To be liberal was to be open an accepting socially. The americans have changed it to mean to allow anything economically which is then coupled with bigotry because division makes the rich richer, or at least stops them being lynched
Bro this is just wrong on the fine details, starting with the fact that the original liberalism, and using that term specifically tends to mean the founding ideology of the American and French Revolutions btw, allowed racial chattel slavery and ending with the reality that the “liberal” parties in most countries besides America are conservatives.
Neo liberal / laissez-faire applies to both major parties in the USA.
Although, it’s certainly becoming less so with the GOP than the Democrats. IE: bailouts for farmers affected by their own tariffs, mass deportations which will affect business, etc.
Is a “right winger” who doesn’t follow liberalism even a “right winger” at all, insofar as the term is used in modern US politics? Considering that without the central bird of liberalism there wouldn’t be a need for the division into right and left wing. Maybe I’m off the mark, though?
Interesting that he phrased it as liberalism.
The American definition of Liberalism is the exact opposite of the original meaning, so maybe he was just being extra-oldschool?
What do you consider to be the original meaning?
To be liberal was to be open an accepting socially. The americans have changed it to mean to allow anything economically which is then coupled with bigotry because division makes the rich richer, or at least stops them being lynched
Bro this is just wrong on the fine details, starting with the fact that the original liberalism, and using that term specifically tends to mean the founding ideology of the American and French Revolutions btw, allowed racial chattel slavery and ending with the reality that the “liberal” parties in most countries besides America are conservatives.
American liberals are not represented properly
You’re delusional.
No u
Neo liberal / laissez-faire applies to both major parties in the USA.
Although, it’s certainly becoming less so with the GOP than the Democrats. IE: bailouts for farmers affected by their own tariffs, mass deportations which will affect business, etc.
Sure, and what ideological branch does a right winger who doesn’t follow liberalism fall under?
Is a “right winger” who doesn’t follow liberalism even a “right winger” at all, insofar as the term is used in modern US politics? Considering that without the central bird of liberalism there wouldn’t be a need for the division into right and left wing. Maybe I’m off the mark, though?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
Ooooh, it was a leading question. I gotcha.
I agree with you 100%.
You’ll get different answers from extreme right and left and neither of them know what the fuck it means
It means fuck nazis is what it means
🤡
🐓
His wrongness was so great, that it caused integer underflow and him saying something correct.
Or horseshoe theory.