Arguably, it’s at least in large part the efforts of socialists, communists, and radical feminists that made some of these possible. But decades of vilification in the USA have made them virtually invisible to the general population.
Vilification that is alive and well here on Lemmy!
Hands up, who hates liberals?!
. . . see? Everyone.
You seem confused. They said socialists, communists and radical feminists. Not liberals.
I am confused as to why they’d misrepresent liberals like that yeah
Are you for real?
Da, comrade. Any likeness to other AI bots, both real and imagined, is purely coincidental.
its called calling out the spread of misinformation
also disinformation too, which is more harmful and intentional.
Nothing like propaganda to make people to go against their best interests. I keep having to remember even decades is well after I was born, I can’t imagine having the ideals of conservatives. As long as it’s functional but there’s no cost to not suppressing others, well there may be at some point when we’re all on a scorching planet and have to make real sacrifices. Of course the old billionaires will be dead for the rest to deal with the fallout… hopefully figuratively and not actually like the game.
MAGA women do not want all women to express to those rights.
MAGA women want to control who represses those rights.
Liberalism is not the reason for almost any of these but radicals working against not within the system.
Liberals taking credit for others’ praxis is their praxis.
Or for the system. If the end result is that an election can be won by buying ads then all the work was for the benefit of the rich.
You’re just being pedantic. In mainstream US terminology “Liberal” means left and “Conservative” means right. If you start using terminology beyond that the target audience isn’t going to know what you’re talking about, and you’ll lose them before you even have a chance to make your point.
Isn’t that because of progressivism? Liberalism is free markets and small government and all that shit. Stop letting the lib shits claim these wins.
Liberal is progressive in America. Lemmy mostly doesn’t want to know that.
No it doesn’t. Just because they might end up voting for the same party (because there are only two fucking choices) does not make them the same at all.
I mean in the semantic sense. The AM radio waves aren’t filled with vitriol for people that support a capital-based economy.
you have just given me a great idea for an AM radio program. Bigfoot Sightings, by Mark Foot.
Shit, I’d listen to that. Well. On podcast cause, no commercials. But yeah that’s brilliant.
Unless you are saying the U.S. had a socialist majority in government when each of these rights/principles became allowed… It was the liberals you speak of that voted them in. Are we going to say Woodrow Wilson had a socialist administration that voted for Women’s Suffrage?
The meme says “liberalism is the reason”, it doesn’t say “liberals voted these in”. You can be a liberal and lean towards progressivism, but that stil doesn’t make these things part of liberalism, it’s still progressivism.
Liberal doesn’t mean the same thing here as it does elsewhere, it’s a dumb thing to argue over. Liberal has no ties to who owns the means of production in the U.S.
I see no one complaining about how the paints were sourced in liberal arts. Words have different meanings in different contexts.
In this context it’s people trying to claim people sound uneducated while really coming across uneducated. If you say different then never say that culture means anything nor exists when someone tramples someone else’s.
Same word, different meaning in different regions
There’s something outside of the US?
/S
A man gave women the right to fight rather than folks fighting for social progress is the liberal narrative we all grew up with. I mean you can hear the same thing on NPR when they talk about the history of Labor Day.
Progressive movements caused social change. Through political pressure. It wasn’t given to us by liberals.
Clearly you aren’t splitting hairs enough. Take your good and add an “ism”… then multiply it by a couple “ists”… and finally divide it by purity…
And the result is basically the same fucking thing, but with a remainder that gives excuses for simple minded folks to disagree…
Yeah, sometimes it is just bargaining chips. Otherwise they have to classify the Richard Nixon administration as being progressive for voting to give women the right to open credit accounts without a male co-signer.
You are describing Republicans, or at least what they used to be about.
Their explanation is a bit reductive, but they are attempting to correctly point out that liberalism is the hegemonic ideology of the US state. Republicans and Democrats have historically always subscribed to liberalism, as in a social and political philosophy centered on individualism and capitalism as its primary organising principles. The current success of fascist rhetoric in the US is another example of how liberalism and fascism do not have fundamentally conflicting interests as both depend on the formal exploitation of devalued groups to the benefit of the hierarchy.
Liberals did not give anyone rights, they were forced to find new ways to exploit groups when legal discrimination became untenable in the face of movements that managed to challenge their system. Think prison industrial complex in response to the Civil Rights era and Black Liberation militant groups.
Think prison industrial complex in response to the Civil Rights era and Black Liberation militant groups.
Yes, and NAFTA / off-shoring in response to worker power, stagnant wages in response to women in the workplace, forcing social media to submit to spying in response to organization efforts, etc.
Neoliberalism – the dominance of free-trade rhetoric, dependency on consumer credit and corporate welfare for growth, and diminished remuneration of labourers – is more difficult to attribute as a response to any one factor in social or political change in the late twentieth century, though the persistence of union power and women’s financial independence are certainly factors. Decentralization and deindustrialization in strong union industries had already been official state policy as early as the late 1940s, as well as state influence over media production and communications technology.
The Prison Industrial Complex is much more of a direct response as we see it emerge during the popular Civil Rights Era of the twentieth century with explicit use of the War on Drugs to target black populations. Racist Politicization of drugs was already deployed in the past, but this systemization into forced labour and targeted community oppression was a new way to specifically handle effective Black Liberation movements in the US.
no I’m describing what liberalism actually means.
Republicans were only about that before the Dixiecrats left the Democratic party over civil rights.
… You don’t buy a credit card.
A better historical note would be to say … to have a bank account
I think up until the 50s women couldn’t have a bank account in their name, without their husband signing for them or something. Up until then, women couldn’t have any money in their name in a recognized bank.
For common women that is … if you were the ultra wealthy, you could afford to skirt around banking rules … but as a common woman with a bit of money, you couldn’t have a regular bank account of your own.
You’re right except for the year. That wasn’t until 1974 that women could open back accounts in their own name.
That’s when legislation was passed ensuring banks couldn’t block a woman getting an account on her own. Before that it was dependant on the bank.
Some do have an annual fee…
Between annual fees or interest, most people do directly pay for using a credit cards.
And even if there’s no AF, and you don’t carry a balance so there’s no interest, we all indirectly pay by way of processing fees.
Paying isn’t buying though.
Buying is paying for ownership of a thing.You don’t “own” a credit card. Credit cards own you. (Unless you’re careful)
You’re being unnecessarily pedantic.
Hey great idea! /s
Not legally anyway
Vote
New Zealand, Finland and the USSR were the first to make that a reality. Spearheaded by trade union movements and communists.
Work
The Soviet Union was the first country to establish legal equality in pay and employment for women, and then followed by the PRC and the wide amount of time of socdem movement in the nordic countries.
File for divorce
France was the first, with the french revolution. Then came the Soviet Union and after it the PRC.
Buy a credit card
To be honest this is absurd, but indeed the US was the first as far as I can remember. Having the right to drown in debt is good i guess.
Buy a home or a car
US and UK did indeed pioneer that, but it was with more focus on married women. Actual acts focused just on women were implemented by the Soviet Union with collective property and gender equality laws.
Driver’s license
There were little to no formal bans for that, social stigma was and is real though. Still an issue.
Pregnant and not get fired
USSR pioneered that in 1918, with labor codes protecting working mothers. Followed by the nordic socdem movement and the US only in the 1978
Husband can go to jail for beating you
USSR again, was the first to criminalize domestic battery in 1918. Although enforced unevenly it was legally punishable. Western Europe and the Northern America started it in 1970s with implementation continued to 1990s.
Many of the achievements listed are not of liberalism or neoliberalism, they were achievements of activists and unions working in a group to protect their collective interests. In many of the cases it was the Soviet Union with the revolution spearheading these rights, because the revolution itself was started by working class women. The nordics followed with their own social democrat feminist movement. In many things the PRC came before the neoliberal states in achievements of women’s rights, and that is a state that was ravaged by war and imperialism for years. Liberalism gave little to nothing, it maintained the hierarchies, and silenced the movement. Both democrats and republicans both do not care about women’s rights. They are both parties of the same right wing on the fascist eagle.
So this is almost definitely referring to social liberalism, not economic/classical liberalism which is an entirely different thing. Some ideas of social liberalism overlap with progressivism and even socialism.
The US happens to have two parties that are liberals - but it’s two different varieties of liberalism. Republicans are classical liberals whereas democrats for the most part are social liberals
Liberalism means so many things around the world, it’s a shit show.
What exactly could the women vote for in the USSR, or anyone for that matter?
I guess they can vote even today in Russian 😂
I will give you the feminism stuff embedded in the socialist system, that’s true…
Yeah but their pastor said liberals eat babies. So deal’s off.
They are trained from a very young age to obey and never question authority. It’s pretty much part of the religion.
Optional@fash.worldmisspelling “radicalism” for “liberalism” is peak liberal Illusory Truth Effect.Get more radical, law-boot licker.
LOL liberalism.
American dumbThe problem is that a significant portion of MAGA don’t actually want most of those things.
They feel that freedoms are responsibilities. They don’t want to think about who they should vote for, or have to have a job or think about credit cards and budgets and bank accounts. And they’re not worried about needing a divorce or their husband beating them because they figure “Well I married a good Christian man, that will never be a problem for me.”
They say that now, but they’ll be the first to whine about it when they’re inevitably taken away.
No, that’s all due to leftism. Liberals just took credit for them, and have prevented leftists from protecting them.
Okay but “leftism” is just a made-up word like “cromulent” and “hypothetical”.
I mean…if you want to be pedantic, and I always do, every word is made-up. That’s how words work. Don’t have a word for something? Make it up from nothing, or by smashing two or more words together (lookin at you my German fam 😘👉) or just borrow a word from a different language. That’s literally just how words work. It’s all made up.
So true. Or as William Burroughs said, “Language is a virus from outer space.”
yeah but “leftism” really embiggens the wordostrophe
You’ve really ponked on the big kamimbo there, no refutinating that.
This is a post talking directly to MAGA women. Right-wingers generally don’t know the difference between leftism and liberalism. You gotta talk to people at their level. Being pointlessly pedantic doesn’t convince people.
No, it’s just one group of rightwingers, talking to another faction of rightwingers, trying to take credit for the left’s work to increase their recruitment.
It’s not “pointlessly pedantic.” It’s crucial distinction we have to constantly make, because liberals have been trying to steal that credit for as long as there have been liberals. And nice job throwing in the standard liberal condescension, straight up admitting the tactic is to talk down to conservatives as if they’re children. Because that’s worked so well?
First off, I’m definitely not a liberal.
No idea why you think I’m being condescending, please explain so I can avoid giving that impression in the future. I’m just explaining something that you seemed to have missed in your original comment.
And credit doesn’t matter when the person you’re talking to doesn’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.
Talking to someone at their level doesn’t mean talking to them like they’re a child. It means stopping to think about where that person is coming from and using that to more effectively make your point. Empathy is an incredibly useful skill when you’re trying to communicate with someone, especially someone with very different beliefs from you.
So why not just tell them conservatives accomplished all of those things? If we’re just trying to make them feel good, and giving credit to people who had nothing to do with it, why not just reinforce their bias?
Okay, but can I renounce them all to own the libs?
Hell yeah! Heck, in Texas this doubles as a yard sign for your candidacy!
Count on the Internet to bring out the pedantic comments. “Liberal” is the word used to describe pretty much anything on the “Left” in the USA.
Keep making your divisive posts about the “Liberals” vs the “Left” though. Trying to make sure you aren’t boxed in with any other “Left” pointing groups will definitely help bring people together to change the current state of things…
Getting people to not be conservative is how you change the state of things. Liberalism is a conservative viewpoint by definition in the us. It is not left wing,’ as its not revolutionary nor progressive in any way.
Liberals dont want the state of things to change in a positive way. By definition.
Liberals dont want the state of things to change in a positive way. By definition.
Liberalism - a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, right to private property, and equality before the law.
Not sure where you’re getting your definition from. Seems like you’re just kind of making your own up.
…the left wing of the French parliment was revolutionary. That defines left wing, leftist, left leaning, etc. The right wing was conservative. This is where we get out definitions. Both parties in the US are liberal. Specifically neoliberal.
Therefore advocating for liberalism, is, by definition, right wing. They dont want a change, because they believe they’ve achieved it. And by their definition, they have.
Liberalism isnt progressive. It isnt radical nor revolutionary. It was in the 1700s. It hasn’t been since the 1700s.
Sorry bud. You said by definition. Then you proceeded to interpret your own definition using the history of multiple nations.
You can’t go around saying “by definition” when it isn’t the definition. Words matter. Maybe not to you, but they matter.
No, buddy, you read the wrong definition. I corrected that for you. Please reread and then try again.
By the definition of left wing, liberals are not left wing in the us.
Hope that is more clear and good luck on your ESL journey.
Looks like my comment went over your head. You are exactly what I’m talking about.
I understand your point, but it’s pedantic either way.
It’s really not, and I understood your kumbayah nonsense.
‘Liberals’ do not want to see the atrocities that the us does.
That is the difference between them and MAGA. They do not want to stop anything trump is doing. They want to be at brunch while it is happening.
That is the fundamental problem. Half of Harris voters supported Donald trumps 2016 immigration policy. As that is what harris ran on. The other half was okay with genocide as long as it didn’t happen to them.
Still missing my point. I agree with your stance wholeheartedly. It’s a semantics problem. The point of communication is to get an idea across, and you’re hard stuck on this pictures usage of the word liberal.
I don’t know if you’re not from the US, but I am, and what I’ve described is how that word is interpreted in the US.
It’s not semantics to be against incorrectly used, inclusive language when it includes two groups that couldnt have less to do with each other.
It’s like saying “humans sexually assault dogs.” And being mad when someone points out that humans dont generally do that, just creepy zoophiles.
Correcting language is the first step to correcting ideas, and thats the first step to fixing undeveloped countries like the us.
That is semantics friend. You’re describing semantics. We disagree on the meaning of a word, because colloquially it means one thing while it means something else in other definitions.
Also your analogy is bad. You’re describing a generalization or the formation of a stereotype.
Correcting language IS NOT how you correct ideas. You correct ideas by making people experience a difference in emotion.
You are wrong
Hey, I didn’t pick that fight. A bunch of super geniuses started shouting liberals suck in every thread and my position is they’re doing it wrong.
Count on the Internet to bring out the pedantic comments. “Liberal” is the word used to describe pretty much anything on the “Left” in the USA.
See all those downvotes from people who “disagree” with your well obvious fact? That’s bullshit. If people can learn new and interesting things from other countries, why can’t this be one of those things?
The answer I’ve gotten is ‘shut up, Americans should change the words they use’. As someone who’s said that often enough myself, I can reliably inform them that is not going to happen.
So they can either learn it or not, but it is the case. This meme being one small example.
Agreed. People are trying so hard to be correct that they don’t want to be on the same side, they’d rather pick a flight.
If the same side is “liberals suck”, yeah that’s gonna be a fight. Why would people deliberately piss off the majority of progressive voters in the US? Unless they wanted fascism to win. Again.
They don’t care and take everything for granted, that’s what stupid people do. Also they think 5 min in advance.
See the people who voted for Trump and then were shocked that they or their relatives get deported. Likewise here: "the bad stuff is for other people and not me“ or some version of that.
Women everywhere don’t like getting yelled at, and this meme is yelling at women. Might actually influence the men in their lives perhaps, somehow.
