I read it again just for the sake of discussion. Again, I am not upset. :D There is just not a lot to talk about.
Only takeaway I got from this is that liberals suck according to the author. Cool, I guess they do. Or at least the very wide and constantly changing group being referred as “liberals” sucks.
What’s with the name calling? Rude.
Maybe you got some insights on the article since you think I did not read it when in fact I’ve read it multiple fucking times and the contents just won’t change :D
My insight into the article is it’s 100% accurate, you’ve had it explained to you in detail by several other users already here and you know it and you’re playing dumb because you don’t have an argument to make, the name calling is entirely warranted, cry about it
In fact, liberals do not even substantially disagree with the core of Trump’s policies. After all, both right-wing and liberal elites are loyal servants of empire, the latter just give it a veneer of humanitarianism.
This is low hanging fruit, you did not even try. I can imagine many arguments you could make how liberals fundamentally disagree with some policies.
But you would be hard pressed to refute the follow up paragraph
Both support policies that sustain the oppression of poor and marginalised people: the corporatisation of healthcare and education, labour exploitation, mass incarceration, militarised policing, censorship, corruption through corporate donations, and extractivism and militarism abroad. The liberals have put their spin on all these with talk about human rights, rule of law, and diversity.
And I think you literally have no valid counterpoints, for this op ed piece, as a whole. Or else you would have shattered me with your logic.
Who is this liberal group who does not disagree with trump? This grouping of people and ideologies is insane. Are people who agree with trump now also liberals? Is satan liberal?
The article makes no real points, so dunno what there is to counterpoint? This magical group of “liberals” is evil and bad and fails at everything. The group changes paragraph to paragraph. Maybe they mean to say democrats? Or democrat votera? Or americans? Or the west? Or jews?
Or they have defined “liberal” to mean some evil western leadership who has meaningful power but chooses not to use it because they actually agree with the way shit is going down.
Maybe those liberals are evil. But it’s a non-opinion. Evil people are evil!
Yes, conservatives are a subset of liberals. What we think of as “liberals” in the US is really a narrow category of the DNC’s policy positions, but both the GOP and DNC are liberal parties supporting capitalism and demonizing socialism.
Liberal in the non-US world is center-right at best. Full right at worst. The Dems outside the US are seen as center-right in some points and right in others.
I think one needs to define liberal here; as noted elsewhere what is one persons liberal is not seen as liberal by others. Especially when reading an essay in a non American paper.
So, you did not read it
Oh, I did :D maybe you did not?
I did twice, let’s discuss it. Can you pick a paragraph that particularly upsets you and explain why it’s wrong ?
I read it again just for the sake of discussion. Again, I am not upset. :D There is just not a lot to talk about.
Only takeaway I got from this is that liberals suck according to the author. Cool, I guess they do. Or at least the very wide and constantly changing group being referred as “liberals” sucks.
So you didn’t read the article
No u
Quit lying and go read the article dipshit
Why don’t you read it before name calling
Quit lying and go read the article dipshit
What’s with the name calling? Rude. Maybe you got some insights on the article since you think I did not read it when in fact I’ve read it multiple fucking times and the contents just won’t change :D
My insight into the article is it’s 100% accurate, you’ve had it explained to you in detail by several other users already here and you know it and you’re playing dumb because you don’t have an argument to make, the name calling is entirely warranted, cry about it
Lack of specifics
Ok
This is low hanging fruit, you did not even try. I can imagine many arguments you could make how liberals fundamentally disagree with some policies.
But you would be hard pressed to refute the follow up paragraph
And I think you literally have no valid counterpoints, for this op ed piece, as a whole. Or else you would have shattered me with your logic.
I accept your concession.
Who is this liberal group who does not disagree with trump? This grouping of people and ideologies is insane. Are people who agree with trump now also liberals? Is satan liberal?
The article makes no real points, so dunno what there is to counterpoint? This magical group of “liberals” is evil and bad and fails at everything. The group changes paragraph to paragraph. Maybe they mean to say democrats? Or democrat votera? Or americans? Or the west? Or jews?
Or they have defined “liberal” to mean some evil western leadership who has meaningful power but chooses not to use it because they actually agree with the way shit is going down.
Maybe those liberals are evil. But it’s a non-opinion. Evil people are evil!
Yes.
Yes, conservatives are a subset of liberals. What we think of as “liberals” in the US is really a narrow category of the DNC’s policy positions, but both the GOP and DNC are liberal parties supporting capitalism and demonizing socialism.
Read the article
Liberal in the non-US world is center-right at best. Full right at worst. The Dems outside the US are seen as center-right in some points and right in others.
I think one needs to define liberal here; as noted elsewhere what is one persons liberal is not seen as liberal by others. Especially when reading an essay in a non American paper.