Those issues don't really align with the concepts I'm reading about it though. It seems more that the term has been co-opted to try to cover more insidious ideologies. There's a problem either way, it just seems that it's whatever this new thing is called and not the liberalism as defined on paper that's being used as a mask.

[–] RiverRock@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I mean what sounds more likely, that there's been a long-game attempt to coopt the label of liberalism while doing horrible shit (which, to what end?) or that the people loudly proclaiming themselves liberals while doing horrible shit are in fact liberals

[–] JigglySackles@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (2 children)

But if they aren't even following the principles of the ideology can we still say that's what they are? Not trying to refute anything you are saying, just trying to understand it better.

[–] m532@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago

The wikipedia article was written by liberals and they did the whole self-deception regiment. What they say they are is irrelevant, only what they do is real.

[–] RiverRock@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

In that case liberalism is an ideology that has only ever managed to exist on paper and does not even have the bare minimum merit of being able to manifest itself in reality without being immediately turned into a program of justifying empire, slavery and genocide.

[–] JigglySackles@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

That's a fair point. Thanks for talking back and forth with me on this. I'm really wanting to understand some of these things better as I'm realizing how deficient I am in my political understanding. So I really appreciate you taking this in the good spirit/faith I'm trying to use, and talking openly and accepting my questions less as pushing back and more as probing to better understand. Have a great day!