I think the real reason they hate liberals so much is that they’re jealous of liberalism and they know that they owe their existence to it. They know that without liberalism, they wouldn’t be allowed to express themselves, and that frustrates them to no end.
As long as we are going with the social definition of liberalism and not the economic definition. Economic-liberalism can get fucked.
Individual liberty and social freedoms aren’t debatable. I would happily debate in good faith for the effectiveness of socialist economic policy for human necessities. With other people that similarly valued social freedom and individual liberties. Before I would support someone that technically supports a limited form of socialist economic policy. But would revoke a persons access to it for disagreeing with some bougie vanguard party.
The problem with states is always human nature. The idea of a democratic state is excellent, the reality much less so. Whether intentional or not. The power continually accumulates, stratifies and insulates from individual and most collective action.
Especially with a state the size of the US. It’s no coincidence that half our population doesn’t vote due to many obstacles purposefully placed against them. Or abstain because they feel they have no say, and their vote no value. With one quarter desperately trying to accomplish anything good even if misguided. The remaining quarter actively trying to tear everything down because they feel they haven’t gotten anything good personally.
Honestly, some mayors have too much power. There definitely shouldn’t be others above them. No senators, no governors, no presidents, no kings. The structure of the European Union is infinitely more preferable while still being wildly flawed. Their prime ministers and presidents being closer to our governors in power and scope.
I don’t believe the US is a democracy and hasn’t been for a while now. I mean the popular vote isn’t even what wins the elections, that’s kind of the core concept of democracy, no?
Anyways, so if the state was more democratic like the EU or countries with Parliaments you’d consider a planned economy?
More acceptable, but still unacceptable. In the over 30 years of voting in this state, no one I voted for above mayor has made it into office. And many of the ones are seditious, grifting, fascist, enablers. That ladder lover Hawley, should be marched up an extremely tall ladder with a rope around his neck. The rope pulled taut and the ladder kicked out from under him as he’s effectively done to so many people.
Not even most Californians would want a president or prime minister newsome
I think the real reason they hate liberals so much is that they’re jealous of liberalism and they know that they owe their existence to it. They know that without liberalism, they wouldn’t be allowed to express themselves, and that frustrates them to no end.
Insecurity, really.
As long as we are going with the social definition of liberalism and not the economic definition. Economic-liberalism can get fucked.
Individual liberty and social freedoms aren’t debatable. I would happily debate in good faith for the effectiveness of socialist economic policy for human necessities. With other people that similarly valued social freedom and individual liberties. Before I would support someone that technically supports a limited form of socialist economic policy. But would revoke a persons access to it for disagreeing with some bougie vanguard party.
Absolutely social, yeah.
According to a political test, which I don’t take seriously since they’re too yank-centric, I’m supposedly between a socialist and a communist.
How do you feel about planned economies? I’ve been giving it a fair bit of thought recently with the AI slop bubble
Planned economies by the state, burn it with fire. By and with consent of the community/ies, you’d be crazy to do it any other way.
Even planned economies by a democratically elected state? Isn’t that the consent of the community?
The problem with states is always human nature. The idea of a democratic state is excellent, the reality much less so. Whether intentional or not. The power continually accumulates, stratifies and insulates from individual and most collective action.
Especially with a state the size of the US. It’s no coincidence that half our population doesn’t vote due to many obstacles purposefully placed against them. Or abstain because they feel they have no say, and their vote no value. With one quarter desperately trying to accomplish anything good even if misguided. The remaining quarter actively trying to tear everything down because they feel they haven’t gotten anything good personally.
Honestly, some mayors have too much power. There definitely shouldn’t be others above them. No senators, no governors, no presidents, no kings. The structure of the European Union is infinitely more preferable while still being wildly flawed. Their prime ministers and presidents being closer to our governors in power and scope.
I don’t believe the US is a democracy and hasn’t been for a while now. I mean the popular vote isn’t even what wins the elections, that’s kind of the core concept of democracy, no?
Anyways, so if the state was more democratic like the EU or countries with Parliaments you’d consider a planned economy?
More acceptable, but still unacceptable. In the over 30 years of voting in this state, no one I voted for above mayor has made it into office. And many of the ones are seditious, grifting, fascist, enablers. That ladder lover Hawley, should be marched up an extremely tall ladder with a rope around his neck. The rope pulled taut and the ladder kicked out from under him as he’s effectively done to so many people.
Not even most Californians would want a president or prime minister newsome
No clue who Hawley is, don’t really care to know.
It’s insane to me that if you’re from a certain area your vote is rendered useless. Really insane system the US has