The historical shortcomings of liberalism don’t mean that socialists should throw liberalism out wholesale. On the contrary: socialism needs liberalism.
Many liberals would agree with Ludwig von Mises that the core commitment of liberalism is to private property, and obviously socialists can have no truck with that. My response is that if liberalism really can be boiled down to little more than a fetish for property, it isn’t an inspiring credo worth allying with.
But I don’t think that’s true of many liberals. For plenty of people who identify with the label today, liberalism is about securing something like a dignified life for everyone, regardless of their circumstances. The goal of socialists should be to hold a mirror up to liberals and say that they cannot achieve their goals unless they’re willing to extend liberal principles about equality and freedom from domination to the economy.
Let me guess, by "liberalism" they mean some vague shit about freedom, democracy and "enlightenment values"
"I get to own capital and you get to work for me for a fraction of your labor's value, but I also tolerate gays and like weed."
Spot on.