this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2024
92 points (97.9% liked)
chat
8193 readers
13 users here now
Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.
As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.
Thank you and happy chatting!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
ok enlightened centrist lol. liberalism and conservatism are both contradictory ideologies for dumb dumbs and are inherently regressive, how's that. liberalism had its day of being a phase of progression but it's time for it to go in the trash can of history. get back to me when you see the light of dialectical and historical materialism and realise Marxism-Leninism is the only alternative that's fit for furthering the progression of humanity. but keep mounting a soft defense of conservatism if it gets you off or whatever
to your edit: evaluating an ideology should be done through the lens of how fit it is for accomplishing the universal liberation of all working and oppressed peoples. I don't give a fuck if liberalism is a "smart" decision for some bougie mfs to protect their class interests. that doesn't make it valid or good or worth any kind of justification. it's at best a trite thing to point out
Claims to be a materialist, believes that the vast majority of Americans have no material basis for their politics and are just stupid
you are a dumb lib or a pretty boring troll. I wish you all the best in reading a book sometime
No, you understand perfectly. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it" and all.
No idea why "this person makes money off this policy, so they have a material reason to support it" is suddenly a controversial concept
Those frameworks are sound if you don't have the priors leftists do. That doesn't mean they're good, it just means they're internally consistent.
Take homelessness. If your prior is that housing is a human right, then you think the government should make sure everyone has housing. But if your prior is that housing is something individuals have to provide for themselves, you aren't as concerned about homelessness.
A lib with the latter prior isn't stupid; they just have a fundamentally different belief about how society should work. It's not that they haven't read the books we have on homelessness, it's that they simply disagree with the importance we place on the issue. Often they disagree because they understand that agreeing would have a material cost.
Of course, plenty of libs also have incoherent worldviews, or really are just uneducated on important topics. My point is that viewing them all that way isn't correct, and falls into the same "no reasonable person could possibly disagree with me" trap we rip on others for buying into.
i think I got that I just think it's a trite thing to point out around here and it falls flat anyway because it isn't "smart" for fuckloads of Americans to be liberals or conservatives, the working masses of America would plainly be better off under socialism they just have propaganda brainworms about it. in most cases it's not a "well thought out opinion" it's just how citizens of the imperial core are successfully programmed to think