Economic ideals and political philosophies are a circular ven-diagram. The economy is inherently political, as politics are fundamentally about who gets what, when. The division between economic and social issues is a dangerous myth. Civil rights are economic issues, and stock markets are political.

Liberalism is the philosophy that incorrectly decouples these two opposing views in your mind. Civil liberties and private ownership; human rights and capitalism. The two will ultimately come into conflict, and one must be sacrificed to maintain the other. Capitalism requires the liberal state, as it becomes feudalism without it. The rules based system of ownership is fundamental to capitalism's existence.

[–] Quadhammer@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

Most lefties on here are complaining about laissez-fair liberals(economic, let the free market do its thing. Neoliberals), which are more closely related to libertarians IMO.

Most people who identify themselves as liberals are simply pro civil rights and freedoms(the economy does it thing as long as it stays the fuck out of civil rights and doesn't oppressthe lower/middle class. Pro regulation. Monopolies and insider trading are bad). Closely related to social democrats and the labor party

[–] TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago

I'm not just complaining about the laissez-faire liberals, but the self identified liberals who remain ignorant of how far we actually needed to go into democratic socialism to stand a chance. I even underestimated how much radical reform was needed to sustain liberal democracy. Even self identified liberals and progressive did not push hard enough. As someone who felt the urge to shy away from radical reform, I now know that it was necessary yesterday.

We needed business owners OUT of conversations as owners of businesses; no more entrepreneurship or private interests. We needed DEprivatization and regulations that STARTED at the Green New Deal. We needed the stock market to perpetually remain stagnant as wages rose. We needed effective wealth redistribution, not so we could reach communism, but so people would continue to buy into the system. We needed an FDR, but got a party of Herbert Hoovers.

We refused to dream big enough out of fear of being filthy commies, but that's what would have been necessary to hold back fascism and keep liberalism. Now we have the unenviable task of surviving fascism, clawing back control from the rich out of the remains of an empire, and suffering from an apocalyptic climate crisis for the rest of our lives. We're not doomed, but we are cursed.

[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Correct, and this is the real issue I am identifying when I point to this anti-liberal discourse as of late.

Most of your common liberal voters are not in support of the things we are fighting against. They are poorly educated and mislead, and continuing to paint them as the enemy is making the problem worse and giving the far-right more power. "You're either with us or against us" mentality isn't conductive to genuinely solving socio-political problems.

Fuck libertarians and neo-liberalism. They are not liberals, nor the centrists I was pointing to in my earlier post.

[–] TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I'm not blaming any liberals voters; I'm blaming liberalism and **CAPITALISM**™. I often forget that people don't view the world like I do. I don't blame most Trump supporters for Trump. I don't even blame people who are rich as a whole, only how the laws of the economy drive them to evil. I don't inherently care for retribution, but I know people automatically think that way.

I am saying that liberalism, as an ideology, needs to amputate capitalism and imperialism from itself. Capital must be secondary to people, always and forever. Unless we are absolutely clear on that, fuck liberalism. It's dead weight as a brand. The old system is politically toxic, so we need to rebuild from humanitarian ideals and critical thought. Ownership means nothing anymore. The social contract withered away already.

[–] Quadhammer@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

You can't really amputate capitalism at this point. Its just not possible short of a really long and bloody war or somehow convincing conservatives it was their idea. You can try to change it from within and eat the rich but it's core tenants are not going away.

Capital must be secondary to people, always and forever.

This I agree with. It's a tragedy that it even has to be said

[–] TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

Exactly. People are too wedded to the idea that capitalism "needs protecting" from some boogeyman. Capitalism will probably be better off if we actively oppose it instead of pretending that it's wise. It's an evil system BECAUSE it's similar to evolution. There's no "invisible hand," only self interest that ignores externalities and generational consequences.