Seems like this is really what it comes down to. The idea of helping less fortunate people appeals to them, as long as it doesn't materially affect their lives in anyway whatsoever.
You could get someone to agree with you on all of the ways socialism can help the less fortunate and vulnerable - but if that would require them to live in a more modest house or apartment, take public transportation, and give up some luxury consumer goods -- no can do, Jack.
Is there any way to even fix this? How can you make people realize they'd still be happier and better off because they'd be living in a more communal society that actually valued human life, they just might not be able to buy a new iphone every year.
I agree with this. Even working class libs will see the system as a necessary evil because they cannot imagine changing it radically in anyway.
The libs will die thinking they tried their best when they tried absolutely nothing at all. It's best to ignore liberals entirely when they speak because none of it matters. None of these people have power and none of them want to create a party where they have power. It's easier to simply give someone else all the responsibility, and therefore blame, for the necessary imperialism that keeps their standard of living.
Seriously, just shame these people when they talk. Don't bother debating them, bc as earnest as they feel their material interests remain their highest priority. Otherwise they'd just be commies already. There are millions of people out there who will be way more open-minded about economics than libs who have mainlined MSDNC content all day for decades