For the longest time, “liberal” seemed like it basically just meant “Democrat” the same way “conservative” has/had been used to mean “Republican.” Now, it seems like it means “bad Democrat” and is even worse than being MAGA the way many seem to use it. Where did its use as an insult within the [relative] political left come from, and what does it specifically accuse/identify someone of/as?

  • Hereforpron2@lemmynsfw.comOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    Ahh that’s interesting, so the issue is as much having a conveniently shifting position as it is a further-right-than-progressives static position. Thanks a ton, that helps me understand a lot!

    • Archelon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Basically liberalism tends to be capitalist, whereas leftism tends to be anticapitalist. Historically, there’s been a pattern of centrists and capitalist allying with authoritarians and fascists against leftists, so the insult boils down to “you’d support a fascist before you went against capitalism”

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Leftism, as it has been represented on Lemmy, also doesn’t usually have a path forward other than seizing weapons and goods and magically reforming everything through the miracle of revolution. So in one sense, kind of worse than useless if one were attempting to affect positive change.

        • The Stoned Hacker@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          Anyone who thinks a revolution without a very solid, well researched, and peer reviewed plan is a good idea is an accerelationist at best.

          That being said, those who make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable. Eventually the powder keg will blow, and the way things are I don’t think we’ll have a single modicum of control.

      • aasatru@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        A brief rough history, in case anyone is interested:

        17th century: Kings and shit. The people supporting the rule of the king are in power. They become conservatives.

        18th century: Liberals appear. They believe men have certain inherent rights from nature. They don’t dig kings, but they do believe in private property. They sit to the left in parliaments, the conservatives sit to the right.

        19th century: Marx gives us his take on history and labour. Liberalism is given a competing framework from the left.

        20th century: All kinds of shit goes down, partly because the conservatives and the liberals are terrified of the Marxists and give the fascists the keys to the kingdom, partly because of a Marx-inspired Leninists take control in Russia. The “new” left (socialism) becomes a major force in the postwar era, promising to build a new world on the ashes of the old.

        21st century: There seems to be a head on collision. People feel strongly about these concepts, but it seems many have forgotten where they come from or what they mean. Disinformation campaigns have gotten efficient. Green politics enter the field.