You clearly do give a shit, or wouldn't have taken the time to comment saying how much you don't give a shit

Agreed.. I’m getting the feeling … when some run out of friends ..they argue with strangers

I don't disagree at all. I may have huge criticisms of the liberals but the far right is far worse. Good thing there's options outside of those

@PolyComrade And I agree. Both sides have serious issues. Both sides let emotions govern many of their ideas.

@JackPedigo the only contention I have with what you say is I don't think there's only two sides

@PolyComrade Yes, there are probably as many sides as people.

@JackPedigo I just get bummed out when I hear politics described as a simplistic binary spectrum. I find it so limiting

@PolyComrade But seems to have become so at this time in this country.

I'm about as far from GOP as one can get friend. I developed my politics by reading autjors such as Kropotkin, and Emma Goldman, as well as having a bookshelf stuffed with books by folks like bell hooks, Kate Bronstein, Vine Deloria Jr, and Julia Serano.

There is criticisms of liberals that come from the far right, or so called centrists, but there's also criticisms of liberals that come from those to the left of them, or even the post left, or other groups who see both the right and left as two parts of the same engine. Don't make the mistake of assuming that all who are critical of liberals are to the right

From what I’ve read ..we’ve someone incapable of accepting impurities, but instead of going after the worst offenders (like many on the left), the focus of his derision are those closest to him.. Apparently, it’s safer to attack good than evil. But as folks demand such a delusional ‘purity’ from our best - evil smiles ..on it’s way to the bank ~

Some are definitely dumb as a rock yes, but there are also those within these movements that are highly intelligent and well educated. That's the scary part. It's too easy to just dismiss all racists as morons. And what happens when they are the ones writing the laws or sitting on the supreme court? The smartest of them aren't running around in white hoods with swastika tattoos, they are in board rooms and university faculties

@PolyComrade VOTE!

@AnneWimsey voting is one way to fight them, I'm not convinced it's the most effective way but it's a way. Hopefully those who believe in voting see it as a start, not and ends in and of itself

Why do you ascribe such negativity to liberals in particular for advocating education?

Because he's stereotyping.

@1of5 it's was a rhetorical question

@Cutiebeauty true, but some of us <coughconservativeswithmyopiacough> need things spelled out for us

I didn't say getting an education was arrogant, I said assuming anyone who holds a different opinion than you needs more education is arrogant.

There are a lot of highly educated, highly intelligent people who hold positions I or you might find despicable. They don't argue these positions from ignorance, but rather from having a different moral compass, different values, and often from deeply ideological places.

A great example would be transphobic radical feminists; often these are women with PhDs who have been involved in activism for decades, yet spew hate speech against transgender women. And many even dedicate large amounts of their time and energy to removing trans women's access to healthcare and other services like shelter for abuse survivors. Cathy Brenan is a great example, or Susan Griffin, or Mary Daly, or Lierre Keith. This vile hate isn't coming from an uneducated yob, but rather from a deeply ideological place rooted in a complex analysis of gender that's implicitly transphobic.

Another great example would be some of the academics that support the continued occupation and genocide of Palestinians by the Israeli government. Certainly there are those whose support for this violence is just doing what their told, holding a position that fits the party line of their respective identity, or centered in a weird religious interpretation that requires the Jews to return to the homeland for the end times to come; but there's also many secular scholars who side with the Israeli government against the Palestinians regardless of how much evidence there is that they are committing atrocities.

Or you can look at some of the racist arguments against indigenous peoples having self determination. Here in Canada there's a well known academic who's basically the guy in the background of the Canadian conservative movement, professor Tom Flannigan. He wrote a best selling book called First Nations Second Thoughts that's essentially a series of deeply racist arguments against indigenous peoples and for their continued colonization. Published by a university press and taught in many university courses to thus day. The guy is disturbingly brilliant, yet his ideology is frightening. More frightening is his influence on the people who make policy.

My point is that while education can be good and can help solve certain problems, it's not always the answer. Nor is more rules. Especially when some of the worst are those writing the rules.
Education only addresses the problem of ignorance, not values, greed, or ideology.
And further, often these issues are systemic, so giving some extra training or adding some new regulations won't fix the problem if the very foundation of the institution is racist, classist, or sexist.

@PolyComrade OK, I see your point now... When speaking about education, you didn't address the issue of ideology or race etc... Thanks

My definition of Liberal is in large a person that never questions the institutions themselves, never considers options outside the system, and takes the system as a given, but rather only ever seeks reform within those institutions as the only type of legitimate change. And one who believes history is a largely linear progress towards more equitable and just society.

Of course I'm not convinced history is so linear or that progress is always good. And I'm concerned that often the problems of inequality, marginalization, and other forms of violence are built into the very foundations of the institutions and structures that the liberals only ever want to reform and refuse to question or seek alternatives to.

It's true, as you said that my definition of Liberal is negative and sided against liberals. It's equally true th at your definition is decidedly only positive and uncritical. So then both be propaganda? Lol. If you define something only by the virtues they claim to be based on, of course it sounds good, especially to anyone who wants to associate with those values. But it's not a complete story

@PolyComrade The difference between my definition and yours is that mine is the correct dictionary definition...whilst yours is an invention of your own biased mindset. It appears that many others agree with me.

@Marionville that's a way of seeing it, sure. It's a way very favorable to your position. There's many ways to describe things, one being true doesn't always necessitate the other to be untrue. My definition is a critical one, yours is explicitly uncritical

@PolyComrade My definition is how I personally view liberalism, and try to uphold its ideals. I occupy the centre ground in politics and believe only by reaching out to both sides...left and right, to form consensus can we govern fairly, Politics should be the art of the possible, and can only be achieved by compromise with those who hold opposing views. This is lost in the current deadlocks in the US and the UK present, and the resulting polarisation is tearing both countries apart. I have been studying politics for a very long time, and have lived through an age where many systems have been tried and failed...and few have been really successful in the long run, and believe that having liberal ideals and Social Democratic policies are proven to be the most successful. I take issue with your depiction of my ideas being uncritical, they are based entirely on my lifetime of practical experience.

@Marionville there are more than 2 sides. Hell there's more than one position within each of those sides. But you kinda proved my point about liberals only seeing reform within existing institutions as the only legitimate option by your reply. There are politics outside of democrats/liberals and republicans/conservatives.

@PolyComrade Go ahead and invent a new system...if it’s better than the Scandinavian model I’ll buy into it. I suggest you stop making such sweeping statements about “all” liberals as seeing things the way you think they do. You may believe in your own your opinion on liberals and how they always behave, but you must give others the right to hold dissenting views. Unless you have made a long study of the practices and policymaking history of Liberalism, your views are just drawn from your own narrow observations. You can believe what you like, we are all entitled to that, but if you put your ideas out into a forum such as this one, don’t expect everyone to agree with them, especially when your basic premise doesn’t seem sound.

@Marionville i don't expect everyone to agree. Im not looking for an echo chamber.

I'd rather have interesting discussion with people who don't share my views but can still debate respectfully than just having people who agree with me tell me how right i am.

And of course while there will be those who disagree perhaps there will be others who maybe see in my argument something they haven't articulated yet or heard said. Or those who might not agree fully but can see where I'm coming from, even if it's not now but at a later time where the patterns I described show up, and do to this discussion they are more able to see them.
Or maybe someone who disagrees with me will argue something that makes me rethink some of my own positions, even if it's not the ones they are trying to change my mind about.

No, I think there are many solutions, sometimes education might even be a valid one, just not every time to every problem. Sometimes the solutions involve structural change, or maybe building alternative structures all together. In most cases I feel the problems are caused or exacerbated by unnecessary hierarchy and centralization of power, so often I see solutions involving decentralization, or finding ways to empower people to make decisions for themselves over the issues they face. And often I see a need for multi tier solutions since one solution will only work for a portion of people. Like harm reduction strategies for drug users, combined with sobriety groups that advocate for abstinence from substance use and addiction councilling; each of those solutions address a portion of the problem but not all of it. Decriminalization, housing and other mental health treatment is also part of that solution.
There are other answer, other options, if only we look for them. But first we need to quit choosing to only ever look in the same direction and surround ourselves in echo chambers

Exactly

There's a lot of people who's politics don't fit into those boxes.

Since you asked, even though i don't expect you to agree with me (or even want you to necessarily...

I'm anti statist, thus choosing which group of elite billionaires should run the state isn't in line with my ideas of a just society.

I'm a collectivist as well so centralization of power and wealth and private property don't fit well with the world I seek.

I'm anticolonial so this creates an issue with those who value borders on maps to separate which nation holds power over one portion of stolen land from the powers of another portion is a problem for me.

And I'm critical of technology, or at least endless adoption of it and endless industrialism at the continued expense of the ecosystems that makes up the infrastructure of life, whereas all these governments just argue about where the balance between the needs of business and the environment lay.

I could go on, but I think this should be more than enough to articulate that my politics don't fit either the left or right as both left and right are systems of governance based in a centralized state and power to influence how capital is spent or produced in an economy centered in private property.

@PolyComrade I love kumbaya and Utopia too.

Interesting how you interpreted my arguments; turning my statement that liberals only ever see regulation or education as the only valid solutions regardless of what the problem is into thinking I was thus arguing we should be ignorant and deregulate everything.
Are you really that binary?

Seems so as I argued against liberalism which you then seem to have interpreted as leftism, as though the left is only liberals, then went on to describe right wing and cast me within that mileu.

BINGO

@PolyComrade actually it was more I was questioning the premise of your argument, namely, as you said, "turning my statement that liberals only ever see regulation or education as the only valid solutions regardless of what the problem is into thinking I was thus arguing we should be ignorant and deregulate everything." @Varn