Liberalism is by definition right-wing you oaf. It is an ideology that believes in the right to private property and is fundamentally capitalist, thus it is right-wing. If you’re going to speak on a subject then make sure you have basic understanding of it.
God what I wouldn’t give to have half the ego you oafs have. To just be able to confidently say some absolute bullshit on a subject I only have a vague understanding of, all of my knowledge picked up through cultural osmosis, yet I still feel as though the person I’m talking to definitely hasn’t heard the cliché I’m about to spit out, even though we both exist in the same world of neoliberal propaganda. Absolutely incredible.
“All I did was call you a non-human foreigner, how is that racist!”
It’s particularly bad, because if you actually believed it, you wouldn’t keep replying to an LLM saying “I hope you get what you deserve”, so clearly don’t actually believe they’re bots, you’re just dishonest
Democrats are fascists. They are in favour of: Concentration camps, slavery, mass surveillance, a police state, the MIC, genocide, imperialism, persecution of queer people, persecution of POC, persecution of marginalised groups, group punishment, election suppression, voter suppression, and everything else that the Republican party and fascists in general love. They are massively nationalist and religious zealots. They harp on about patriotism, the bible, how great the US is, how evil foreigners like the chinese and russians are coming to take it all away.
It does not matter that they are less crude, this is what they support politically.
Being liberal, by definition, is not opposite fascism. That is in no way the definition of the political ideology known as liberalism. If you are going to speak on politics then educate yourself. Liberalism is an ideology that values free markets and the right to private property, that’s it. That’s the base of liberalism, that’s all it is about.
Due to liberalism valuing private property and the right to fuck over other countries with imperialist wealth extraction - sorry, “free markets”, this leads to the interests of the liberal bourgeoise converging with the interests of fascists - Destroying left-wing movements. Liberals have historically supported fascist movements both abroad as a means of destabilising other countries in order to easier extract wealth from said countries markets and at home as a means of ensuring the pillaged wealth does not get taken away from them by filthy unions or other nasty leftist idiosyncracies.
Your idea of fascism is one that is limited to “do they think gay people are allowed to breathe and do they put burning crosses in their yards? If they do, then they’re fascists. So since liberals don’t care about gay people as long as they can take their shit and extract surplus value from them, then they can’t be fascist!” This is a childish, naive and completely incorrect understanding of fascism and liberalism. The nazi SA were led by a gay man, does this mean the SA aren’t fascist?
Liberalism will often find itself nominally in support of personal liberties such as the right to abortion or the right to own slaves or the right to be gay or the right to molest children or the right to increase rents on the hot single mom until she agrees to sleep with you. Liberalism will abandon any such support as soon as any group becomes a threat to their property or wealth. This is because political ideologies do not appear cleanly in the real world, they are shaped by the circumstances in which they exist, and so you will find all sorts of things that might confuse a half-wit like you. Socialists that don’t support queer rights for example - or “socialists” if we’re being pedantic, since socialists seek to work towards communism and so any persecution of minorities is inherently at odds with the core of the socialist project, but that’s for another time.
I guess what they mean is that liberals and fascist share a same imperialist ideal, even if they disagree on how to reach it. A bit as anarchism and communism share the same aim but with different means.
If you are favorable to the aim, the means may also matter to you. But if you are strongly opposed to the aim itself, you could get irritated if you were asked to choose the lesser evil way to reach it.
Socialists (including communists) and anarchists splited from their union it the first International, because they disagreed on how to proceed after the revolution (with or without a State). But they were in the first International for the same aim.
(And soc-dem too, separation between them and communists is what splits the second International. soc-dem leaders are often disguised liberals, but soc-dem workers are often genuine socialists).
Librealism uses finance while fascism uses police and army ; of course most real regimes tend to use both at different level…
Also, liberalism value free market, while fascism don’t. Liberalism let other ideas exist (and corrupt them) while fascism doesn’t let them exist. One buy and abuse, the other one destroy ; it is not the same means (just the same aim reached).
Removed by mod
Being pro maga is when you accurately point out a promise of treats for Amerikans doesn’t outweigh genocide and imperialism.
Never beating the not seeing people outside of the west as human allegations.
Removed by mod
“Anyone who dissents is a subhuman foreigner”
Forgot to add: “Everyone who disagrees with me is an unthinking machine” And Other Insane Conspiracies For The Right-Wing Mind
Removed by mod
Liberalism is by definition right-wing you oaf. It is an ideology that believes in the right to private property and is fundamentally capitalist, thus it is right-wing. If you’re going to speak on a subject then make sure you have basic understanding of it.
You called yourself a “liberal” a couple of posts ago, so their characterisation of you is accurate.
Also:
spoiler
We can figure it out pretty easily
God what I wouldn’t give to have half the ego you oafs have. To just be able to confidently say some absolute bullshit on a subject I only have a vague understanding of, all of my knowledge picked up through cultural osmosis, yet I still feel as though the person I’m talking to definitely hasn’t heard the cliché I’m about to spit out, even though we both exist in the same world of neoliberal propaganda. Absolutely incredible.
And straight to dehumanising. Really leaning into not seeing non westerners as humans.
Looking forward to seeing you and your ilk getting what’s coming to you as your empire declines.
Removed by mod
If only that were true. If it was you wouldn’t be a liberal.
Also really tripling down in being a racist piece of shit. Genuinely wishing you the worst.
Removed by mod
“All I did was call you a non-human foreigner, how is that racist!”
It’s particularly bad, because if you actually believed it, you wouldn’t keep replying to an LLM saying “I hope you get what you deserve”, so clearly don’t actually believe they’re bots, you’re just dishonest
Removed by mod
The world would be a better place if you weren’t in it as you are now
Eat shit.
Removed by mod
Your syntax is also incorrect, does this mean we get to disregard everything you say?
Genuine question: What part about accurately pointing out that the democrats are fascist makes me a republican?
Removed by mod
Democrats are fascists. They are in favour of: Concentration camps, slavery, mass surveillance, a police state, the MIC, genocide, imperialism, persecution of queer people, persecution of POC, persecution of marginalised groups, group punishment, election suppression, voter suppression, and everything else that the Republican party and fascists in general love. They are massively nationalist and religious zealots. They harp on about patriotism, the bible, how great the US is, how evil foreigners like the chinese and russians are coming to take it all away.
It does not matter that they are less crude, this is what they support politically.
They are actually.
Removed by mod
Lol. It’s peak reddit shithead pseudo intellectual to think just putting “by definition” randomly in a statement makes it true
Being liberal, by definition, is not opposite fascism. That is in no way the definition of the political ideology known as liberalism. If you are going to speak on politics then educate yourself. Liberalism is an ideology that values free markets and the right to private property, that’s it. That’s the base of liberalism, that’s all it is about.
Due to liberalism valuing private property and the right to fuck over other countries with imperialist wealth extraction - sorry, “free markets”, this leads to the interests of the liberal bourgeoise converging with the interests of fascists - Destroying left-wing movements. Liberals have historically supported fascist movements both abroad as a means of destabilising other countries in order to easier extract wealth from said countries markets and at home as a means of ensuring the pillaged wealth does not get taken away from them by filthy unions or other nasty leftist idiosyncracies.
Your idea of fascism is one that is limited to “do they think gay people are allowed to breathe and do they put burning crosses in their yards? If they do, then they’re fascists. So since liberals don’t care about gay people as long as they can take their shit and extract surplus value from them, then they can’t be fascist!” This is a childish, naive and completely incorrect understanding of fascism and liberalism. The nazi SA were led by a gay man, does this mean the SA aren’t fascist?
Liberalism will often find itself nominally in support of personal liberties such as the right to abortion or the right to own slaves or the right to be gay or the right to molest children or the right to increase rents on the hot single mom until she agrees to sleep with you. Liberalism will abandon any such support as soon as any group becomes a threat to their property or wealth. This is because political ideologies do not appear cleanly in the real world, they are shaped by the circumstances in which they exist, and so you will find all sorts of things that might confuse a half-wit like you. Socialists that don’t support queer rights for example - or “socialists” if we’re being pedantic, since socialists seek to work towards communism and so any persecution of minorities is inherently at odds with the core of the socialist project, but that’s for another time.
I guess what they mean is that liberals and fascist share a same imperialist ideal, even if they disagree on how to reach it. A bit as anarchism and communism share the same aim but with different means.
If you are favorable to the aim, the means may also matter to you. But if you are strongly opposed to the aim itself, you could get irritated if you were asked to choose the lesser evil way to reach it.
Communism and anarchism do not share the same aim. The only thing they have in common is that both are revolutionary.
Socialists (including communists) and anarchists splited from their union it the first International, because they disagreed on how to proceed after the revolution (with or without a State). But they were in the first International for the same aim.
(And soc-dem too, separation between them and communists is what splits the second International. soc-dem leaders are often disguised liberals, but soc-dem workers are often genuine socialists).
No, liberalism leads to fascism as I just explained. Liberalism is in no way opposed to “the means” as you put it.
Librealism uses finance while fascism uses police and army ; of course most real regimes tend to use both at different level…
Also, liberalism value free market, while fascism don’t. Liberalism let other ideas exist (and corrupt them) while fascism doesn’t let them exist. One buy and abuse, the other one destroy ; it is not the same means (just the same aim reached).