: Gladio: no, not the bad bits that cropped up eventually, but the original purpose of fighting an oppressive regime that’s taken hold within your own borders. Don’t take it TOO seriously :D

            I’d love to see a bloodless political revolution. But past history leads me to believe there’s gonna be guns involved somewhere down the line for there to be actual change.

  • @sartalon
    link
    English
    243 days ago

    Leftists are deluding themselves.

    Just like I deluded myself that there was no way Trump could win a second term.

    • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost
      link
      fedilink
      English
      263 days ago

      The second amendment was to defend Americans from tyranny. Trump is that. Use of force in self defense is justified.

      “The soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, the cartridge box. Use them in that order.”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        https://www.npr.org/2021/06/02/1002107670/historian-uncovers-the-racist-roots-of-the-2nd-amendment

        Tl;Dr the Constitutional Congress didn’t really believe in citizen militias providing a sufficient check on federal power. Some power, sure, but by and large the British armies destroyed the militias in the field, with only a few notable successes.

        They did, however, recognize that they could serve as a rapid reaction force for wars against natives and putting down slave revolts until the real army showed up. And, of course, militias could be rolled into a professional army and retrained, like what happened with the Civil War.

        That isn’t to say a genuinely popular revolt wouldn’t work, it’s just not what the 2nd was really about.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            33 days ago

            It’s going to be less of an argument after the US readopts slave labor but knock yourself out!

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              83 days ago

              For the US to readopt slavery, wouldn’t it have to give slavery up first? The thirteenth amendment specifically allows for the enslavement of prisoners. That’s a big part of the reason we put so many blacks in prison.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                83 days ago

                They’ll just make a whole lot of stuff illegal, selectively enforce those laws, and BOOM increase the prison slave population. Hell, the South did it after the Civil War to get it’s slave labor back, how hard would it be to do nationwide now.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                13 days ago

                That’s fair, but there’s at least some difference between chattel slavery and the prison industrial complex. If the traditionally inclined right wing “libertarian” voices that are the sorts of folks the Heritage Foundation hires have their way chattel slavery is back on the menu.

      • @sartalon
        link
        English
        13 days ago

        If it actually happened, I would happily support it. The system is working as it is intended by those with the money to manipulate it. It needs to come down.

        I just don’t believe enough people really give a shit anymore.

        They fucking re-elected him. We know who he is, what the GoP really is. And they still fucking elected him.

      • @masquenox
        link
        English
        02 days ago

        The second amendment was to defend Americans from tyranny.

        Oh, give it a break.

        2A legalized colonialist white supremacist violence against slave rebellions and native peoples. That’s it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      83 days ago

      leftists very much believed trump could win a second term primarily because neoliberals would drop the ball during the election. we were warning liberals all year.

      • @MisterFrog
        link
        English
        62 days ago

        (this is only directed at the people who seem to have wanted Trump to win to “accelerate” the ushering in of a socialist society):

        Deluding themselves about how often there isn’t a glorious revolution, and ongoing, armed resistance by the oppressed isn’t guaranteed.

        Accelerationists have a weird hard-on for revolution, as if it’s easy-peasy to dismantle and replace all institutions all at once.

        This socialist thinks we ought to fight tooth and nail via disruption/extra legal actions, implied threats of the power of the masses (in the same mould that workers won rights by threat), AND ideally within the system itself.

        Because revolution is a roll of the dice.

      • @Jon_Servo
        link
        English
        133 days ago

        Yes. Make them explain their words. Deluding how, exactly? Deluded that women would fight for their bodily autonomy? That doesn’t seem very delusional to me.

          • @Jon_Servo
            link
            English
            43 days ago

            This may not come as a shock, but not all women are white women. Even they would come around eventually.

    • @hohoho
      link
      English
      43 days ago

      Sounds like projection, doesn’t it?

    • @LovableSidekick
      link
      English
      263 days ago

      Yeah that’s the point - the two pictures show two types of people who both exist.

    • @MisterFrog
      link
      English
      42 days ago

      To me this is the right answer. Both always exist. I think people’s propensity to believe the oppressed will definitely pick up arms in the face of oppression are kidding themselves.

    • @njm1314
      link
      English
      12 days ago

      I I’m not sure why you felt that need to be said, it was the point wasn’t it?

  • @GrymEdm
    link
    English
    12
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    I agree that women are not going back “into the bottle” as it were. There definitely are females out there opposed to women’s rights (especially reproductive and career rights). They will be opposed by a greater number of women + the men who want women to meaningfully participate in society. A nation that refuses to take women seriously ends up cutting their potential leadership, ideas, production, and so on basically in half. Already we see women planning how they are going to resist misogynistic policies, and maybe they don’t need my support as a Canadian man but they’ve got it.

    • @vzq
      link
      English
      273 days ago

      FEEEEEEMALES!!!

      • @GrymEdm
        link
        English
        -223 days ago

        ? Is that a trigger word for you or something?

        • @vzq
          link
          English
          143 days ago

          Dude, like. No. Stop digging.

          • @GrymEdm
            link
            English
            0
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            I have no idea what’s going on with either of your responses (digging into what exactly?), but ok.

            • @minnow
              link
              English
              333 days ago

              There definitely are females out there

              The use of “females” here is objectifying, and generally frowned upon. Here’s a way to avoid this mistake in the future: replace “females” with the word “people” and if it works grammatically and in the context of what you’re saying (eg, you’re not talking about animals) then you should be using “women” instead of “females.”

              • @GrymEdm
                link
                English
                -16
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                Thank you for clarifying, I appreciate it. I didn’t know that, but I’m not going to stop using the word “female” for reasons I put in another post just above.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  203 days ago

                  “Thanks for explaining why using this word in that way is problematic and makes the people it is attempting to describe uncomfortable, but I don’t actually give a shit and will continue to use it regardless” 🙄

                • @minnow
                  link
                  English
                  6
                  edit-2
                  3 days ago

                  I’m not telling you to stop using the word altogether, just trying to help you understand why some uses are inappropriate and will garner ire from others. It’s fine if you want to say “well that’s their problem” but alternatively you could try to have some empathy. Broadly speaking, being considerate of others rarely requires anything of you, and helps make the world a better place.

                  But if that’s asking too much, I understand.

                  Edit to add: this applies to the usage of “males” and “females” equally. By continuing to use this terms inappropriately, you’re not somehow promoting equality, you’re just being stubborn about using hurtful language.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              293 days ago

              I’ll bite. Referring to women as “females” is usually used by incels. Women, ladies, those are your safer bets.

              • @GrymEdm
                link
                English
                -2
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                Well, thank you for clarifying at least. I’m not changing the wording. Let me be clear, I’m definitely not blaming you for being helpful - I appreciate at least knowing. However, if someone reads my post supporting and valuing women and the thing they comment on is the word “female” as if that makes me an incel misogynist, then I don’t really care. I wrote a post in this thread about the radicalization of men, and I used the word “male” 4 times. 31 upvotes, no downvotes (at time of posting) and no one had issue with “male”.

                I support women and I never ever use the actually pejorative terms, but I’m not stopping using the word female. Incels use the word “women” too all the time btw. There’s even the famous coffee meme that uses the word “women” and I hate it because I’m a gamer and it’s always used in gamer communities to mock women.

                Edit: After thought and given how people seem upset, I won’t post on this forum anymore. I’m sure there are some who will think “Bye - no loss” and it’s their right to do so and tell me so if they want. I don’t like that my obvious intent was overridden by the use of a very common word and it feels like a minefield I’m not interested in navigating. That “female” is an ok adjective but a really offensive noun just seems odd, especially when the equally-misused “woman” is fine. Hateful people say words hatefully and if you let them claim words there won’t be any left. I’d never hear something like “males are being pulled to the extreme right” and wonder if they mean humans (aka dehumanizing). In a lifetime spent with female friends and decades on boards like Reddit and Lemmy this is the very first time it’s been an issue. I have other thoughts but they’re not helpful so I’ll just say adios.

                P.S. I’ll keep on supporting women in other places. I believe strongly that the only ethical position is that a person be judged by their character, and determined fit for any role by their capabilities as opposed to genitalia, ethnicity, preferred sexuality, etc. Regardless of people telling me they know my beliefs better than I do, I actually know what I believe - biases of all kinds must be fought, especially now.

                • @vzq
                  link
                  English
                  15
                  edit-2
                  3 days ago

                  I’m a gamer

                  Yeah, saw that one coming.

                  Anyway, you can say “female” as an adjective all day. It’s the noun that has really icky nonhuman connotations.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  43 days ago

                  Your moral high ground eroded when you vociferously said it was everyone else who was wrong about the current connotation of the word.

  • go $fsck yourself
    link
    English
    73 days ago

    I guess I have trouble groking the difference between “liberal” and “leftist”.

    Could someone summarize?

    • ALoafOfBread
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      None of the answers you’ve received are really correct.

      Liberalism has a specific meaning in political science. Modern Liberals support market economies, strong individual rights, and the right to own private property (not personal property like your house, car, or toothbrush - private property means capital).

      I’m going to use socialism as a proxy for Leftism broadly because Socialism + Anarchism is too broad. Socialism is a political philosophy characterized by public ownership of capital (aka the means of production). That is the primary thing that binds leftists together.

      Leftists view Liberalism as an improvement over feudalism, the system that it replaced, but criticize Liberals for protecting the status quo of neoliberal capitalism and the injustices, inequities, and evils it has perpetuated (slavery, colonialism, white supremacy, patriarchy, labor exploitation, etc.). They also assert that any Social Democratic reforms Liberals champion are ineffectual at addressing the core problems of capitalism.

      The reason that the leftists in the meme have guns is because Leftists have historically been violently opposed to fascism and have engaged in revolutions to overthrow feudal, liberal, and fascist regimes.

      • @masquenox
        link
        English
        52 days ago

        Modern Liberals support market economies,

        That’s a very diplomatic way of saying liberals are pro-capitalism and pro-imperialism.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        63 days ago

        Modern Liberals support market economies,

        Only partly true. Liberals support capitalist markets, but not worker owned markets (worker co-ops, market socialism.)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      203 days ago

      Leftists HATE capitalism. They want to replace it altogether with some alternative economic system (market socialism, planned economy or a combination of the two) depending upon the type of leftist. Differences in leftists also exist based on the HOW of replacing capitalism (violent revolution, democratic reformation and so on).

      Liberals ARE NOT leftists. Liberals believe that capitalism, with all its flaws is still the least bad economic system. They recognise some flaws of the free market and think that capitalism must be regulated to a certain extent by the government.

      So again, all leftists HATE capitalism. Liberals dislike a free market, but think that regulated capitalism is the least bad form of governance.

      Note: I know you didn’t ask this, but just wanted to clarify - capitalism ≠ market. There’s a large group of leftists called “market socialists” who want a market without the means of production owned privately.

      • @LovableSidekick
        link
        English
        4
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        So which ones don’t want abortions to be banned because Romans nailed a guy to a cross?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          73 days ago

          Liberals and leftists both don’t want encroachment of the state into personal matters. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule.

          Now, what we refer to as the “far right” wish for expansion of the state for “moral policing”, to conserve traditional values and so on. That includes banning abortions.

          • @LovableSidekick
            link
            English
            -5
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Yup. While left and right are vastly different, one thing that’s consistent between them is “[whatever] is not evil when WE do it.”

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              63 days ago

              You find hypocrites in all groups. That’s what I meant when I referred to exceptions. However, if u look at raw ideology, liberals and leftists don’t want to encroach in personal matters, while conservatives most definitely do.

              • @LovableSidekick
                link
                English
                -2
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                That’s not my experience at all - I see freedom-loving conservatives constantly propose to restrict freedoms, and liberals constantly criticize the imperfections in each other’s liberalness. “Live and let live” is a very rare attitude.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -103 days ago

        That’s kinda iffy. Liberals are still on the left, why should leftist be delegated only to democracy haters? It’s basically making a special definition that isn’t used on any common level

        • Cowbee [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          213 hours ago

          That’s a horrible misunderstanding of liberalism and leftism. Socialism is more democratic than Capitalism because it extends democratic control to production itself.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          123 days ago

          Ronald Reagan was a neo liberal. Would you consider him a leftist?

          Also, leftists are not democracy haters. Different groups of leftists have different stances on democracy. Anarchists for example, hate the idea of a state altogether (doesn’t matter if it’s democratic or not). Market socialists want to expand democracy in the economic sphere as well, with the help of cooperatives (be it worker, consumer, hybrid and so on).

          Marxist Leninists are a group of leftists that you could say are anti democracy (in the context that you are referring to). MLs believe that a revolution must be led by a vanguard party, i.e., a group of intellectuals, and smart people who truly understand Marxist theory. This vanguard party would form a state, create material conditions for democracy (educate the uneducated, or people brainwashed by capitalists). After the material conditions are created, you can achieve democracy and all associated nice things. Remember, this is in the context of violent revolutions, like the ones that took place in Russia, China, Vietnam, Cuba and so on.

          NOW, I am NOT a Marxist Leninist. I do not condone their ideas. I will not expand upon my own ideas, as that goes beyond the scope of this discussion. The point is, not all leftists are anti-democracy. Most leftists active politically at least in the west are incredibly pro-democracy, want to expand democracy or are anti state altogether (democratic or otherwise).

          • Cowbee [he/him]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            12 hours ago

            A bit of a correction regarding Marxist-Leninists: they support democracy the whole way through, not just after the entire economy has been folded into the public sector and thus classes and therefore the State cease to exist. A good article on the subject of AES and Democracy is Why Do Marxists Fail to Bring the “Worker’s Paradise?”

            I have a “Read Theory, Darn it!” introduction to Marxism-Leninism post if you want to glance over it, questions on democratic structures and how to achieve them are answered.

    • @Agent641
      link
      English
      22 days ago

      Liberals die on their knees, leftists die standing.

    • AnIndefiniteArticle
      link
      fedilink
      English
      93 days ago

      After the French Revolution, they arranged the seats in the legislature with the most progressive on the left, and the most conservative on the right.

      This left-right axis is often still used in modern politics.

      On the American politics version of this spectrum, “liberal” defines those in the center who are in the middle and who accept whatever they are given. Leftist progressives fight for a better future.

    • @AngryRobot
      link
      English
      3
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Liberal plays by the established rules.

      Leftist revolts and fights back.

      • @masquenox
        link
        English
        3
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Short answer liberals are the leftmost of the centrists,

        Liberals are not “centrists.” They are right-wingers. If you are pro-capitalism, you are a right-winger. It doesn’t matter how “nice” liberals try to pretend to be about it.

        No ifs, ands or buts.

    • @Sonicdemon86
      link
      English
      13 days ago

      Liberal is the opposite of authoritarianism. Left politicies are less capitalism and more socialism. What America calls Liberal is more authoritative than what should be considered central party. Like in the political compass “Liberals” are middle middle top right, while “conservatives” are upper middle top right.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13 days ago

      To me, a leftist is someone who looks at the status quo and goes this is fucked up. We need to fix it.

      A liberal looks at the status quo and goes “this isn’t this bad.” Think Bill Clinton or Tony Blair. Politicans who continued to maintain the status quo after their conservative predecessors.

      If a leftist politician served after a conservative politician. The leftist politician would be like “fuck this” and upend the status quo.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        63 days ago

        What you are saying is only applicable for North America/ Europe. Liberalism is already the status quo there, which is why liberals defend it. However what is liberalism in the first place?

        Liberalism: “Regulated capitalism is the least bad economic system. Also, the state shouldn’t encroach upon the personal matters of an individual.”

        Leftists: “Capitalism is the cause of all problems. Fuck capitalism. The eventual goal should be to have a stateless, classless society. However, we disagree quite a lot on how to achieve this goal. This goal is called communism. Some of us say that we should do a violent revolution. Some of us believe that we can abolish capitalism using democratic processes. Some of us believe that to achieve communism, we need a temporary powerful state led by smart people, intellectuals, etc. to achieve material conditions necessary for communism. Some of us believe that the previous idea is absolute dog shit, and instead, we can achieve communism slowly, using non state actors like cooperatives, unions, syndicates and so on.”

        Conservatives: “Capitalism is good. The morals and traditions of our ancestors were better than the ones coming up now, and deviating from them would cause a lot of harm. We need to take steps to conserve these ideas.”

        Fascists: “All problems in society are because of group X. We need to get rid of group X by either converting them to our ways (if possible), deporting them from our borders, or cleansing our country of them entirely by killing them. Democracy is a slow and inefficient process. We should give power to a strong, smart leader who can get things done a lot more efficiently.”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        13 days ago

        I thought liberalism literrally meant that personal freedoms are the most important thing to that person and the belief is the government should not restrict them and needs to actively protect them.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          43 days ago

          That’s one of their beliefs, sure. However, their economic beliefs are still kinda pro capitalism.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 days ago

            Fair, I’m just curious why ShaggySnacks mentioned the status quo thing when personal freedoms are being encroached on and revoked.

    • @Quadhammer
      link
      English
      -33 days ago

      Leftists want full auto space communism.

      Liberals want rights and liberties for all.

      Both can overlap or not depending.

      • @masquenox
        link
        English
        32 days ago

        Liberals want rights and liberties for all except for the impoverished and repressed labour that makes liberalism possible.

        FTFY.

        • @Quadhammer
          link
          English
          -11 day ago

          Neolibs maybe. Not typical libs

    • Doom
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -23 days ago

      No because a lot of it is bullshit people just drawing lines in the sand of an already silly way to plot political stances.

      The truth is all liberals should be leftists. Politics leans left and right and people are broken down from there.

      Currently people use the term “leftist” in too many ways but generally it suggests being against the system or capitalism. A liberal or liberalism is easy to Google but usually people mean it as left leaning folk who buy into the system, capitalism or neoliberal politics.

        • Doom
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -23 days ago

          Lmfao it’s literally in the names but okay.

          A Liberal was a supporter of laise faire capitalism, currently a Liberal is more of a socially minded progressive. The term changed and will continue to change.

          Leftist is literally a left leaning individual that’s it. People use it a word to lump together a lot of groups especially those with a more socialist or anarchist sort of mindset. The term changed and will continue to change.

          So no, they really don’t mean anything exactly and people use them different and unclearly all the time. A liberal is a leftist, even if individuals out there reject that. Politically speaking you’re either right or left leaning, are you thinking liberals are right leaning? No. Then they’re leftists lol.

          The worst thing for the socialist movement are other socialists. This probably can be said about any left leaning group. Everyone has to have a different title to differentiate their leftism from other leftists

    • @GrymEdm
      link
      English
      14
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      40% of voting women support trump

      Necessarily that means most voting women did not vote Trump.

      • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed
        link
        fedilink
        English
        73 days ago

        Except the fact that the women supporting maga is more likely to be gun nuts than the women supporting harris. They also have the military in control once Jan 20 comes.

        We ain’t winning. They will massacre us. The US will have its own Tiannamen Square.

        • @njm1314
          link
          English
          22 days ago

          That’s a great point, women go by guns. An unarmed leftist is a vulnerable leftist.

  • @LovableSidekick
    link
    English
    2
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Good point. It’s like keyboard justice warriors ranting about racism compared to actual BLM marchers.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    23 days ago

    Liberal and leftist are both very vague terms with several definitions that place them both in very different places in the political spectrum.

    You should just use other, clearer terms.

    • knightly the Sneptaur
      link
      fedilink
      English
      273 days ago

      These terms are rather well understood by leftists, it’s only liberals who think they mean the same thing.

      • @Quadhammer
        link
        English
        -33 days ago

        No, conservatives think that. Liberal doesn’t mean what leftists desperately want it to mean; neoliberal

    • @masquenox
      link
      English
      32 days ago

      What is so vague about them?

      They seem perfectly clear-cut to me.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -12 days ago

        Some people think liberal is right-wing, just not extreme (for example, liberal party of Quebec)

        Some people think liberal is centrist. (For example, liberal party of Canada)

        Some people think liberal is some sort of wide category including everyone left of center.

        As for leftist, some people think it means anything left of center.

        Others think it means left-wing, but more so than center-left.

        Others yet think it refers only to the most left-wing of political opinions, including communists, anarcho-communists, and adjacent ideologies.

        And even “center” is a vague term to begin with. What passes as center in the US is decidedly right-wing in other countries.

        • @masquenox
          link
          English
          32 days ago

          Some people think liberal is right-wing, just not extreme

          What can possibly be more extreme than being pro-capitalist? Even a fascist can be made to admit that there is more to water than merely it’s market value.

          And even “center” is a vague term to begin with.

          That’s the whole point of “centrism” - vagueness. You can hide all kinds of right-wing garbage under “centrism.”

    • @AngryRobot
      link
      English
      53 days ago

      I see leftist as Revolutionary. The resistance. Quite honestly, I loved nazi hunter stories growing up and stories of the resistance movements and operations to smuggle the vulnerable to safety. I will be a part of it this time around.