ISISstolemykidsname t1_iwkphbg wrote
Reply to comment by speederbrad95 in Minor party candidate who called for Daniel Andrews to be hanged preferenced ahead of Labor by Liberals by Jeremy_Gorbachov
The are, its just classical liberalism not the more popular current usage.
Humane-Human t1_iwktamc wrote
no, they aren't classical liberals
they are conservatives in a coalition with far right nationalists
Supermichael777 t1_iwl05ww wrote
Economic liberalism with conservative social tendencies. Liberals aren't your friends. It's the politics of wealth, trading power for wealth, and trading wealth for power.
Liberalism is the old guard of modern and post modern economics. It is a conservative position in practice, because closely aligning power and wealth is inherently opposition to changing the systems of wealth and power.
Nimrond t1_iwnk91w wrote
But classical liberalism is more than just economic liberalism. It's individualism, equal rights, separation of state and church, religious tolerance and much more. It's certainly not about using your wealth to gain power over others, to infringe on their liberty. Not even the government can do that in classical liberalism - if it breaks the social contract, it becomes a tyranny to be overthrown. No monarchy with those guys. Economic protectionism or subsidizing your coal industry buddies are very much not economic liberalism either.
Saleh1434 t1_iwl8pho wrote
Conservatives are liberals.
Gh0stMan0nThird t1_iwl8y2d wrote
Honestly the term conservative and liberal are entirely subjective anyway.
Apeswald_Mosley t1_iwmm5bu wrote
No they entirely are not, its just people have repeatedly used them without understanding what they entail until now they've taken on new connotations
GoodMerlinpeen t1_iwl5jen wrote
>no, they aren't classical liberals
What are the characteristics of classical liberals in your view?
gregorydgraham t1_iwl9o7w wrote
Classical liberal are the party of merchants, entrepreneurs, and the nouveau riche. They believe in free trade and freedom of labour (to move to their factory). They’re against workers rights, subsidies (right up until they need them), and entrenched aristocracy.
Classical conservatives are the party of landowners, established monopolies, and old money. They believe everything is just perfect and will enact miserly changes only when forced to.
Classical Labour/socialist are the party of the little guy. They believe in freedom of trade, freedom of labour, and freedom of movement. They’re against the other 2.
Believe it or not, none of these exist any more. All we have now is Neoliberals, Reactionaries, and closet neoliberals. And the Greens, I suppose
vacri t1_iwn45x6 wrote
>Classical Labour/socialist are the party of the little guy. They believe in freedom of trade, freedom of labour, and freedom of movement
???
That wing of politics is much more for protectionism than freedom of trade. Socialism in particular is big on controlling trade.
Freedom of labour and movement is also a weird one, as they're not really up for freedom of labour and movement if it's the wrong kind of person. And certainly in practice, history's socialist countries have been quite strict on freedom of movement even for the favoured people
gregorydgraham t1_iwn6a3j wrote
Traditional Marxism sees international borders as yet another way to oppress the little guy. Modern labour parties are covered in paragraph 4
vacri t1_iwnlxz7 wrote
When you say "All we have now is", you're implying that in the real world we used to have significant political parties that followed your definitions.
gregorydgraham t1_iwoeiw7 wrote
Fairly certain I explicitly said we used to have parties like that. My apologies if it was only implied.
vacri t1_iwp425n wrote
Sorry, you're right, you did explicitly say that. I stand corrected.
Who were the real-world significant political parties that had abolition of the concept of nations as a core part of their platform?
gregorydgraham t1_iwpb6p0 wrote
Well the Bolshevik’s for a starter.
vacri t1_iwpq4wn wrote
... and what a borderless, free-trade nation they created once they took power!
zipsam89 t1_iwn0zby wrote
That is absolutely not what classical Labour or socialists are.
Especially not freedom of trade.
HouseHusband1 t1_iwljk7r wrote
Classical liberalism means low government oversight, as in "being liberated". Basically libertarian. This results in private citizens mistreating other private citizens with little legal recourse.
Colloquial liberalism means social inclusion, as in "accepting ideas other than your own." So welfare programs, corporate regulations, and inclusion of all demographics.
socialcommentary2000 t1_iwlmgco wrote
Yeah it's basically "Pay no attention to the fash unless it's hurting my avarice and then, only pay attention to an extent that it doesn't inconvenience me (and not cost me any money.)"
[deleted] t1_iwm9b56 wrote
[removed]
mechapoitier t1_iwlfqpq wrote
Jesus that’s confusing
[deleted] t1_iwlzj59 wrote
Liberalism is a very conservative idea.
imafraidofmuricans t1_iwmm9mn wrote
Yes, liberalism. Pro corporate people who prefer facists over leftists.
optichange t1_iwol6yh wrote
The Liberals are not far right
Humane-Human t1_iwol8wa wrote
Dutton/ Morrison are, and the Nationals are
ISISstolemykidsname t1_iwl93dw wrote
Humane-Human t1_iwm7dwr wrote
Of course I'm confident
I'm Australian, I've grown up seeing the liberals being a bunch of conservatives
ISISstolemykidsname t1_iwo7k93 wrote
Oh well you must be right then, because there wasn't ever a time before you were born where the word meant something different...
Oh and I'm also Australian.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments