I think they’re referencing your using an assumed ideological generality/commitment (“liberal”) to refer to someone in response to a common albeit somewhat tiresome joke.
It looks a lot like you were trying to be dehumanizing, rather than constructively asking the person a question. Most people understand that asking a question or entering into honest discussion requires some generosity, do it’s only human nature that people detected when none or the opposite is given.
You know, that choice, the choice to demean people by ideology - seems to tie into to common fears about Marxist and Socialist systems… That they’re authoritarian or would be “once the mask was dropped and they gained any sort of power”
…and that seems to be the appearance you would prefer to perpetuate. You’re doing Capitalism’s work for free. You’re actively reproducing the cultural mindset you’ve been allocated in its system.
Remove their professed ideology and the people that choose to be dumb, arrogant, angry, tribalistic assholes are all indistinguishable. The way they act, speak, and think are identical.
My point was “this is the kind of person you’re choosing to be.”
There is no such thing as a “socialist” liberal because there is no such thing as an anti-capitalist liberal - once you cross over into anti-capitalist - ie, socialist - territory, you automatically become anti-liberal, too.
Again, your goal seems to be tracing a very small territory which will obviously be rejected by most… It’s as if that’s your aim is to be more radical and exclusive “than thou”.
To me this is no different to the billionaire bragging about his particularly libertarian agenda, or extremists Randian “egoic motivations”.
Its aim is to perform and adopt an assigned cultural position in order to reproduce the dominant cultural hegemony; positioning and imparting the awareness of the majority population’s moral imperative to avoid both positions as ugly and extremist, and hence their righteousness for staying away from both.
Throughout your comments there are quite a few people who are blatantly socialist, and people who say very anti-capitalist things that may be socialists, who you have called a lib. It just seems you perceive it as an insult towards people who hold different beliefs, rather than describing capitalists… not to say that the specific OP here isn’t a capitalist, but some of the others definitely aren’t.
I wouldn’t count myself as a capitalist, personally. I may be more amiable to short-term solutions that acknowledge that we are still in a capitalist society, but I see an investor-driven economy as ruinous to both itself and democracy, and not something that can be sustained in a truly democratic society.
You found what, liberal?
whooooooosh
Again - you found what liberal?
You a bot or just…touched?
You sound just like the Donald Trump supporters I’ve met online: the style of “argument” and even the “insults” are identical.
What a coincidence.
Come now, liberal… are you too politically incompetent to explain your little liberal joke to me?
Try not to disappoint.
I think they’re referencing your using an assumed ideological generality/commitment (“liberal”) to refer to someone in response to a common albeit somewhat tiresome joke.
It looks a lot like you were trying to be dehumanizing, rather than constructively asking the person a question. Most people understand that asking a question or entering into honest discussion requires some generosity, do it’s only human nature that people detected when none or the opposite is given.
You know, that choice, the choice to demean people by ideology - seems to tie into to common fears about Marxist and Socialist systems… That they’re authoritarian or would be “once the mask was dropped and they gained any sort of power”
…and that seems to be the appearance you would prefer to perpetuate. You’re doing Capitalism’s work for free. You’re actively reproducing the cultural mindset you’ve been allocated in its system.
Remove their professed ideology and the people that choose to be dumb, arrogant, angry, tribalistic assholes are all indistinguishable. The way they act, speak, and think are identical.
My point was “this is the kind of person you’re choosing to be.”
what exactly does “liberal” mean to you? what makes some socialist a “lib” as opposed to a pureblooded leftist hero?
There is no such thing as a “socialist” liberal because there is no such thing as an anti-capitalist liberal - once you cross over into anti-capitalist - ie, socialist - territory, you automatically become anti-liberal, too.
Again, your goal seems to be tracing a very small territory which will obviously be rejected by most… It’s as if that’s your aim is to be more radical and exclusive “than thou”.
To me this is no different to the billionaire bragging about his particularly libertarian agenda, or extremists Randian “egoic motivations”.
Its aim is to perform and adopt an assigned cultural position in order to reproduce the dominant cultural hegemony; positioning and imparting the awareness of the majority population’s moral imperative to avoid both positions as ugly and extremist, and hence their righteousness for staying away from both.
Then let them reject it.
Elitist.
Throughout your comments there are quite a few people who are blatantly socialist, and people who say very anti-capitalist things that may be socialists, who you have called a lib. It just seems you perceive it as an insult towards people who hold different beliefs, rather than describing capitalists… not to say that the specific OP here isn’t a capitalist, but some of the others definitely aren’t.
I wouldn’t count myself as a capitalist, personally. I may be more amiable to short-term solutions that acknowledge that we are still in a capitalist society, but I see an investor-driven economy as ruinous to both itself and democracy, and not something that can be sustained in a truly democratic society.