this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2025
23 points (96.0% liked)

Progressive Politics

3315 readers
205 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
23
‘Liberal’ has become a term of derision in US politics – the historical reasons are complicated (theconversation.com)
submitted 1 week ago by TokenBoomer@lemmy.world to c/progressivepolitics@lemmy.world
23 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In this setting, liberals face a conundrum. How far should they maintain traditional liberal ideals, and how far should they move towards non-liberal, and potentially illiberal, ideologies if these seem more promising for the purposes of social change?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What do you think?

[–] Tuuktuuk@piefed.ee -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think you're making am assumption based on a one or two liberal countries and extrapolating that to a larger bunch of countries where your assumption doesn't hold.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Prior to the twentieth century, are you willing to stand by the human rights record of all (but one or two) liberal countries? Are you even willing to do that today?

[–] Tuuktuuk@piefed.ee -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No.

Are you? And why is the question relevant?

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ok. Have fun playing dumb, but I'm not going to keep responding to it

[–] Tuuktuuk@piefed.ee -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Haha, that looks funny in the eyes of anyone who understands the subject.

But okay. I believe that regardless of how many questions I pose in order to find out if your case makes any semblance of sense, I won't find out whether it does.

I'll just assume you are clueless without noticing it yourself. That's okay.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ok, and I'm just going to assume you're dishonest shit heel. Actually, that's not really an assumption, given I can see that you are

[–] Tuuktuuk@piefed.ee -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

What if I just give you my contact on Telegram and you throw me a video call and see that no, I'm just a person who has grown in such different environment than your that I cannot recognize the context in which you are making your basic assumptions?

I'm not stupid, literally, but I am apparently very inexperienced in the regards of many things that are absolutely everyday for you.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't really care about your backstory - you were deliberately playing dumb just to be obtuse; making you a dishonest shit head.

[–] Tuuktuuk@piefed.ee -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Honestly, not.
And it is sad that people are so entrenched that they fail to understand that people can really have different backgrounds.