Shocking
1 Boost
143 Likes
Liberal in the US seems to mean something different than anywhere else. Most classifications don’t line up that way, though the far right extremism seems to be aligning across countries since 2016.
There are many definitions of the word “liberal”. Which one are you using?
It’s so lovely watching pedantic, ideologically uncompromising nitwits “scorpion and frogging” us to the end of civilization.
See you all in hell!
Healthcare should be available for all, not a luxury for the rich
Politicians should not dictate medical decisions for any person
Ignoring the shameless virtue signaling, it’s amazing to me how so many people can honestly think these two ideas can exist together.
Easy: government pays doctors to work … and then fucks off, does nothing else.
Got any more unsolvable dilemmas for me? I have a few minutes to spare.
![PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]](https://anarchaos.s3.eu-central-003.backblazeb2.com/users/l8/6J/l86JmmX0dt2lfs4.jpeg "PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]")
😁
So everyone knows who here stands against this:
Updated
The ninja person was just bragging about being a Nazi a couple days ago actually
Yeah, that dude is trying hard to be on the wrong side of everything.
This is just empty talk until the proletariat seizes the means of production.
no child should fear being shot at school
That means you support a robust system of social safety nets to treat the root causes of violence: poverty, homelessness, unemployment, and mental health, right?
That’s not coded language for, “We’re going to pass a feel-good ban that’s logistically unenforceable and only applies to citizens, not our over-militarized police force, further entrenching the police state, and declare the problem solved, regardless of whether it actually stops the violence,” right?
Right?
nah. i think he means to lobotomize the children. only way to keep em unafraid of anything.
Sure, but how do you propose the portion of society who’s entire personality is guns be brought to a reasonable place? So many people who proclaim they’re all about 2A are the ones actively supporting the current state of affairs because ‘muh freedoms’ overrides all else regardless of any detriments to others.
logistically unenforceable
So true, no other country has radically reduced the rates of gun ownership & gun crimes & gun injuries via those stinky unenforceable ‘laws’ or whatever.
I also support the other stuff you suggested but I won’t live in your fantasy world.
These are all reasonable common sense standpoints that should represent the political center in a sane society.
These should be unquestioned facts in a sane society regardless of politics.
How I wish we lived in a sane society. 🫡
Yeah, this is at best wish casting and at worst deliberately disingenuous propaganda. Obama was a liberal or not, because he opened the US to the largest expansion of for-profit fossil fuel extraction in history, and championed fracking, and even presided over the militarized police beatings of indigenous protestors of oil pipelines.
Liberals don’t believe any of this
He had the trifecta and the best they could do was continue expanding the profits of the insurance companies. They could have done literally anything else and it would have been better but they fundamentally believe in the markets, they believe everyone should work, they believe benefits should be means tested and they believe that only compliant people should be given any benefits, and that anyone getting benefits should be in full poverty.
@frisbird still better than "a concept of a plan." The insurance industry is criminal.
Things liberals believe in but will do nothing to implement, and in some cases actively impede.
Liberals, or the left?
Nah, actual leftists would be much more extreme.
There are a couple modified versions in the comments here. Check those out for what actual leftists want.
It’s economic liberalism vs social liberalism. It’s the fucked up political language of the US. They mean what the rest of the world would call left. But unfortunately due to our misuse of the term it allowed neoliberals to come in, take over, and work against the people.
Sorry but the liberals in governments all over don’t act like they believe much of this at all.
NO ONE, ESPECIALLY VETERANS, SHOULD BE HOMELESS
Would be better without the ‘especially veterans’ part. WTF makes veterans so special? Why is a homeless veteran more concerning than any other homeless person?
I am a veteran, by the way. But fuck this shit.
MAGA & GOP view themselves as the pro-military party, which is really important because it means veterans often vote for them. The reality is MAGA & GOP is happy to vote for more military spending of the variety that puts money into the military industrial complex. They are way less willing to spend it in ways that benefit actual veterans.
I’m against war & the military and do not think highly of those that join. That said they are, technically, a public servant. And public servants should be granted public resources such as housing & healthcare & food. So yes, ‘especially veterans’, should get housing.
But also yes, everyone should.
Because it frames the homeless issue in an undeniably harsh light. “If even vets end up homeless, WTF are we doing?!”
I didn’t make it, if I did it would have been that way.
You made it leftist but forgot to change the title.
Normies don’t generally understand this distinction.
Sorry but the liberals in governments all over don’t act like they believe this at all.