Why/how did Liberalism win?

Why/how did Liberalism win?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=kCpzk-EDXSQ
youtu.be/GuSiuR47xsU
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov–Ribbentrop_Pact
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German–Soviet_Commercial_Agreement_(1940)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German–Soviet_Credit_Agreement_(1939)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi–Soviet_economic_relations_(1934–41)
youtu.be/0bFs6ZiynSU
youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig
espressostalinist.com/the-real-stalin-series/gulag/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Win what? World politics are still in development.

Because reality has a liberal bias

You are crazy if you think that Liberalism won. Every single western country is currently in the process of decaying from the Socialism virus.

t. retards

Fascism was crushed in WW2

Socialism died out for good after the cold war.

All thats left for the past damn near 30 years is liberalism

Simply because it was less retarded than the other 2. Still leaves much to be desired though.

>Because reality has a liberal bias
How many genders are there? 2
How's that search for the "gay gene" going? FAILED
How'd those "global warming" predictions turn out? WRONG
Reality has a CONSERVATIVE bias. Libtards are simply in denial of reality.

Civilization is constantly moving. An ideology is replaced with a different one so the concept of winning does not apply.

youtube.com/watch?v=kCpzk-EDXSQ

Most countries in the world haven't even approached democracy. China and Russia especially are distinctively not in the same league as the U.S. and EU

Are you just memeing or are you genuinely this much of a newfag with this aunt on facebook tier shit?

>China and Russia especially are distinctively not in the same league as the U.S. and EU
yeah, theres obviously going to be degrees of this, but there is no doubt that Russia is no longer part of the socialist world revolution. Russia is NOT the Soviet Union, despite how much neocons might claim it is.

Liberalism will collapse soon. Mankind is doomed if it doesn't.

Economic reforms are by no means the same as political reforms. The second world has fallen, but these countries should not be described as "liberal" or "democratic". In 30 years we could see a comeback of communistic dictatorships.

Liberalism fuels fascism, and socialism will soon be back on the menu.

Left to his own devices and with his own vision, man can accomplish nearly anything.

Lurk moar faggot

You have it wrong, socialism and communism fuel fascism. Otherwise fascism wouldn't exist

>In 30 years we could see a comeback of communistic dictatorships.
With a growing middle class, no one is going to screech and riot for a socialist government. Even now, there are protest in Iran to make that country more Liberal

fascism and nazism were reactionary to the jewish revenge plot you call an ideology.

Indirectly. Communism spooks capitalists, and when spooked, they stop playing "democracy", and start funding Freikorps. Liberals still love private property, and freedom (to own others), but capitalism is inherently contradictory, which gives rise to revolutionary movements like communism and socialism, which, in turn, causes a reaction, which enforces private property by force, like fascism and nazism, hence the name "reactionary".

Pic related.

Pleasure sells.

>literally the construct of random biochemistry
>HURR REALITY BELIEVES IN EQUALITY
Lets not forget there use to be 20 planets in our star system now its only eight because the rest were either ejected or destroyed(Asteroid belt). Reality is so equal so that we had a chance of not existing right?

This is not a game you can win. It's infinite

youtu.be/GuSiuR47xsU

Liberalism confirmed for having the hottest girls.

Italian Fascism had nothing at all to do with paranoid jewish Illuminati shit, it was simply a revolutionary ideal that Mussolini thought would propel Italy into prosperity

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov–Ribbentrop_Pact

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German–Soviet_Commercial_Agreement_(1940)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German–Soviet_Credit_Agreement_(1939)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi–Soviet_economic_relations_(1934–41)

>pic related
>having a liberal bias

>This is not a game you can win. It's infinite
>
>youtu.be/GuSiuR47xsU
youtu.be/0bFs6ZiynSU

>talking about muh IQ when it has literally nothing at all to do with the conversation
I hate the aut-right

by telling lies like that.

Race differences are so completely denied and yet so foundational that you can't talk about them enough.

Because Liberalism is generally a call for moderation and avoiding fanaticism. People might initially be hyped up for fanaticism but after that they want safety and peace

>realpolitik shit
?

USSR also offered Czechoslovakia protection, but Britain forced them to give up Sudetenland, and to join the Allies, which Poland blocked.

What's your point?

...

Sup Forums and /leftypol/ absolutely and unequivocally btfo

You cant bitch about liberalism causing Nazism when it was the liberals who tried to stop them WHILE the socialist were aiding them since they had a common enemy in the liberal/capitalist countries of europe. In other words, you have no real high horse to look down on us from, not only because of this relationship, but also because communism is nearly identical to fascism in its despotic police state and concentration camp practices

Is the idea true or not? No problem to me if Jews also recognize its validity privately.

>Liberalism
>Capitalism
>The same thing
Mate.

Is this a joke? Liberalism is such a weak ideology it was subverted by Commies and Marxists from the get go. Liberalism has been failing for half a century.

Both socialism and fascism imply market control mechanisms while liberalism implies more freedom (even if theres a few limitations), so yes.

>weak ideology
>lead to the most powerful nation on earth
eat shit hobbes

Electricity made the satanic mind virus unstoppable. Turns out the Amish were right.

>lead to the most powerful nation on earth
The USA was never a liberal country.

>fascism and socialism aren't basically the same thing

Man fuck all this noise

When are we going back to monarchies?

Tyranny of the masses is bringing us down

Because Communism/Marxism are doing so hot in the modern world...

Look up Democratic Socialism retard, they're the ones who subverted Communism.

>When are we going back to monarchies
Civilization would have to collapse again.

That's not liberalism.
Liberalism is the SJW bollocks we have now, essentially cultural marxism.
That is free market capitalism, most of the great advancements were done during the time of conservatism and the image is purposefully misleading

If you like your kings rich and kabbalist we'll have a global monarchy quite soon

Thats whats implied on OP's pic.

When you conspire with the duke to kill your count.

Fixed your photo.

Maybe so, but the phrase isn't the same anymore.
Social liberalism is the new meaning of the word so it shouldn't be used anymore to describe capitalism as it goes against it.

all animals choose the path of least resistance
man is no exception

>appease fascists for years
>USSR was the only country in the world condemning fascists
>refuse USSR entry into League of Nations
>ditch Republican Spain
>refuse USSR's offer to help
>act butthurt when USSR gets tired of your shit and signs an Non-Aggression Pact
lmao

...

pretty empty menu

>Capitalists fund Fascism

The Freikorps were supported by democratic socialists to crush their communist rivals. Stalin recognized that. No wonder he hated them more.

But is quite the opposite really. Fascism is openly suppressed in Liberal Capitalist societies, while Communists are given space to operate within reason. The Capitalists fought an open war to destroy Fascism. They could never quite muster the same energy with Communism except through token proxies. This is myth largely perpetuated by Trotsky. He had a lot of interesting observations about Fascism, but he was wrong on that observation.

Fascists want to defeat Liberal Capitalism as well. They would just prefer to subjugate it (rather then destroy it) or revert society back to a pre-Capitalist society based on tradition and hierarchy.

>The USA was never a liberal country.
are you fucking high? or are you that clueless about american history?

>Fascists want to defeat Liberal Capitalism as well.
this is the main part all socialist fail to realize. They see the liberal free market and fascism as two sides of the same coin. Or as a hulk sort of thing where if liberalism is pushed too far, it simply turns into fascism to beat communism. Even though Fascism evolved out of a critique of socialism AND liberalism

We have, however, found the gay parasite.

Social democrats. Don't let a DemSoc hear you make that mistake.
>But is quite the opposite really. Fascism is openly suppressed in Liberal Capitalist societies, while Communists are given space to operate within reason.
Only after Hitler's autistic shitfit.
> The Capitalists fought an open war to destroy Fascism.
Only as a rival empire.
>They could never quite muster the same energy with Communism except through token proxies.
Wrong. USA intervenes every time a socialist might win in democratic elections. Also, the USSR had nukes.

Since when are slavery and segregation liberal?

>They see the liberal free market and fascism as two sides of the same coin.
That's fascism started out as supporting liberal l'aissez faire capitalism. See, Alberto de Stefani.

Civ 5 had awesome artwork.

>American Revolution was a shitfit by the rich colonial elite
USA was liberal since fucking inception.

Yeah dumb pol don't you know REAL freedom is when the government takes all your shit and throws you in a work camp for wrongthink.

>That's fascism started out as supporting liberal l'aissez faire capitalism.
It didnt. Also, how do account for the fact that across the western world, fascism is the ultimate evil and isnt even tolerated in any real since, while you socialist are at least given free reign to play around in the open? Even CNN was bending backwards to defend Antifa

You really have no idea what you are talking about. Our founding fathers were all liberals. our government they constructed is a liberal one. Our constitution is based on liberal philosophy. Thomas Jefferson especially was a big fan of Locke and admitted he basically just copy pasted what he wrote.

For a landowning white men. That's the only way a liberal democracy can work

>look who was Mussolini's Finance Minister was
>nuh-uh!
Okay.

>how do account for the fact that across the western world, fascism is the ultimate evil and isnt even tolerated
Because Hitler.

"Liberalism always wins, eventually"

>liberal democracy
>work
youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig

Slavery wasn't abolished by the founding fathers.

Slow grinding subversion of academia and media. Control perception and you control behavior.

Anglo-Saxons have always won.
The form of government was probably irrelevant, but that is much harder to prove.

Abolitionism isn't liberal.

>Because Hitler.
and how is this not proof that liberalism is not intrinsically fascist? If the left wing meme about it just being liberals were true, then how come now NO ONE supports or tolerates fascism while the socialist, who are suppose to be their number one enemy, are tolerated and even encouraged?

>Socialism died out for good after the cold war.

I have some bad news for you my friend.

>I'll be already in my 30s when all the exciting stuff happens
not fair REEEE

>*creates a police state complete with secret police who arrest and murder people for wrongthink, or just ships them off to a network of slave labor camps
really made me think

in civ 5, order is best

Win? Well in a sense but you must remember that the only progress that exists is the journey around the circle. Everything has its season and our current order finds itself in its winter years, there is not much time now.
Have no fear user, the sun will rise again

...

But Fascism won here.

Remember that comic about "paradox of tolerance"? Which was taken from "The Open Society and Its Enemies" by Karl Popper in 1945? In it, he actually blamed Marx, Hegel and Plato for the European dictatorships of the previous decade.

>Scratch a liberal, and a fascist bleeds. Especially when subject to leftist criticism will they suddenly swing hard right. Progressive liberals will take all sorts of quasi-socialist positions, as long as they are arguing with a reactionary under an overarching reactionary climate.

>But as we saw with Obama and Clinton, they will easily swing right when offered the most tepid social democratic criticism, let alone fully Marxist ones, if they fall for the propaganda that claims neoliberalism is "adult politics," "reasonable," "centrist." The same people who protested Bush's wars and called for UHC in 2007 were defending Libya and Honduras and attacking UHC in 2016.

>The same day they tell a white supremacist that the police are racist and corrupt and that we need strong social programs, they will tell a leftist that community self policing/armed self defense and serve the people campaigns are ridiculous. To them this hypocrisy is nuance, but to anyone with clear historical vision and class consciousness it's just hypocrisy and a clear sign of how a protofascist develops.

Gulags were an even more humane system than Norway's prisons.

espressostalinist.com/the-real-stalin-series/gulag/

>Only after Hitler's autistic shitfit.

Nah, even before that the Western Elite were chilly to him. The aristocrats tended to like him. But the media and intelligentsia not so much.

>Only as a rival empire.

And a rival socio-economic system. Capitalism's economic system is rooted in mercantilism and high finance. Fascism's was rooted in traditional conquest ethos and war economy. Private ownership of business was completely secondary in importance to Fascists to those two main points.

>USA intervenes every time a socialist might win in democratic elections.

Because they are usually hostile to American interests. They do the same thing with Arab Nationalists, the Middle Eastern version of Fascists. Kind of similar that they can't get worked up about ISIS in the same way.

>Also, the USSR had nukes.

Not in the early days went they sent expedition forces in the USSR to the help the Whites during the Civil War. They could have crushed it then, but simply couldn't get worked up about it the same way to they do with Fascism.

At the end of the day, it wasn't Fascists that they let take over all their Humanities Departments.

And was then subsumed into global liberal capitalism.

>spouting left wing propaganda at me that doesnt even address the question really
youre a mormon knocking at my door at this point user. Theres also the glaring problem that socialist countries end up being just as totalitarian and despotic as fascism(just as marx said btw)

Liberalism won because it was able to come across in the most confident yet non aggressive manner. The egalitarians had goals, ambitions, they held themselves in the right way, didn’t blame another group for their sufferage, yet called forth a plan.

Granted, the blame game being fabricated into fascist principles was a wonderful way to stamp it out, making its idea seem unattractive. If you want to convince the masses to rally behind you, you’re not going to need logic or a well organized plan. You simply have to ask yourself how to imitate success? Or better yet, how to pursue success with a passion that drives others towards you? What doors do you, an ordinary citizen need opened in order for you to seize success?
Liberals absolutely mastered this body language, this friendly weight, not just in body and speech, but behind action.

Talking about what a liberal wants and what a fascist wants to another person gives them the impression that the liberal is much more comfortable. He is at ease with himself. While the fascist and all the things that he simply needs to DO, make him sound like a loser to this secondhand audience.

>Gulags were an even more humane system than Norway's prisons
>links to some literally who communist blog
yeah, your watching looney tunes in your head. Youre fucking retarded lol

it's more appropriately called neoliberalism, and it's frankly on its deathbed. it isn't going to last.

The japs were seriously good allies.

>page is actually littered with quotes and sources
Okay.

Nobody encourages socialism, btw.

>Theres also the glaring problem that socialist countries end up being just as totalitarian and despotic as fascism
No more or less totalitarian or despotic than fascist states, or liberal ones, but more justified in the targets they pursue.

>Socialism died out for good after the Cold War
t. boomer
You literally imported Socialism from China and the U.S.S.R. straigth to your universities. You made the Cold War irrelevant.
Too bad right-wing authoritarianism/traditional monarchism is back to bury the communists upstarts for good.

>DA HOLOCAUST DIDNT HAPPEN! LOOK AT 1488ARYANWOLF.BLOPSPOT!
This is you user. Thank you for displaying just what a complete batshit crazy retard you are though. It really puts the whole previous conversation in perspective.

shhhhhhh they still seem to forget franko

The communist will lose automatically in all cases, simply because he sounds really bitter, it’s the way communist ideals are. A communist wants to seize and reorganize everything, thus he’s going to seem like he wants to fight everybody who isn’t a communist. A fascist can still have that same wonderful charisma as the liberal, but he can’t just go around opening every dialog with how much the Jews suck. In fact it would be much more beneficial for him to maintain his “I want to kill you” weight, while demanding nothing of the sort. Like how a policeman or soldier carries himself.

The liberal is a natural product of his own environment, and while he lacks great vision to see past his current predicament he’s absolutely mastered garnering respect (not the modern liberal, the ones from the last century).
They had the success, the right attitude, knew what to say, and proposed ideas that made people believe this man could solve their problems relatively soon, unlike the communists and fascists who want to redo everything, the liberal made suggestions while fixing his own house to weather any storms so to say. The liberals offered the public a band-aid, while the fascist and communist had to convince them the need for a serious operation.

Im not a boomer, your analysis has the right concept, but is wrong. Youre also very obviously a delusional 20 year old based on the idea that fucking monarchist are relevant at all.

I'm not the one rehabilitating fascism, by equating it to communism.