Remember the right-wing frenzy over “Rich Men North of Richmond”? Well, this ruling exposes Trump-MAGA hypocrisy on the working class—and reveals a big media failure.
Neoliberalism is a perversion of liberalism. It is not the evolution and certainly not the natural progression of liberal thought.
It is a excuse looking for a rationalization. An offshoot no normal liberal would approve of. They are like that weird stranger who thinks numbers will fix everything.
The liberties that original liberalism introduced are so basic that they’re now taken for granted by all but the extreme Right.
The founding fathers were classic liberals and still most major them owned slaves and none of them would give them up during their own lifetime. While mostly very progressive for their time, they would be considered very conservative today.
You’re right about one thing: Neoliberalism IS a perversion of liberalism and it’s NOT natural. That doesn’t change that it’s the kind of liberalism that exists today and that “liberal” and “on the left” are objectively mutually exclusive.
It is a excuse looking for a rationalization. An offshoot no normal liberal would approve of. They are like that weird stranger who thinks numbers will fix everything.
That’s how it was in the 80s/late 70s when Neoliberalism was pioneered by the likes of Reagan and Thatcher. Nowadays, both of them would be considered to the Left of most Democrats and yes, all liberals.
You’re simply using the false definition of “anyone to the Left of Republicans” that billionaire-owned media have been drilling into your head in support of the false dichotomy of the two party system being absolute.
The biggest right wing party of Australia is called the Liberal Party and guess what? They’re not the ones who are confused about what contemporary liberalism is.
Granted, the fact that Neoliberalism is inherently authoritarian, which is by definition illiberal on the other axis DOES add to the confusion, but on the left-right economic axis, Liberals are firmly to the right or they aren’t liberals.
You might be thinking of social democrats rather than liberals tbh 🤷
Same difference since today’s liberals are Neoliberals.
Neoliberalism is a perversion of liberalism. It is not the evolution and certainly not the natural progression of liberal thought.
It is a excuse looking for a rationalization. An offshoot no normal liberal would approve of. They are like that weird stranger who thinks numbers will fix everything.
The liberties that original liberalism introduced are so basic that they’re now taken for granted by all but the extreme Right.
The founding fathers were classic liberals and still most major them owned slaves and none of them would give them up during their own lifetime. While mostly very progressive for their time, they would be considered very conservative today.
You’re right about one thing: Neoliberalism IS a perversion of liberalism and it’s NOT natural. That doesn’t change that it’s the kind of liberalism that exists today and that “liberal” and “on the left” are objectively mutually exclusive.
That’s how it was in the 80s/late 70s when Neoliberalism was pioneered by the likes of Reagan and Thatcher. Nowadays, both of them would be considered to the Left of most Democrats and yes, all liberals.
You’re simply using the false definition of “anyone to the Left of Republicans” that billionaire-owned media have been drilling into your head in support of the false dichotomy of the two party system being absolute.
The biggest right wing party of Australia is called the Liberal Party and guess what? They’re not the ones who are confused about what contemporary liberalism is.
Granted, the fact that Neoliberalism is inherently authoritarian, which is by definition illiberal on the other axis DOES add to the confusion, but on the left-right economic axis, Liberals are firmly to the right or they aren’t liberals.
You might be thinking of social democrats rather than liberals tbh 🤷
I’m not really sure why tankies are so bent on hammering liberal into a right wing tool. It is not