This is simply a friendly reminder that Liberals are an actual belief system that is in place in pretty much all of the western world, from the United States to the United Kingdom to France to Canada ect. and it is not the SJW meme shit ignorant conservatives (who are most likely liberals themselves) think it is.
Liberalism
youtube.com
Socialism (a completely different ideology that came about against liberal ideology)
youtube.com
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
we know. read the fourth politcal theory.
Socialism: "Power to the laborers!"
Liberalism: "Power to the rich!"
Fascism: "Power to the nation!"
How's that first year of your undergrad treating you?
> Lurk more faggot
You say this, but I constantly see people on Sup Forums, and people in general, referring to SJW, Antifa, and other socialist left wingers as "liberals"
It's an American misuse of terms. Most of us here grasp the concept
> I think your mission efforts would be best applied to Facebook and Tumblr, new friend
More like
LIBERTARIANS: PRIVATE PROPERTY OF CAPITAL AND FREE MARKET
SOCIALIST:PRIVATE PROPERTY OF CAPITAL AND PUBLIC PROPERTY OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION
FASCIST:PUBLIC PROPERTY OF CAPITAL, LABOUR BASED CURRENCY, LEADERSHIP RIGHT/SYNDICAL/CORPORATE PROPERTY OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION AND MONOLITHIC UNITY IN ORDER TO WORK AS AN ORGANIC BODY AGAINST MONOPOLISTIC, OLIGOPOLISTIC, HIGH FINANCE JEWISH OWNED CAPITALISM AND JEWISH FINANCIAL OWNED SOCIALISM, AGAINST ALL THE CORRUPTED FORCES OF MATERIALISM
but none of that is true. In practice; Socialism: Power to the Government, Liberalism: Removal of Power from anyone who believes in Individualism, Fascism: Power to the Government through Violence.
They mean cultural liberalism, not economical
This.
Cultural liberalism is just a moral justification for economic liberalism, liberalism is a worldview, you are meaning critic theory
That is just an American colloquialism, anyone that understands political science knows the full extent that liberalism is cancer, both left and right-wing liberalism.
This. OP your thread isn’t the worst thing up on Sup Forums right now, it just sounds like you recently realized there’s a colloquial difference between liberals and Liberals. A uniquely American difference.
But just to clarify, most of Sup Forums considers both to be cancer.
>who are most likely liberals themselves
no I don't believe in freedom or human rights
So by your image
The only way we can get all three to work is by removing all the blacks?
I don't want to tell the libertarian that their loved capitalism is the root of degeneration
Even then, critical theory is a specifically socialist thing. That all comes from Marxist philosophers from the frankfurt school. judging whole groups like cis white men is fundamentally anti-liberal.
that's why i usually prefer to use the term lefties, or classical liberal if i'm being specific. oddly enough the lefties consider the term classical liberalism to be a "dog whistle" for racism and white supremacy. the people calling themselves liberal don't know what it means. the term is in danger of losing all definition, perhaps that's the point, without a name to the concept that is accurate we lose that concept, or we're forced to rename the concept which takes some of the pr branding away, slowing it down.
Thats literally what Orwell was writing about in 1984. The control of language to such a degree that you can erase a word, and the entire idea and meme of that word with it. Socialist, both Soviet styled ones and Neo-Marxist, do this shit all the fucking time.
Fuck off
Jesus Christ you actually managed to get them all wrong.
Leftism is the world’s most dynamic religion.
Most people don’t recognize this fact.
One reason is that leftism is overwhelmingly secular (more than merely secular: it is inherently opposed to all traditional religions), and therefore people do not regard it as a religion.
Another is that leftism so convincingly portrays itself as solely the product of reason, intellect, and science that it has not been seen as the dogma-based ideology that it is.
Therefore, the vast majority of the people who affirm leftist beliefs think of their views as the only way to properly think about life.
That, in turn, explains why anyone who opposes leftism is labeled anti-intellectual, anti-progress, anti-science, anti-minority and anti-reason (among many other pejorative epithets): leftists truly believe that there is no other way to think.
get fucked.
i want fascism. i want faggots thrown off helicopters.
No, it comes from the adaptation of marxist theories to the oligarchic powers interest
yeah thats what Im saying. Critical Theory is rooted in marxism, not in liberalism.
Fascism > literally everything else
>Fascism > literally everything else
short term solution for long term problems
Liberalism simultaneously props up the idea of individual freedoms in society whilst creating policy that restricts it in others. It is literally logical fallacy in political form, and results in the death and decay of civilization, not saving it.
How does individual freedom conflict with freedom in others?
I'm so sick of semantics
> Gets understanding of politics from Video Games and Sargon wannabes.
Sup Forums is for ages 18 or older. Come back once you've graduated high school.
Socialism: "Power to the people (who are from the right class)."
Liberalism: "Power to the people (who fund my election campaign)."
Fascism: "Power to the people (who control the army that keeps me in power)."
Stop using language.
How do you prevent identity politics from eventually subverting liberalism? It seduces decent people with feel-good rhetoric in its beginning stages, then, once established, it becomes full-blown SJW cancer. Would you ban identity politics for the sake of universalism? Would you only allow civic nationalism or not even that?
>How does individual freedom conflict with freedom in others?
>when those freedoms interfere with the freedom of others dumbass.
This legitimately annoys me.
Whenever I see somebody using the world "liberal" in a manner that indicates that they are just parroting political brand marketing, I basically know that I am dealing with a lazy-minded dolt.
In the same vein, conservatism itself is merely a method, and whenever I see people treat it as a set ideology, I also know that I am in the presence of an idiot.
This especially annoys me because it allows people to escape actually governing as a conservative by simply pretending that supporting a specific political party somehow makes them a conservative. Western governments were designed with en emphasis upon the balance of progress and caution tempering each other and when one side stops even trying to fulfill its role, everything turns to shit.
He's correct. You should find a small child and ask them to read their social studies primer to you. And this time pay attention and try to focus your adhd-addled brain long enough to learn rudimentary aspects of western politics.
>mwf I'm the only autocratic civ left except a pawn I sold a puppet state to, and I handed over control of the UN.
My culture ruled the motherucking world, after detroying Byzantium, of course. :)
Liberalism is just Libertarianism for Europeans.
Commies stole the term from us in the US and no one was using Libertarian at the time so we decided to swap. It is our tradition not theirs. Filthy red commie pink bastards.
Then give me an example. Prove your point. Individual freedoms are fairly straightforward and usually don't really clash from my point of view.
XD another liberalist? I didn't come on here to waste time debating your autism.
Do you even know if Laurence Fishbourne is White?
All of those look pretty good to me, despite the fact that I see socialism as cancer. Part of it, is because they're all white, but left to right I see
Honorable me willing to die for the sake of their people
An upstanding, and prosperous people
People working with pride to build.
Honorable people*
(not a Freudian slip. I'm just half asleep.)
Why is the section of the left objectively the best and most stable for the population and technology without sacrificing the populace to try and reach unfeasible goals?
anarchy bb
How can the self-determination of the people increase in efficiency to the point it makes the government obsolete?
sauce on pic related? anyone got a link?
Perhaps under an especially extreme and violent chaos wherein any groups that begin to get even moderately sized are ruthlessly culled.
How can we ensure that no group will be allowed to get even moderately sized? What if nothing about them suggests threat of coercion in the beginning, specially since people will need voluntary organization in the absence of government? Will sufficient numbers keep that preventive goal in mind and act on it? Will they themselves be immune to corruption if they win?
I guess an overarching moral framework has to be agreed on first.
Some 10 year old boy
Liberalism:"Liberty first!"
Marxism:"Equality first!"
Fascism:"Fraternity first!"
god created the peoples with overarching moral frameworks built into their souls, and it is straying from His will, cultural decay, commodity fetishism, and materialism which has led us away from this original understanding. Once these things have all been permanently abolished, we will be able to return to a state of equilibrium and build the final dialectical synthesis of the New Jerusalem and the final Third Rome.
Should these things be abolished by coercion or some enlightenment effort, or both?
Eh, Just shooting the shit. You probably can't for very long, unless you have some way to maintain a state of permanent chaos. Like you'd need a situation where no one trusts anyone and people are violently opposed to political cooperation in both themselves and others.
Cooperation for community, firefighting, etc doesn't really involve law / politics / religion so it could possibly remain unaffected if divorced as a concept. Even business would have to reform under smaller, independent groups and figure out a way to make that work.
Every journalist would live in pants-shitting terror that their reporting would be taken as biased and they would be killed.
>Like you'd need a situation where no one trusts anyone and people are violently opposed to political cooperation in both themselves and others.
I guess this would make people permanently defensive and paranoid, which would probably lead to more gratuitous violence than the current system. This would lead people to create a government to protect them.
>if divorced as a concept
It can until it becomes big enough to be hijacked without consequence, I suppose.
I'm thinking technology could probably help us develop workarounds for the problems above.
For instance: /wiki/Smart_contract
Well said
Nah, people can handle way more violence. We're at record lows in all of history.
>not preferring fascism
geyest life of my reincarnation cycle
does anyone know where i can find this vid?
meatspin.com
oh hey, look at this pedantic faggot
how about you kys?
DESU, it took me a long time to realize that's what it boils down to, but once you realize it, the French Revolution being such a clusterfuck starts making a lot of sense.
Man, I'm so sad this faggot is so cucked by his purple-haired whore beast.
Forgot pic.
sauce on pic related pls
...
You're preaching to the choir. The only people who don't know this are retarded boomers and magapedes.
So very few understand, the word fetishism of the left has corrupted so much of what is used to describe what is truly Right.
>from USA to france, and everything inbetween
Your fuckless moron
>this faggot is so cucked by his purple-haired whore beast.
Spooner is a faggot. Pig-face is incidental to his over-arching issues.
>don't blame the piggu for the sins
youtube.com
...
...
All of it stems from the french revolution. Look at the mantra "Liberté, égalité, fraternité" (liberty, equality, fraternity).
Liberalism stems from the idea of liberty.
Communism stems from the idea of equality.
Fascism stems from the idea of fraternity.
The political compass isn't a square, it's a triangle representing each of these ideas.
Somewhere in the middle lies the Hegelian synthesis which will most likely be the system of the future combining ideals from all three of these ideologies.
Forgot image.
>dem spelling errors
Those intellectiums be keeping da white man down
This seems biased to the point to where it's not credible.
yes lets talk about politics from some stupid crappy game
Nobody in this thread knows what the fuck they're talking about.
Most people on Sup Forums don't.
"cultural liberalism" it's simply libertine socialism.
Watered down commies.
Socialists and outright commies used to be puritanical and rail against the excesses of the rich... the libertine sex life, sexual exploitation, drug abuse, partying.
In China the commies preached Confucianism, which is kind of a Chinese Stoicism.
The Chinese mock the American left and western socialism.
The American "socialist" is more obsessed with protecting their libertine lifestyle, avenues of pleasure than the economics of everyday life.
First they needed to erode the nation states of Europe, they did this by injecting neo marxist post modernism into academia, the infection spread from there via swarms of indoctrinated post graduate students into the very arteries of Western civilization. The spheres of politics, economics, industry, education, law enforcement, diplomacy, the media and everywhere else power and influence resides were utterly subverted to the globalist cause, they used this refined Marxism to effectively seize control of every major instrument of the state in most if not all of the target nations.
Once they held the strings, they went to work on the European man, a relentless war has been waged against the mind, body and spirit of the white man, psyops have been deployed with surgical precision, the constant and relentless barrage of subliminal messaging has been smashing into the brains of white children for decades, and the results are clear to see, homosexuality being widely considred normal, the transgender epidemic, paedophillia on the rise as children become sexualised years before puberty, interracial cuckoldry is now virtually a religion, degenracy on a scale that would make the late Roman empire blush and of course the submission to women, from Prime Ministers and Secretaries of State to teachers and police, the authority figure of the west is ever more feminine and men were successfully turned into submissive cretins, and that's when they opened the door to Africa.
Because these people have hijacked liberalism.
Meanwhile nothing about efficiency or productivity. It's why the whole notion of an ideological "system" is foolish.
Because efficiency and productivity can be achieved in multiple ways. In a laissez faire liberalist society, efficiency is achieved by selling all the cheap manufacturing jobs to the cheapest developing country. For others, efficiency is to be achieved by ensuring their own native workers are of a better stock and force them to strive for better.