Oh, so you guys believe people on Twitter now?

Oh, this is genuinely a problem for them. They want to normalize the kind of violence that targets vulnerable groups disproportionately, such as disabled people, but they need a “deserving” victim to remain palletable enough to the liberal masses so that they can gradually normalize this kind of public violence. But, now if they pull out of this after international pressure, it’ll look weak and make it even harder to try again.

That’s obviously the problem. They want to normalize the kind of violence that targets vulnerable groups disproportionately, such as disabled people, but they need a “deserving” victim to remain palletable enough to the liberal masses so that they can gradually normalize this kind of violence.

Try talking to people about things you like rather than about things you dislike, and you’ll see there’s a lot of value in the breadth of perspective we have access to. Even bad opinions on things you like can be learned from.

Bud, it isn’t an assumption when the action is both reliant on liberal beliefs, and the individuals openly express liberal values.

Also, you don’t get to pick that moral value for other people. As much as I believe we are obligated to exercise whatever power we are afforded, which includes a vote, I could never in good conscience tell someone they’re a problem for refusing to participate in a system that has committed genocide against their people. Colonizers don’t just colonize by explicitly and intentionally dominating other groups, they often do so by asserting that their “moral” philosophy is in everyone’s best interest, even if that means the “unfortunate” reality that necessitates them deciding for others.

The narrative you just created requires us to forget that vulnerable people have revolted against the US state for centuries. You’re saying that their resistance only counts as something to put faith in when the privileged white people join in, and conveniently, that means we should just do what the privileged white people wany out of practicality. This is not the mindset of a reasonable, empathetic person, it is of someone whose politics are oriented around their own comfort; many of us do not enjoy that privilege.

If the sole survivor of a Palestinian family does not want to vote, who the fuck are you or I to tell them they’re immoral if they don’t want to help their family’s murderers do anything for some fake “greater good.” For fuck’s sake, you’d refuse them even that? Why should you have any right to tell a closeted trans person who’s skirting through genocide that they aren’t allowed to maintain some feeling of power or self-authorship by refusing this system their participation? What, them giving away their less than one percent of the vote gonna make all the privileged people listen to trans people for the first time fucking ever?

These are people who have lost and given more than what we could ask of anyone simply by being victimized by this system, and they do not represent dominant voting trends even in the minority groups they represent. You want them to vote for your benefit, don’t act like it is anything else. This discourse didn’t become prominent in liberal discourses until they wanted to blame victims for not supporting the “good guys,” and it’s disgusting. If you’re going to act like this is from whatever, socialist and/or anarchist voters, I’d love to see either stats that proves some sleeping giant lives among us, or an argument that targets them specifically without presuming to speak on the moral purity of victims.

Fuck off with this fake shit.

That has literally already happened to me on here multiple times. Liberals do not have solidarity, that’s kind of their problem.

Can’t wait to be called a Stalinist Yankee tankie in two years for saying he’s not a respectable person.

Everything is a lootbox if you find something to bet on.

Person below is using an incorrect understanding of liberalism too (economic).

When I say liberal, I’m referring to the political philosophy of liberalism, which is rooted in individualism and capital, and emerged through the cisheteropatriarchal and white supremacist system of settler-colonialism. People perceive of this as meaning “progressive” or “freedom” because much of the early rhetoric surrounding liberalism (such as the early republican era in the Americas) involved a claim to moral righteousness under the guise of individual freedoms. Liberalism is the philosophy of capitalism as an economic system (which the other commenter here misidentified as liberalism), but it would be distortive to not recognize the specificities of either respectively.

Since liberalism has been the proponent of capitalism and EuroAmerican imperialism for the past couple centuries, it has developed a durability through the appropriation and subsequent assimilation of potentially challenging political movements; such as those based in social justice. Consequently, liberals have effectively coopted the language of equality and progress as natural elements of its politics, despite it consistently disarming and presently continues its genocidal campaign against vulnerable groups.

Conservatism is less a cohesive set of politics than it is the rhetoric of liberals with grievances about the failure of the system to deliver the privilege they feel entitled to, and which this system does assure them. So, a conservative liberal may vaugely subscribe to the notion of “anti-racism” but will inevitably subscribe to racist values that are more consistent with the imperatives of a white supremacist system than they are challenging of it.

Most people in Europe and North America subscribe to liberalism. Most liberals lack a level of political literacy to identify how they subscribe to it, and many mistake themselves as “leftists” or non-liberal “conservatives,” even though their values are actually closely aligned. Since I genuinely do not subscribe to liberalism, many liberals on Lemmy self-report when they take issue with some genuine anti-racism, or any anti-bigotry in general when it doesn’t align with their comfort level (most of which have been Canadians or Euros who feel free to openly express these views with the confidence that they’re “better than Americans”).

Yeah, you can tell, way more conservative liberals on here than there used to be.

Actually a really good representation of accessibility and planning.

Lmao what are the odds of coming across you here making misogynistic comments, again. You seriously seem like you can’t stop.

What are you even referring to?

Edit: something interesting, the Eurotrash likes these misogynistic comments, wonder if that could mean anything 🤔