Haha look up the French revolution my girl,
Yes private property was more free than direct rule by the king, that’s why liberal people at the time fought for that, but people who are liberal minded still want more freedoms, that’s why a liberal today would likely fight for anarchism or socialism, as it gives more freedom (less control) than private property.
You just believed the bourgeois when they told you society is most liberal when markets are most free.
A lie so easy to see through.
You can’t say “a liberal capitalist society is athoritharian”
Its like saying “a cold cup of water is hot”, at makes absolutely no sense.
Either it is hot or it is cold (compared to something else)
Either it is liberal, or authoritarian (compared to something else).
And yes, capitalist societies systematically tend to be more and more authoritarian as time goes on to the point where they become facism, we agree on that. But becoming more and more authoritarian LITERALLY means becoming less and less liberal.
Okay, I was so perplexed that you seem to associate liberal with free markets so hard that I looked up definitions in different languages.
As it seems in America liberal really applies to markets not people (which is such a wild 'murica moment for me)
While in Europe the term means people.
In Germany for example we have “liberal” vs “autoritär” which means individual freedoms vs no individual freedoms (practical ones, not theoretical one, not that you are allowed to live in a house for example, but that you actually have the means to do so)
This has nothing to do with markets.
In the american spectrum people for some stupid Orwellian reason rebranded that term to apply to freedom of markets.
The Germans then needed a different term for that weird philosophy, which is “libertär”, because it has nothing to to with the original meaning of “liberal”.
So I think this is a language barrier issue, Americans redefining terms so they uphold their hyper capitalistic view on society.
Me talking that language as a foreigner didn’t get that you use our term (derived from the original french “libéral”) and just rebranded it for capitalistic propaganda.
Apparently in American English “egalitarian” or “liberty” is what comes closest to the German meaning of “liberal” or the original French “libéral”
So my bad I guess…
Or american redefining of concepts…
i don’t think bringing up the french revolution helps your point. bourgeois liberals fought for property rights against feudal authority, which was more freedom for them and less for everyone without property. calling that “more liberal” just means more freedom for property owners. the definition was always class specific.
we live in a authoritarian liberal dictatorship of capital
Haha look up the French revolution my girl, Yes private property was more free than direct rule by the king, that’s why liberal people at the time fought for that, but people who are liberal minded still want more freedoms, that’s why a liberal today would likely fight for anarchism or socialism, as it gives more freedom (less control) than private property.
You just believed the bourgeois when they told you society is most liberal when markets are most free. A lie so easy to see through.
You can’t say “a liberal capitalist society is athoritharian” Its like saying “a cold cup of water is hot”, at makes absolutely no sense.
Either it is hot or it is cold (compared to something else) Either it is liberal, or authoritarian (compared to something else).
And yes, capitalist societies systematically tend to be more and more authoritarian as time goes on to the point where they become facism, we agree on that. But becoming more and more authoritarian LITERALLY means becoming less and less liberal.
Okay, I was so perplexed that you seem to associate liberal with free markets so hard that I looked up definitions in different languages.
As it seems in America liberal really applies to markets not people (which is such a wild 'murica moment for me) While in Europe the term means people.
In Germany for example we have “liberal” vs “autoritär” which means individual freedoms vs no individual freedoms (practical ones, not theoretical one, not that you are allowed to live in a house for example, but that you actually have the means to do so)
This has nothing to do with markets.
In the american spectrum people for some stupid Orwellian reason rebranded that term to apply to freedom of markets.
The Germans then needed a different term for that weird philosophy, which is “libertär”, because it has nothing to to with the original meaning of “liberal”.
So I think this is a language barrier issue, Americans redefining terms so they uphold their hyper capitalistic view on society.
Me talking that language as a foreigner didn’t get that you use our term (derived from the original french “libéral”) and just rebranded it for capitalistic propaganda.
Apparently in American English “egalitarian” or “liberty” is what comes closest to the German meaning of “liberal” or the original French “libéral”
So my bad I guess… Or american redefining of concepts…
let’s agree to blame the br*tish
I can live with that
i don’t think bringing up the french revolution helps your point. bourgeois liberals fought for property rights against feudal authority, which was more freedom for them and less for everyone without property. calling that “more liberal” just means more freedom for property owners. the definition was always class specific.
we live in a authoritarian liberal dictatorship of capital
Yeah, read my last comment.
Its a language barrier issue.
English “liberal” is totally different from the original French “libéral” or the German “liberal”. Which is quite confusing.
In English “liberty” or “egalitarian” comes closest to the original meaning of liberal