• YearOfTheCommieDesktop [they/them]
    ·
    1 year ago

    to be less specific than the other commenters: I read it more as saying that from a materialist perspective, being supposedly socially liberal but fiscally conservative is well, stupid, because the social issues you claim to be liberal on have economic roots that you must attack if you want to really fix them.

      • YearOfTheCommieDesktop [they/them]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        yeah idk lol I can kinda see the vagueness that allows for other interpretations, but I thought it was pretty clear that it was just poking fun at liberals who think those are fully separate areas and we can address social issues without so much as touching capitalism. or more succintly, a poking fun at "centrists"

        • novibe@lemmy.ml
          ·
          1 year ago

          I guess but I mean the logic in what they say is so direct lol it’s also pretty clear to me. But we are all different. I mean not you and me, we are identical.

      • JuneFall [none/use name]
        ·
        1 year ago

        The other interpretation is: Since capitalism and property and all that are per definition good, then problems from them have good causes. Those causes can never be done away with.

        Often I heard such lines of thinking from well off liberal or libertarian people.

        • novibe@lemmy.ml
          ·
          1 year ago

          I feel that’s the same thing, but in a more roundabout way lol no offence.

          It’s still - issues bad, causes to issues good.