yeah some lib on here hit me with that after i told them they were a stupid liberal. it's just a new expression of the "anyone who disagrees with me isn't human" strain of liberal denialism
lol i saw that. that user was sooo mad that we weren’t ridin with biden. and then they cried ad hominem and had a problem with ur “death to america” tag
they had the most reddit aura ive seen here in a while
I think it's more of a maturity thing than a liberal thing. It's an unwillingness to acknowledge other opinions and grapple with why they exist, which happens across the political spectrum.
It's a liberal thing because liberals are fully grown diaper babies with no real political knowledge and get all of their opinions from liberal comment sections or CNN.
So, yes it's a maturity problem but part of it is that liberals are all immature.
The ones that aren't end up becoming socialists. Or they become neoliberals because they're genuinely evil pieces of shit.
liberals are fully grown diaper babies with no real political knowledge
And chuds aren't? There's a weird tendency to blame libs and libs alone for things that conservatives also do in spades.
liberals are all immature
This is another version of "no reasonable person can possibly disagree with me," which is exactly what "who hurt you," "OK Boris," and calling people bots is. Plenty of libs are mature and have thought out their opinions -- they just have far different priors than we do, and/or have strong material incentives to believe what they believe.
liberalism is the dominant ideology so it makes sense that we spend the most energy trying to dispel their wrong and contradictory beliefs. most people aren't ideological fascists.
priors
lmao.
libs aren't mature people with well thought out opinions. they are people who hold contradictory and wrong opinions and lack the critical tools necessary to examine and break down and develop those beliefs. they uncritically think their beliefs are Right and Good because that's what they are told by the dominant ideology. but they can learn. that's why we focus on them. it's fair to say lots of libs are "close to getting it" (at least the less ideologically committed ones who just never questioned the beliefs they were raised on) they just need an injection of dialectical materialism.
libs aren’t mature people with well thought out opinions.
Some certainly are. Shit, some conservatives are, too. "Everyone would agree with all of my correct, true opinions if they grew up and read what I read" is not a good take, even if maturity and education do help.
Plenty of people know how their bread is buttered and consciously support it. Writing off virtually all non-leftists as immature or uneducated is a serious mistake -- other groups can make smart (for them) decisions, too.
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
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
A core axiom of liberalism is that liberalism is universal, so they'll do that regardless of how mature they are. They believe it's correct in the same way the theory of gravity is correct, so not being a liberal means someone is either misinformed or lying. They sincerely believe all political differences are the result of complex misunderstandings, rather than genuinely competing interests.
yeah some lib on here hit me with that after i told them they were a stupid liberal. it's just a new expression of the "anyone who disagrees with me isn't human" strain of liberal denialism
Death to America
lol i saw that. that user was sooo mad that we weren’t ridin with biden. and then they cried ad hominem and had a problem with ur “death to america” tag
they had the most reddit aura ive seen here in a while
I think it's more of a maturity thing than a liberal thing. It's an unwillingness to acknowledge other opinions and grapple with why they exist, which happens across the political spectrum.
It's a liberal thing because liberals are fully grown diaper babies with no real political knowledge and get all of their opinions from liberal comment sections or CNN.
So, yes it's a maturity problem but part of it is that liberals are all immature.
The ones that aren't end up becoming socialists. Or they become neoliberals because they're genuinely evil pieces of shit.
And chuds aren't? There's a weird tendency to blame libs and libs alone for things that conservatives also do in spades.
This is another version of "no reasonable person can possibly disagree with me," which is exactly what "who hurt you," "OK Boris," and calling people bots is. Plenty of libs are mature and have thought out their opinions -- they just have far different priors than we do, and/or have strong material incentives to believe what they believe.
liberalism is the dominant ideology so it makes sense that we spend the most energy trying to dispel their wrong and contradictory beliefs. most people aren't ideological fascists.
lmao.
libs aren't mature people with well thought out opinions. they are people who hold contradictory and wrong opinions and lack the critical tools necessary to examine and break down and develop those beliefs. they uncritically think their beliefs are Right and Good because that's what they are told by the dominant ideology. but they can learn. that's why we focus on them. it's fair to say lots of libs are "close to getting it" (at least the less ideologically committed ones who just never questioned the beliefs they were raised on) they just need an injection of dialectical materialism.
Some certainly are. Shit, some conservatives are, too. "Everyone would agree with all of my correct, true opinions if they grew up and read what I read" is not a good take, even if maturity and education do help.
Plenty of people know how their bread is buttered and consciously support it. Writing off virtually all non-leftists as immature or uneducated is a serious mistake -- other groups can make smart (for them) decisions, too.
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
deleted by creator
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
deleted by creator
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.
deleted by creator
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
Chuds are also liberals, except for the ones who are so extremely chud they go full monarchist
I think it's a correlation, in that being a liberal requires one to have immature views on (primarily) humanity, history, society, economics and war.
A core axiom of liberalism is that liberalism is universal, so they'll do that regardless of how mature they are. They believe it's correct in the same way the theory of gravity is correct, so not being a liberal means someone is either misinformed or lying. They sincerely believe all political differences are the result of complex misunderstandings, rather than genuinely competing interests.