Every liberal, they are reborn anew each day with no memories whatsoever of the past
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s because if you remember anything that happened more than a week ago, you naturally turn into a Marxist
Also everyone hates you for being right and calls you a tankie
Truly our symbol should not be the hammer and sickle, but Cassandra of Troy pulling out her hair
I just have to keep telling myself, most extreme online liberals were born after 9/11 or were very young. Hell, I was only 13.
Not a defense though. Just something to keep my blood pressure low. The only problem, is every twenty years there’s a new crop of people refusing to listen to anyone who was there or learn from history in any way. They just love catchy phrases that make them feel smart
It’s wild to me having been a teen during 9/11, so many memories coming back of a truly dark time. And you got liberals older than me repeating literally the same talking points.
I was 13 And interested in the military. I had so many brainworms to undo. It only took me smoking some weed and listening to hippie music to break me out of the dominator culture narrative
I too was into military shit. I had the picture of Saddam getting captured by navy seals on my locker in high school because I had brainworms.
It was truly a wild time to be learning how to navigate the world. I just wish I would have realized how cringe that all was from the jump
It only took me smoking some weed and listening to hippie music to break me out of the dominator culture narrative
And now I’ll be throwing that on when I’m cleaning the garage tomorrow!
If only, it seems like they don’t apply deduction to anything causing cognitive dissonance. Same shit with cia/fbi - “yeah they did fucked up shit up to %date_of_declassification%, but that’s not a reason to mistrust them” but simultaneously they believe in “institutional memory”. It is a choose-one situation and yet 🤷
As much as I’m sick of annoying internet phrases like “cognitive dissonance”, they wouldn’t be libs without it.
Only got that and
.Well actually, freudists also have something about two simultaneous opposing ideas. it could be dialectics of opposite ideas with synthesis of “fuck non-white people”
The weird thing is I was also in my young teens, but seeing the libs dunking on Bush like they did Trump - with the same ineffectualness - plus things like protest music and Michael Moore, actually helped prime me for being a communist later in life.
I remember questioning everything, never trusting the news, and now to see people fall for this shit again and again since 2014ish is fucking maddening.
When the war was in full swing, I used to go to all the rallies. After I realized nobody was there to actually do anything effective, I knew these weren’t my people. 15 year old me was smoking pot and reading Abbie Hoffman. I fancied myself as an old school 60’s leftist, still kinda do. I would come into the protests all full of piss and vinegar, and I would get told by the old folks there I was doing it wrong. Fuck them. Fuck them so hard!
There’s an old saying in Tennessee — I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.
Mentions of sa
10 years ago it was Libyan allegations of rape, but i decided its already fairly NSFW
I’d add Assad uses chem weapons on civilians. That one was so obviously false it prevented obummer froma full invasion.
it was first said by Virgil
Virgil who?
Virgil Gaul
Is he still in the log cabini btw?
I think they are talking about the guy from the hit video game series Devil May Cry
Beloved support character Virgil Louisiana
___
Brilliant. I’m gonna post this on Mastodon and see how many tankie badges I can collect.
The lie is that they needed an excuse to show their true face
What the fuck does this have to do with liberals? None of the liberals I know support the palestinian genocide by israel… it’s just a matter of knowing history, not whether you’re liberal or conservative.
I’ve seen fox news pushing the same line of bullshit as every other main american “news” channel, siding with the perpetrators of 70 years of genocide and war crimes.
Hamas’ attack was bad, but nothing compared to what the israelis have done for decades, and this is the prevailing sentiment in liberal spaces like reddit—by a wide margin. Liberal or conservative has nothing to do with it, if anything it would be the muslim-hating/fearing conservatives more likely to side with israel…
Liberals are the ones supplying israel, making BDS illegal, now making protests illegal. If you ask them “do you support genocide?” of course they’ll say no. They’ll just continue shaking hands with them, buying and selling weapons systems from them, buying their spytech and strawberries, making joint science projects and smearing everybody skeptical of israel as anti-semite.
Liberals are sinking refugee ships in the mediterranean , when people dare to escape hellhole liberals made 20/15/10 years ago in countries mentioned in the picture above. Who funds frontex do you think? Its not landed fucking gentry or council of kings. What do you think aircraft carrier group is doing near israel, having a nappie time?
And fox news are liberals. And have you seen reddit?
EDIT: I didn’t realize I’d stumbled into a specific socialist space, I was reading all of this as “liberal” in the typical usage in American politics—because that’s the way I’ve encountered its usage 99.99% of the time in my life. Why don’t you all say capitalist instead of liberal?
——————(Original comment):
Umm, it doesn’t matter who is in office, America would be supporting Israel because they’re our ally and a vital toehold for our interests in the region. If you think a republican president/cabinet wouldn’t be saying and doing all the same shit then you’re really washed.
“Fox news are liberals”
Oh, so no wonder you’re blaming it all on liberals, in your mind literally 99% of the population are liberals?
You’ve clearly spent far too long just telling yourself all the bad things are cuz of liberals rofl. Next you’ll be saying it was liberals behind the citizens united ruling and liberals cutting taxes for corporations, and defunding the EPA, and trying to ban contraception, and make voting harder for citizens, and gerrymandering to disenfranchise black voters.
Next you’ll say Liberal presidents have historically been worse for the economy! (Go ahead, look it up)
Those are definitionally ‘liberal’ policies because they ‘liberate’ corporations from government oversight, rather than a technocratic policy that would place their oversight under government bureaucracy, or a socialized policy that would place their jurisdiction under an element of popular consent.
Even more so, they are historically liberal policies because liberalism is historically and definitionally about privatizing the rights of aristocrats to be bought and sold on the market, rather than outright socializing and creating universal access to them. While some avenues of policy have been socialized, (usually after years and years of legal battles to just make things run smooth) most things in the U.S. are run liberally, by liberals, usually at this point in time either neo-liberals or conservative liberals. Policies like Citizens United are explicitly conservative neo-liberal policies because they increase the freedoms of those with the most access to the market.
Just because you are ignorant of politics and history doesn’t mean that we are.
Just because you are ignorant of politics and history doesn’t mean that we are.
This. I’m sick of libs coming around flaunting political illiteracy and saying we’re the ones who don’t know what words mean
Hell, I’ll even make a correction. Most policies have been ‘technocratized’, not even socialized, with most towns acting through partially elected corporate boards where the town manager is hired, with most of those managers practicing methods of neo-liberal austerity. or running tax haven development schemes. That being said, while there are family dynasty corporations and politicians, I don’t know of any hereditary lords, so they definitely aren’t royalists, so they kinda have to be some flavor of liberal.
I’m sorry if what I’m about to say is completely wrong, but I disagree with calling Fox News liberal. I don’t think words have absolutely constant meanings, their definitions can change if people start using them in a different way. That has happened with the words “liberal” and “conservative” where they are used to refer to a different set of political positions than 200 years ago (mostly because people advocating for feudalism and aristocratic rule are few and far between nowadays). So I think that Fox News would be “liberal” in the original meaning of the word, but not in the current understanding of the word.
Although you have a point about words not having absolute meanings, the usage of liberal the poster everyone is dunking on is pretty much only used in the us and Canada. Most of the rest of the world uses liberal in the original sense of the word (see the liberal party in Australia for example)
I probably wouldn’t describe Fox News as liberal myself. Obviously they are liberals, but in context it makes more sense to refer to the channel as conservative.
My gripe is just with libs being politically illiterate, while claiming we don’t know what words mean
The problem, as others have pointed out, is that only in America is the term “liberal” twisted to mean just one part of the liberal spectrum. Words aren’t unchangeable, but if just one place on the entire planet is using the term “liberal” that way - in a way that obfuscates real political understanding - it should be pushed back against.
Next you’ll say Liberal presidents have historically been worse for the economy!
Worse than who? Every president was liberal
You’ve clearly spent far too long just telling yourself all the bad things are cuz of liberals rofl. Next you’ll be saying it was liberals behind the citizens united ruling and liberals cutting taxes for corporations, and defunding the EPA, and trying to ban contraception, and make voting harder for citizens, and gerrymandering to disenfranchise black voters.
all of those folks are ideological capitalists, and that makes them liberals. as opposed to monarchists or communists.
If you think a republican president/cabinet wouldn’t be saying and doing all the same shit then you’re really washed.
Yes, the more extremist and even more chauvinist bloc of liberals also do it. Both ruling parties are imperialist liberals, with one being in coalition with fascists and theocrats and the other being at war with a tiny handful of right wing tepid sucdems who are trying and failing to do entryism into it.
Next you’ll be saying it was liberals behind the citizens united ruling and liberals cutting taxes for corporations and defunding the EPA.
Yes, that is correct. We live in a liberal democracy. Here’s a definition of liberal to help you out:
a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.
Everybody in America except for the far left is basically a liberal.
Not population no, but every single usa politician on national level is a liberal. EPA was founded by nixon who is also a lib.
Of course they are, jesus christ.
You think internal infighting between libs who want to skate on global rent extraction and worker exploitation vs liberals who want to exploit workers and planet is some important distinguishing fight? Who increased oil production then by permitting it everywhere? Was it supreme court maybe? Obama was fairly proud of that achievement as i recall.
From 70s onwards usa economy is static piece of shit, here, show me on this graph where liberals are not in power:
Or i should refer to stock market, the true economy, not this useless household income figure right?
You may say republicans slash taxes and doing starving the beast, but somehow dems are never resurrecting those taxes. There is some sort of mechanism as i recall, which allows the gear to go on way, but stops the other way, if only there was a name to that effect.
Also also, do you think dems supported mandela at the time of apartheid south afrika?
Do you think they supported Martin Luther King?
Operation cyclone was started by carter, cuba siege was started by kennedy, clinton exploded pharmaceutical factory in sudan. Obama has decreased black house ownership,
but it is all coinky dinkies in the world of no memory liberal, because in their mind they don’t support it, its just how it happened, it was our ally, it was our enemy, blah blah blah
You’ve the writing style of a teenager. I will assume you are, so forgive my condescension:
Assume ignorance and then ask for elucidation rather than take positions you are unaware of.
That said, liberalism is the dominant and hegemonic ideology of the capitalist world order. A conservative and liberal both support property rights and nominal support - on a spectrum - for equality and liberty. (e.g: The conservative party in AUSTRALIA is literally called the Liberal party)
Therefore, liberals as a term by socialists encompass left-liberals and right-liberals, dems v gop, labour v Tories, etc. All on the same spectrum of Liberalism and capitalism.
Why even use the term liberal at all then and not just say “capitalists?” I don’t often find myself in specifically socialist spaces so I assumed by liberal you just meant leftist in general.
Because an ideological adherent who is also just a worker is different than people who own capital goods (means of production).
In other words, Just because you work for the king doesn’t mean you’re a noble, just that you profit off of the aristocracy.
Leftism or leftist are always anticapitalist, and always seek the abolishment of private ownership of capital goods in favor of collective ownership and planning. A leftist isn’t a Bernie Sanders supporter who just wants college or free healthcare.
leftists, and most other people on earth, don’t use the word “liberal” the same way Americans do.
As for “vital toehold for our interests in the region,” could you expand on this? What do you mean? And how do you feel about it?
@[email protected] Ask yourself who “our interests” represent. Are the destroyers being sent to Israel making your life better? Or are they being used to enable a genocide across the world from you rather than being money spent to help you?
Ummmmmmm, acksuallllllyyyyy
Just to be extremely clear here, we’re not contrasting “liberal” and “conservative” as those two terms are defined in the american two-party electoral system. We’re contrasting “liberal”, that is, someone who supports capitalism, with “leftist”, that is, someone who thinks capitalism is bad and should go away already. We’re communists here, not republicans.
Thank you for clarifying, because I was confused as well.
Yeah, its a common point of confusion that I honestly do wish we were a bit better at communicating. But on the other hand, its not really our fault that the American political language messed up the definition of the word. Like, in Australia the “Liberal Party” IS the more conservative party, essentially the Republican equivalent.
love too have a liberal national coalition 😬
Everyone in the American political milieu is a liberal by definition. Conservatives are liberals, progressives are liberals, democrats and republicans are liberals.
and of course, everyone posting here except me, are liberals
What the fuck does this have to do with liberals?
sadly, everything has to do with liberals. Its why the world is so fucked up.
None of the liberals I know support the palestinian genocide by israel
Yes they do
They may not say it aloud, they likely won’t encourage Israel to kill em all. But they’ll handwring and hem and haw about how just darn uncivil those Palestinians are and how regrettable the violence is but Israel has to defend themselves etc etc
The outcome is the same. They’ll tut and fingerwag at Israel but won’t raise a finger against the genocide.
deleted by creator
