• rah@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    As an outsider, I’m curious why there is such a focus on liberalism in leftist circles? It seems every other meme here is hate for liberals. What’s the relationship between liberalism and leftism?

    Edit: thanks for the responses but unfortunately I don’t really understand what you guys are talking about. I needed an ELI5 really. Thanks anyway.

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      I will always point to mlk as a response to this question:

      I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Councillor or the Ku Klux Klanner but the white moderate who is more devoted to order than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says, “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can’t agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically feels that he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by the myth of time; and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

    • алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      To quote Malcolm X:

      The white liberal is the most dangerous thing in the entire wester hemisphere. He is the most deceitful, he’s like a fox. And a fox is always more dangerous in the forest than the wolf. You can see the wolf coming, you know what he is up to. But the fox will fool you. He comes at you with his mouth shaped in such a way, that even though you see his teeth, you think he is smiling.

      All their supposed progress and opposition to capital only reinforces and propels capitalism, alleviating the need for fascism just for a little longer (which arises for the ruling classes when the majority of the population grows disillusioned with their lies, be they conservative or “progressive”). In the end only legitimizing the underlying framework (capitalism), without ever threatening it.

      tl;dr: scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds

    • masquenox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I needed an ELI5 really.

      Liberals essentially cover for both capitalists and fascists. See, capitalist and fascist ideology are very unpopular on their own, so liberals come up with all kinds of ways to pretend that rich people owning everything is good for everyone (capitalism) or pretending that more police repression means more safety (fascism).

      Liberalsm essentially acts as the pretend-friendly “facade” ideology of this unholy trio - so yes, it’s simply coherent for leftists to despise liberalism.

      • rah@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Liberals essentially cover for both capitalists and fascists.

        ELI5. What’s a liberal? What’s a captialist? What’s a fascist? Why are liberals covering others?

  • masquenox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    The very last line is redundant. If you don’t know by now what the critical role fascism plays in the liberal order is, I don’t know what to tell you.

  • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Or, because liberals care more about preserving their increasing property and stocks values and thus willing to bed with the devil, than preserve democracy.

    • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      No. Leftism is primarily defined by support for a socialist economy. There is not a single liberal on the planet that would support socialism.

      • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        That lack of nuance is not helpful. There are plenty of liberals that would like a more balanced economy.

        Edit: I’m tired of everyone’s “that’s not socialism.” You have to get people behind it. That requires taking steps. You aren’t going to bitch at reasonable people online to wake up one day and we’ve made the full conversion.

  • orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Liberalism has been a weird one to try and tackle in the US today, at least in my friends circle. I’m a leftist through and through, but have friends that still fall into the liberal bucket. But they have absolutely no desire to compromise with fascism, and they have the same criticisms of capitalism and the current market as myself. Despite this, they still sometimes take offense to my criticisms of liberals and still feel some sort of ownership over it. So I think as times progress onward, it’s going to get harder and harder to define it, especially with how the US has clouded all of these terms.

    That said, there’s still a shitload of liberals in the US that think we can simply vote these problems away and basically do nothing else. They aren’t willing to get their hands dirty if it comes down to it and will instead do whatever they can to fly under the radar and put on blinders. They fail to realize that the Democratic Party is the other side of the same fascist coin.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      But they have absolutely no desire to compromise with fascism, and they have the same criticisms of capitalism and the current market as myself.

      This is pretty much the default stance for most people, I believe. The issue, is that without deprogramming the Anticommunist Red Scare Propaganda, and without reading Leftist Theory, this is the endpoint of this position, essentially doomerism.

      That said, there’s still a shitload of liberals in the US that think we can simply vote these problems away and basically do nothing else. They aren’t willing to get their hands dirty if it comes down to it and will instead do whatever they can to fly under the radar and put on blinders. They fail to realize that the Democratic Party is the other side of the same fascist coin.

      This is why it’s important for Leftists to constantly agitate, organize, and spread theory. Electoralism is a doomed game, organizing is what’s important.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s not how fascism works, in any way. Fascism is a response to dying Capitalism, it’s an attempt to turn the clock back via the Petite Bourgeoisie and Bourgeoisie working together against the Proletariat and Lumpenproletariat.

      Marxists want to turn the clock forward and organize along Socialist lines, with a democratically run worker-state. This is not fascism, nor is it Leftists taking advantage of fascism.

      Historically, Liberals prefer to side with fascists, as they wish to maintain current structures, rather than reorganize.

    • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      No, no and no*

      Marx postulated communism from an economic analysis with the goal to improve the economic and political situation of the working class. This is deeply antifascist.

      Lenin abolished the tsarist rule and implemented progressive politics like womens rights and ended the criminalization of homosexuality.

      Stalin while ideologically and economically not a fascist was staunchly authoritarian, which is a core theme of fascism and he rolled back many of the progressive social policies of Lenin. However authoritarianism is an universal political theme, whether fascist, stalinist, monarchist or even “democratic”.

      • zaknenou@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        hmm if you are condemning these acts from comrade Stalin, I think Marx encouraged dictatorship of proletariat, Karl Marx believed in a transitional period in the road to total communism this being a socialist state under a dictatorship authority of “the people’s party”, even the acts of purge that Stalin carried I think were mentioned by Marx, I personally don’t think that Stalin betrayed Marxism, but if Marxism is a totalitarian system, and we’re here calling totalitarians “fascists” then Marxism is a form of fascism

        • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          You don’t actually know what the dictatorship of the proletariat is. I would suggest you read up on that first.

      • zaknenou@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        hmm, fascism is mainly a totalitarian system I think. I heard USSR did actually suppress some religious acts on its’ soil, which is an important aspect of individuality