Obama is a war criminal. He continued Bush policies and was where the buck stops regarding the disposition matrix.
A lot of Afghani villages burned at Obama’s command, and one in fifty people killed by drone strikes was a POI. The rest were mostly civilians, including children and grandmothers
Liberals are just not as left-wing – and not as truthful – as some of us are.
Based
Real madlad.
Me ten seconds before I talk about how the root of all evil is capitalism :3
Liberals love Israel and look away from Gaza, that’s one of their defining characteristics, and the major thing splitting the Democratic coalition.
I literally don’t know a single liberal who supports Israel or the genocide.
And I’m in academia so I know a hell of a lot of them.
Needs an Oxford comma
🧐
Our jobs as citizens is to be critical of the government.
If you’re not being critical, then they are getting away with something.
Obama refusing to name a matching DNC chair is why we lost all momentum, and neoliberals were able to force Hillary, Joe, and Kamala down our throats for over a decade.
And people legit worship him for “getting” us a more conservative version of Mitt Romeny’s healthcare plan while he normalized the US military killing US citizens…
Now Carter…
Carter gets rembered as the “last great” Dem.
But the truth is he was further right than the Dem voting base, and even had an anti-abortion speaker at his first nomination acceptance. He didn’t push too hard to overturn Roe v Wade.
He wasn’t “the last great Dem” he was the begining of neoliberlism.
It’s just 50 fucking years later, nobody understands how much we’ve lost, because they don’t know what we had.
Oo ooo, can I go next?
FDR wasn’t the great working class champion he has been lionized as. The New Deal was a compromise that was a direct response to the working class organizing and beginning to make demands. It’s purpose was to mitigate the failings of capitalism, because the contradictions could never be directly addressed. Roosevelt sided with big business, in both agriculture and banking, that added speed to consolidation of corporations we are now fully having to deal with.
Based
Roosevelt was a social liberal. He believed in state intervention on economy only if required. He went hands off sometime after his first term when when the economy improved. But when US had a mini-recession during the Depression, he put his hands back again on the steering wheel.
Roosevelt sided with big business, in both agriculture and banking,
What?
EBRA?
I have no idea what you mean, I don’t know everything, but I feel like you may be misunderstanding something
The National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933 (NIRA) included the promotion of monopolies and price-fixing, which had a negative impact on small businesses, and inadequate protection of workers’ rights and collective bargaining (7a a single line).
That’s legislation…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Industrial_Recovery_Act_of_1933
Are you mad he didn’t veto it?
Or do you think FDR is soley responsible like when China killed all the sparrows and caused a famine killing millions?
That’s relevant, because you’re saying unintended consequences matter after all.
I just don’t understand why you’re blaming FDR unless you assume he had the same level of power as Mao
It was apart of Roosevelt’s New Deal, his administration was the driving force behind it. Like yes it was legislation but is the point you are trying to make that the New Deal had nothing to do with FDR?
You’re blaming him for one piece of legislation that had unintended consequences…
Do you blame Mao for the famine that resulted when he ordered the extermination of sparrows?
For some reason you didn’t answer that
Are you at all familiar with the subject at hand or just talking to talk?
NIRA was an utter failure, considered both by the people that lived through it and historians because of the reasons I listed. So bad that it had to be repealed within 2 years. Like idk why you keep bringing up Mao dude.
Who in the absolute fuck worships Obama? I’ve known many people who like him and most of those also criticize him on some level. Can’t say I’ve heard of anyone “worshipping” him even if we go with a loose definition there. Strawman.
My mother; but, to be fair, she’s a Haitian immigrant who got to witness (and vote for) America’s first ever black president so…you know.
For your average person, I’d have to agree with you (in my experience).
Liberals are capitalists though. Just in a “I can fix her” kind of way
Liberals don’t believe in capitalism… No one does. It’s descriptive, not prescriptive
Liberals believe in rules. That you can tweak the rules and eventually you’ll end up with a perfect system of government
Obviously that doesn’t work, but a true liberal is a midwit with good intentions. I’d take that all day right now
“language is descriptive, not prescriptive”
Gods, what an utterly myopic defense. You do know there is a difference between colloquial language for the purpose of simple communication and theoretical language for the purpose of in-depth systemic analysis, right?
Don’t make excuses for being willfully ignorant of political theory.
I think I’m making an important point here.
It’s really important that we stop pretending that these people believe their bullshit. The difference between liberals and the neo-liberals we have now isn’t more belief in capitalism, it’s that they’ve been bribed directly and indirectly
If you say they believe in capitalism, you’re giving ground. There’s an implication that they believe their actions will lead to better outcomes… But they so obviously don’t
Liberals are literally the source of capitalism and capitalism is the source of liberals. They are undeniably linked. The liberal Revolution was the capitalist Revolution. You cannot have one without the other. They adhere to the capitalist mindset brutally and without question. The last 300 years of human history is that story.
Liberals believe in strong private property rights, which is one of the most core tenents of how capitalism works. It allows capitalists to accumulate their private property and hold it for profit. And by “believe”, I mean they advocate for this dynamic / structure.
I think that’s a really good point. Strong property rights is a better way to put it, I’m going to add that from now on
But the reason why I’m splitting hairs is because we’re at the point where they’re trying to privatize the FAA. In fact, they partially have under Trump 1, which is why the planes are breaking - we let airline companies inspect themselves
And it’s not because Republicans believe in capitalism
The problem we have isn’t some belief system, it’s just naked corruption
Correct. While a lot of conservatives are liberals to some extent, a large number of them are becoming increasingly fascist. I appreciate this dialog we had here.
The whole world is capitalist. Changing it at this point seems unrealistic. Limiting it and controlling it seems more viable.
“The whole world uses feudalism. Changing it at this point seems unrealistic. Limiting it and controlling it seems more viable.”
- You a couple hundered years ago.
Leaps of logic I didn’t not make for 200 Alex.
That’s exceptionally defeatist.
this system that is rapidly devolving into feudalism already has a chokehold on the world, might as ask it to loosen its grip
Like, in what way is that viable? This is a hostile system that should be viewed as an assailant, not as a competing ideal that can be reasoned and compromised with.
Feudalism is a political ideology and not an economical one.
People said the same thing of the divine right of kings and look how that turned out.
Any power that is created by human hands can be dismantled by them.
Kings and queens are a political ideology not an economical and financial one. As much as I do agree progress would be nice and welcomed, banks and capitalism has been around for centuries. We can’t go back to shared markets and good for exchange. We are too specialized as a populace. What else is there?
Wow, you completely missed the point.
Nothing is set in stone. Everything that exists today are imaginary social structures, including but not limited to the entire concept of economics and finances, that 100% can be altered or removed in their entirety.
Go read political theory and educate yourself to find the alternatives. There are many.
It’s not a political solution. It’s an economical one. Which I have an education on.
So maybe you should go read some books and stop acting like some stuffy asshole. I don’t need to be educated by people who’s head is so far up their ass they can’t actually present anything besides insufferable annoyance when conversing with another human.
How fucking stupid are you that you do not understand politics and economics are intrinsically linked? You cannot have an economy without the overarching government that dictates its structure.
You have no education that matters for these purposes if you don’t even know this most fundamental basic.
I don’t owe you a conversation, fyi. I have no interest in a discussion with a simp for the owning-class
You can link lots of things. But it doesn’t change the implementation of it. You are too dumb to realize that. You responded. That’s what you owe me. If you chose to engage you can use that little flesh eaten cavity affixed on your neck to discuss things.
Fuckin moron
Smart people worldwide used to say that democracy had been tried and failed. What’s unrealistic is expecting capitalism to last forever.
Which smart people? There are plenty examples of it working correctly in Europe.
Thomas Aquinas, Niccolò Machiavelli, Jean Bodin, Thomas Hobbes, Blaise Pascal, Voltaire, and more. It was the prevailing opinion before the French revolution. There were plenty of examples of feudalism “working correctly” before we had a good example of democracy.
Every societal idea is a bad idea before it works. Whatever comes after capitalism has almost certainly been proposed already, and gets dismissed like democracy was. That’s what social progress actually looks like.
Thomas Aquinas, Niccolò Machiavelli, Jean Bodin, Thomas Hobbes, Blaise Pascal, Voltaire, and more.
If they’re so smart, why don’t they have a TikTok?!
/S
I do think it’s important to clarify that America was the first modern democracy, so others learned from our mistakes while we refuse to learn lessons from anyone else. With a big qualifier that only white male landowners could vote and while Black slaves were “represented” in amount of House members, they had no vote themselves, their owners and other white male landowners just got disproportionate representation.
When talking about government systems, “first is worst” shouldn’t surprise anyone , but it continually does.
Thank you for actually answering the question. However I see feudalism as a political concept and not a financial one.
Short term? Sure. Long term? Nope
How do you figure?
Capitalism should be dismantled. Eroding the foundation is a good start, not an end goal.
How? If you don’t have a replacement all you are doing is wasting everyone’s time. Just calling it shitty isn’t enough. How are people going to get food and shelter and live?
Socialism / communism. Have productive private property owned by all and not the few.
I hear you. I wish we had better examples than the USSR and China. We are a socialist society. However the controls got out of hand.
This is naivety in thinking capitalism gives people food and shelter. That is done through human hands laboring to create and then distribute those things.
Capitalism only restricts access based on the private property system of ownership then makes us of the working class compete against each other for the privilege of buying it back with imaginary tokens of value from those who have claimed private ownership over it and the means of producing it.
Other systems exist. You have the ability to educate yourself on them.
Then educate me. I have a degree in business and been through the system where it’s never been discussed. Please tell me what else exists in the world that works.
This is a bit defeatist, wouldn’t you agree? A lot of people use the same argument to fight against climate protection actions
That is not apples to apples. One is scientific and an opinion on our effect on this living breathing rock. The other is objectively correct. Capitalism is everywhere. In varying degrees and control.
Capitalism is everywhere. So are our efforts to destroy our ecosystem. Changing it at this point seems unrealistic. I mean, you could make this point, but it is indeed defeatist. But to be fair, on short term I would also pick severely limiting and controlling capitalism over a sudden revolution. As a start, let’s get rid of billionaires. That would help making any change further down the road, because there won’t be a class of people with incredible power that will try to prevent any change.
It’s not defeatist to say the sky is blue and we breath oxygen but we need to optimize keeping the sky blue and the right amount of oxygen. Would I be ok with an alternative? Absolutely. But I don’t see one and I am asking all that object my observation to present a viable alternative.
Leave Carter out of this shit!
Jimmy Carter is a saint among demons as far as US Presidents go. I mean it’s inevitable that some bad shit is gonna go down during almost any admin. But compared to the stuff other POTUS did willingly or proactively, c’mon…
And then I mention that I own firearms and start criticizing my state’s overbearing gun laws.
The proletariat needs weapons.
I frame it as having a Marxist view on gun rights and seeing the gears turn after explaining what Marx said about weapons
like how schumer is a right winger calling “left” as way to say hes part of that group and supporitng israel. the only people calling Left in sentence are right wingers.
My Lemmy experience so far ^
No surprise. You’re in .world
Unfortunately, that instance is crawling with neoliberalists.
That isn’t the only instance I’ve engaged with, but yes I’ve found that larger and more generalized ones have more liberals. There is a particularly obnoxious form of liberal discourse that I’ve found consistent across them too. Liberals on Lemmy think they’re radical just for finding the loud fascism distasteful, and get very upset if you suggest that they aren’t radical enough. It’s less of the pompous fixation on hypocrisy you’d find on Reddit and more outraged entitlement to the desire for change.
