Just how fucking dense do you have to be in order to be surprised that a man who created one of the most popular operating systems on Earth, and then gave it away for free, might be a leftist?
Right wingers are extremely stupid and don’t really understand what the left stands for, they fall for all fox news strawman arguments and rage bait.
This is unfortunately true of both sides.
For example, conservatives think pro- choicers are callous baby-killers who only care about abortion because it allows them to “whore around” without consequences. Liberals on the other hand, think pro-lifers are misogynists who want to ban abortion because banning it will hurt women and because they want to make the country more like The Handmaid’s Tale.
…and leftists know that the “abortion debate” is culture warfare injected into the less-educated by billionaires to distract from class warfare.
I was just using that as an example.
Another great one is immigration. Liberals thinks conservatives want to restrict immigration because they hate foreigners. Conservatives want to stop immigration because the job market sucks and has sucked since 2008.
The reason why the job market sucks is that unions got defanged and international capital movement freed from the 80s onwards.
That’s why life for working people took 3 steps backwards compared to our parents and grandparents who could buy a house, go on holidays and have a boat on a factory wage. While we are going to have trillionaires soon and the only thing that’s cheaper is the fuel of capitalism: telecoms and wages.
The problem has never been another wage earner - the problem is pitting us against each other and us taking the bait.
I agree with you on the unions, but the other issue is that a lot of jobs have been outsourced over the years. Unfortunately, those jobs probably aren’t coming back.
Well yes, but how did we get here? The same forces that brought us are still working to keep wage slavey alive and well.
Free movement of capital, weakened unions and ceaseless propaganda pitting people against each other (welfare queens, immigrants are taking your jobs, eating the cats and dogs, work harder and you’ll be rich too, these other people are lazy, stupid, bad genes, wrong religion, the rich are better/smarter than you etc) - that’s how that happened.
There’s only one enemy and it’s not other wage earners.
To consolidate posts:
Liberals on the other hand, think pro-lifers are misogynists who want to ban abortion because banning it will hurt women and because they want to make the country more like The Handmaid’s Tale.
None of their stated reasons against abortion hold any water. There are clear ways to reduce abortion, such as comprehensive sex education and widespread availability of birth control. Since conservatives obviously are against those things, we can only conclude their reasons are bullshit. Cruelty fits the data perfectly.
Conservatives want to stop immigration because the job market sucks and has sucked since 2008.
Except there is no real link between those two, and even economics framed in conservative terms disproves it. Labor generates profit, which should mean every new worker adds to the economy, not takes away. That is, the resources they use (food, housing, etc.) are offset by the extra resources they produce in their work. There is not some fixed amount of labor the economy can have, and anything beyond that is parasitic overflow.
So again, if the stated reasons are clearly bullshit, then we are left with a question of why they’re doing it, anyway. Cruelty fits the data perfectly.
we can only conclude their reasons are bullshit
Tbf this isn’t entirely true. Hanlon’s Razor states “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity,” their reasons could be bullshit (as in intentionally, maliciously deceptive), or they could just be dumb enough not to connect the dots. In fact it could be (and likely is) both. The leaders at the top are maliciously lying about their reasoning, and the base is dumb enough to believe the lies, never underestimate the dumb shit people will earnestly believe due to cult brainwashing since birth, you ever talk to a born-in scientologist or Jehova’s Witness? Fucking wild. People telling me dinosaurs absolutely are planted by the devil to test faith and that OT levels are in any way real and shit, fucking crazy out here dude, there’s even a murderous vegan cult called the Zizians now.
In short: Dumb people be dumbing.
I am a former born-in JW; over a decade out at this point.
You’re not entirely wrong, but the leaders at the top are lying, and that’s all that really matters. They know these policies don’t work, but pursue them anyway.
Conservatives wanted to stop immigration long before 2008…
Democrats too.
Anecdote: Japan has many foreign workers on visa like the US, “jobs that no one else wants to do”. When I visited, I saw a van of the right-wing party driving around with a loudspeaker: “Chinese, get out! Koreans, get out! Japan is for the Japanese!” It was a bit familiar. 😑
created one of the most popular operating systems on Earth, and then gave it away for free
He didn’t created it alone and “then” gave it away for free. Since it’s begging Linux was free and that created a community who made it the most popular OS.
Yes. It’s called summarizing. Obviously it’s a bit more complicated. I’m not writing an essay on the history of Linux here.
Well it’s due tomorrow by the end of class, Mr. WoodScientist, so you better get cracking.
We would all settle for you not making idiotic comments that mislead anyone who isn’t already informed about this, you might know them as “the vast majority of people”
That comment isn’t misleading, unless you interpret “creator” as “sole contributor”
“…or as I like to call it gnu plus linux…”
deleted by creator
I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!
There it is. 🥲
Yes, yes, and it’s NT/Windows or as I’ve taken to calling it NT+Windows…
This point is pedantic and tired to the point that it has become an infamous copypasta.
It’s also, at least as stated here, not even technically correct. A kernel is an operating system all on it’s own. It just can’t do much.
GNU just provides the software that the user interacts with.
Additionally, there are a number of Linux distros that are entirely free of GNU software.
Just about everyone understands what you mean when you call Linux an OS. The pedantry is unneeded.
It’s actually a sandwich.
But is it an indicted ham sandwich?
i cant believe this guy invented popcorn :o
I’m sorry Richard, I’m not calling it GNU plus Linux no matter how accurate it is.
I never know wether to upvote or downvote this comment
How so you differentiate with non-Linux GNU systems?
The kernel is the OS
Wait you mean the guy who made a free and open source operating system for everyone to share is left wing!?!?!? WHAT THE FFUUUU
deleted by creator
TempleOS comes to mind…
Soapbox dude
*Kernel
Don’t undermine the fact that Linus also made Git and I’m pretty sure some scuba diving app. Modern day essentials if you ask me!
I don’t think it’s undermining to credit him with exactly what he accomplished. Linus created the kernel, Stallman invented GNU.
Why not just post the copy pasta
I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!
it’s just copypasta. thanks for posting. but i think it’s just less popular on lemmy
I think he isn’t a leftist, but just reasonable
I see a lot of overlap from where I’m standing.
In the USA the republicans simply are such morons currently that anything reasonable appears to be leftist.
I’m center-right in Austria but US-americans would call me a woke communist (and in many regards I’m more leftist than the democrats).
Maybe it’s just the .world folks but yeah somehow “leftist” on this site has come to mean “left of the American center”…
He is such a good role model for being wealthy.
He is, when it comes down to it, pretty wealthy. But we are talking about the guy who created the kernel that now runs nearly every Internet service, all Android phones, most streaming devices, and a lot of various embedded devices. Anyone else with that much impact would be a billionaire many times over.
But he’s got a comfortable amount and has not exercised unreasonable ambition. A man who did someone very valuable and was well rewarded and sees no point in being any better off than he is.
In Europe, Linus is probably right of centre. Just let anyone do whatever except walk around with a gazillion firearms because that’s just insane.
nah even in Europe being trans friendly makes you at least left leaning
we’re not many miles ahead in the societal run towards progress and acceptance, the US is just sprinting the wrong way
LGBT has always been a target.
The “good guys” still (chemically) castrated one of their greatest minds that won the war for ten, just because he happened to like dicks.
Theres a reason people wanted to reduce the victims of the Holocaust to just being Jewish and ignored all the other groups that both sides wanted to persacute.
They did the same thing this time, target LGBT to build the movement and are now expanded to other groups.
Hopefully everyone stands up while we still have the numbers, otherwise they’ll keep chipping away fringe groups.
In Europe being trans friendly has fuck-all to do with your political leanings on the left-right axis. It’s just USA warping the political discourse with their literally one-dimensional politics.
But also, libertarian right is an oxymoron
though i agree it should have fuck all to do with your political leaning, in reality there’s a strong enough correlation that ignoring it would be foolish. As a European trans person if given the choice to out myself to either a group of people i know are left leaning vs a group of people i know are right leaning i’d pick the leftists in a heartbeat
Over here a leftist could easily be someone voting for the communist party - which is conservative as can be, with most supporters being uneducated rural folk, much like GOP voters in the US.
Your best bet would be a socially liberal party, which could be left-leaning green party or right-leaning pirates.
Nah it really depends.
While the right tends to be religious and does not really approve anything LGBTQ-related, they’ve learned to behave and to mind their own business, which is actually fine. Respect other people, even if you don’t agree with them and as long as nobody’s getting hurt, we can all live happy lives.
This new wave of “America-style” extreme right lunatics though, that’s a different story. Those entitled fuckers feel they’re allowed to mess with other people’s lives, and they’re due a harsh lesson in civility.
You don’t even have to be trans friendly. He never said he was friendly. You can just not care about what other people do with their lives.
if someone is not outright hostile towards me when they learn i’m trans i consider them friendly :')
What the Americans call libertarians have some minority representation in Europe and they’re tolerant of minorities. Not as good as leftists but better than conservatives.
The driving force behind Libertarianism is that the state shouldn’t be able to tell you not to fuck kids. That’s not a popular position, even in Europe.
…wut
Ask any libertarian how they feel about age of consent and child labor laws.
That’s what they call libertarianism in the US. Just another coopted label, is all
That capital L makes a huge difference
It’s pretty hard to make an accurate blanket statement about what the US believes any more. There really are two very different Americas, and the evil one is in power.
And neither gives a shit about the working class
Most of America IS working class, so that’s not true. Neither political party represents the people well, that’s certainly true, although one does so even worse than the other.
True if we’re talking about the divide in the uniparty, though id say the real divide in America is between the wealthy/ruling class (and the sycophants they use their wealth to indoctrinate), and the working class.
The Right doesn’t care what people actually believe.
They happily quote MLK on a daily basis.
Ray Bradbury was always anti-fascist, but he called out President Obama because there were no space missions during the Obama terms. After Bradbury died the Right tried to cherry pick quote to make him look like a life long Republican.
per Bradbury’s Wikipedia Article
"Bradbury considered himself a political independent.[83] Raised a Democrat, he voted for the Democratic Party until 1968. In 1952, he took out an advertisement in Variety as an open letter to Republicans, stating: “Every attempt that you make to identify the Democratic Party as the party of Communism, as the ‘left-wing’ or ‘subversive’ party, I will attack with all my heart and soul.”[84] However, Lyndon B. Johnson’s handling of the Vietnam War left Bradbury disenchanted, and from 1968 on he voted for the Republican Party in every presidential election with the exception of 1976, when he voted for Jimmy Carter. According to Bradbury’s biographer Sam Weller, Carter’s inept handling of the economy “pushed [Bradbury] permanently away from the Democrats”.[83]
Bradbury called Ronald Reagan “the greatest president” whereas he dismissed Bill Clinton, calling him a “shithead”.[85] In August 2001, shortly before the September 11 attacks, he described George W. Bush as “wonderful” and stated that the American education system was a “monstrosity”.[86] He later criticized Barack Obama for ending NASA’s crewed space flight program.[85]
In 2010, he criticized big government, saying that there was “too much government” in America, and “I don’t believe in government. I hate politics. I’m against it. And I hope that sometimes this fall, we can destroy part of our government, and next year destroy even more of it. The less government, the happier I will be".[85] Bradbury was against affirmative action, condemned what he called “all this political correctness that’s rampant on campuses”, and called for a ban of quotas in higher education.[21][85] He asserted that “[e]ducation is purely an issue of learning—we can no longer afford to have it polluted by damn politics”.[21]”
Yeah that’s uh… that sounds about right. I wonder a lot about that generation.
Would Rod Serling, a humanist at heart, who campaigned to bring black actors onto mainstream TV sets, and always sent a message that the individual should always fight against an oppressive regime… would he too be lost in a sea of republicanism as he got older and the world changed around him?
I’m glad we’ll never know.
Bradbury needed to look closer then because Obama was working on NASA to get it built back up. Trump didn’t magically make rockets available in a couple years. That stuff takes a very long lead time to get right.
That stuff takes a very long lead time to get right.
Yet somehow, people still think Mr. “We’ll be on Mars by 2025,” who is still launching rockets that explode mid-air, should be allowed to throw out this tried and true method. Surely, the idea of “move fast and break things” is more financially responsible than polluting debris and waste over the country. Fucking monorail salesman…
SpaceX was an accomplishment that got a lot done. Elon might be shit, but he hasn’t destroyed everything he’s touched.
I think he’s always been a sociopathic narcissist. However. It was around the time of the “pedo” comment or early Covid that he completely purged anyone who would tell him no, surrounded himself with yes-men, and fried his brain with drugs.
Pedo comment was the moment I realized what he actually was. I thought he seemed pretty cool before that. My class consciousness wasn’t fully evolved at that point though or I would have realized he had to be a piece of shit to be a billionaire.
“The devil can cite scripture for his purpose.”
TIL Linus is capable of decency. Occasionally.
Idk, it’s more of a Dr. Cox from Scrubs situation. Clearly not the “villain” but definitely abusive on his way to do good works.
I guess it’s “Jerk With a Heart of Gold” but it’s not very zippy.
Good analogy
He’s also mellowed as he’s gotten older
makes you wonder what the reply would have been like 10 years ago. probably something along the lines “just breathing the same air as you already makes me feel stupider…”
A compassionate misanthrope. I can relate.
It’s called “being a decent human”. It doesn’t take much but the right just can’t comprehend that
Hear me out, people who belong to this stupid label “the right” can also hold those values. Shocking, isn’t it? I’ll even out myself as one of those morally apprehensive people of this homogeneous group, which is the exact opposite to the homogeneous group “the left” (because you’re either or, of course), "“the* right”. But I still hold the same values as Linus mentions.
When you boil it down, being right wing means you value property rights over human rights, and left wing is vice versa. Right wing is maintaining wealth and power, and don’t let anyone else get in the way of it.
When you boil it down, being right wing means you value freedom and being left wing means you value making others work for you.
You can boil it down to whatever punchline you wish.
Wait the right doesn’t have people working for them?
Freedom until it’s taken from you by those who are wealthier and more powerful.
Freedom is a big word that without clarification doesn’t tell us much of what you believe in. I think you boiled it for too long.
Haha you’re an idiot trying to sound smart
You should get a check up. You sound absolutely fucked. Probably brain worms or some shit. Do you sometimes notice foam in the corners of your mouth when you speak?
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Trump is a leftist then?
No, right auth is when you prefer hierarchy. Left auth is bureaucracy. Left and right is how much you think capital is a commodity.
Personally, I’m market socialist so I believe that workers should directly own their labor thru worker cooperatives. Right winger believe that owning capital indefinitely is their right which only leads to capital accural and oligarchy.
If you think you’re on “the right” and are not advocating actively and persistently for Trump’s removal from office, you’re a fucking useless moron.
Thanks! I’m actually European, but it seems that a lot of people here on Lemmy forget that there exists other places than the USA and US politics. Being not-American I don’t actively focus on the US, but actually what happens on my continent, my country, my county and my municipality.
(No, I do not endorse Trump. I hope he’s replaced soon.)
You must recognize that Trump will affect you personally. The US influence is vast. At the very least, some European politicians will try to emulate Trump’s success, to the detriment of everyone they represent if they are successful.
Of course there’s a spectrum. In the US, the spectrum only applies to the populace, though, as the politicians themselves are behaving so polarized that there only exists “the right” (far-right culture warriors) and “the left” (center-right with lip service to the left).
Then you are either uninformed or somewhere the right is significantly less corrupt
Lift your focus away from the US. it’s good for you.
One could argue Linux, GPL, and Open Source are all based on woke communist concepts.
I’d argue they are anarchist socialist, at least in terms of intellectual property as they are collaborative and free to access and use. With permissive licenses being more anarchist capitalist as you can capture and make a project uncollaborative.
I would associate most of these concepts with GNU more than Linux.
Richard Stallman is a hero.
Torvalds isn’t half bad either
True. People often forget Stallman.
“I… I was just asking why my WiFi driver isn’t working.”
This NIC is woke.
Since I had it handy, here’s the source meme for the uninitiated:
You jest but it’s because you chose a manufacturer that made a closed-source driver minefield and the volunteer paramedics haven’t been able to get to you yet.
I didn’t know any of this man’s views, I shouldve started using linux sooner
honestly, do it. if your laptop gets old, no matter windows or mac, it will be dropped by windows/apple. Linux will make it last a lot longer and run it a lot smoother. Do the switch. And you can actually have your computer the way you want it, not how apple or windows want it to be.
We all should have
There are many good reasons to use and learn Linux. Political ideology of its creators is very much not one of them.
They’re largely professional people: their politics almost never influence what they’re building in a practical way.
The (generally) accepting and tolerant culture within which it was produced is part of what made it possible for it to be what it is, but you won’t really see that in the software itself.
Not a good reason for you, this is something that is only subjective lol
I’m sorry, and I don’t want to be disrespectful or rude, but as a person who has no clue about computers I am very surprised the creator of Linux is still alive. I somehow thought he is super old and probably dead by now or at least not using the internet. I’m so sorry for my ignorance.
Edit: Thank you everyone for the many interesting replies, I’ve learned a lot of random stuff which I greatly appreciate!
He’s 55 years old
The people that invented the internet are still using it!
A good benchmark is Windows 95, and that was only 30 years ago.
It’s easy to remember because the 95 means 1995. And 19 means the before fore times our ancestors are from.
Ouch. Fucking ouch. We’re right here you know. Looking over your shoulder as you write on that magic tablet. No need to denigrate ghosts.
Some of us are barely even middle aged
Dude wrote the first Linux kernel in grad school in his early-mid 20s. He’s like 50 something now.
Unix predates Linux by a bit, but most of those old guys made it to at least the Obama era.
Vint Cerf is still around, and he got to see himself portrayed in one of the Matrix films.
Linux was “invented” in 1991, FYI, and Linus was a student at the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux#The_creation_of_Linux
Don’t feel shameful, you’re one of the lucky ten thousand
Heh, back in the early 2000s when I was busy reading up on computer history I was very surprised that a lot of Internet standard pioneers and computer science giants were still alive. Like, people from the stone age. This is such a young field.
I seriously thought John McCarthy (creator of Lisp programming language) had reached such a status of existence that he would probably never die. (sadly, he did.)
The cognitive dissonance of just how fast technology has advanced is pretty crazy huh
To be fair what he’s described is at most Progressive. The left rejects the current economic model as a start. Workers owning the means of production instead of an owner class.
An ally is an ally
Yup, my point is not that he isn’t an ally, it’s that being an ally isn’t inherently leftist.
I have a hard time finding a right wing or centrist ideology that gives a shit about minorities. So, while correlation doesn’t always imply causation, it usually does.
I think the whole left vs right thing is stupid.
Individual views are much more complex than a single left/right axis, so you’re always going to find people on both sides who have views that differ greatly from the major political party on their ‘side’.A ‘progressive’ right winger would care more about preventing the government from deciding what you’re allowed to do, rather than explicitly protecting minorities.
So while they wouldn’t push laws that require businesses to serve everybody indiscriminately, they also wouldn’t push laws that explicitly ban things like gender therapy.Obviously the majority of right wingers in america aren’t progressive though.
There isn’t even a center political party of any consequences in the US. There’s right and far right.
If you believe in equality, you’re woke. You’re also a socialist. Because since fascism is a sincere belief in inequality based on identity, while neoliberalism (democrats) is a sincere belief in inequality based on class / wealth.
So yeah, this belief in equality or basic human decency needs to be destroyed in order to maximize profit. Invest in this propaganda, great ROI guaranteed!
neoliberalism (democrats) is a sincere belief in inequality based on class / wealth
This is actually a misconception! Liberalism (or neoliberalism, as the pejorative goes) is about allowing individuals the ability to dictate their own life on their own terms. Liberals want most of the same things you do, probably: clean air, a reduction in carbon emissions, everybody has a roof over their heads. guaranteed access to healthcare, and dense, walkable cities. The difference is the means by which liberals want to achieve these things. Liberals believe that the government should play as small a roll as necessary to guarantee these things, usually through economic incentives and staying out of the way of the free flow of commerce. Liberals do employ government action when necessary (i.e, making it illegal to dump toxic waste in to rivers).
Liberals also believe that the government should strongly guarantee legal equality and should generally do what it can to provide equal opportunities to everyone. Liberals think it should be illegal to discriminate against someone based on sex, race, sexual orientation, and other factors of one’s birth.
The point of liberalism is to lower the horizons of government. In the 16th century Europeans were quite busy slaughtering each other over what the official religion of their kingdom should be. Liberalism emerged as way to manage sectarian conflict from spilling over into actual violence by disestablishing state churches, or at least significantly reducing the political power of clergy. Liberals apply this principle to other aspects of governance
Liberals are pro-capitalism, which is the ultimate mechanism for inequality.
“Neoliberalism” isn’t a pejorative, it’s a political philosophy that has dominated the Western world for about 50 years, though it has roots much further back. It is a philosophy embraced by both Republicans and Democrats. It’s about privatization of services, lowering taxes, and deregulating corporations. It’s why we have for profit healthcare in the US, for example.
I believe your argument is reductive, and ignores the complexities of the politics of people who call themselves liberals. Neoliberalism is not a coherent political or economic ideology, it’s an insult for moderates used by leftists. Most liberals are not ideological; they pick their policy preferences pragmatically, though nobody can truly claim to be perfectly unbiased and non-ideological.
And if you had argued to me in 2010 that democrats and republicans can both be described as “neoliberals”, I might agree with you, but since at LEAST 2015, republicans have completely turned their back on the most basic aspects of liberalism, becoming the anti-immigrant, anti-trade, isolationist party with no respect for the rule of law or the principles of equality or personal freedom. There was maybe a 10 year period in which republicans paid lip service to these ideals throughout the 1990s, but today Republicans can better be described by Hungarian President Victor Orban’s prescription for “illiberal democracy”, though lately they’re not too hot about democracy either.
Republicans, in contrast to liberals, believe in enforcing cultural conservatism through state power, state intervention in markets to benefit in-groups, majoritarian ruling with very slim electoral margins to the detriment of marginalized groups or opposition parties, and a general hostility to freedom of speech or the free press
Yes, liberals ARE pro-capitalism, but capitalism has been the ultimate mechanism for REDUCING inequality. Since the 1970s (the heyday of so-called neoliberalism), the number of people living in extreme poverty has gone from rougly 50% to about 10% today, accelerating in the 1990s with the downfall of communism across Europe.
To reiterate: thanks to free trade and capitalism, most of the world no longer lives in extreme poverty for the first time in human history. It is in very wealthy countries where we are able to take this for granted because we’ve been living very high standards of living since the end of the 2nd world war, which has coincided with a large gap in wealth equality. However, the living standard of the average American today is still MUCH higher than the living standards of the average American in the 1960s or 1950s.
Healthcare in the United States is not actually really a free market. The specifics of how our system works lives and dies by the letter of the law. What many blame on deregulation is in fact due to specific regulations which were written by the insurance companies. To be clear: this is called regulatory capture, which is NOT a principle of liberalism. Liberals believe in a fair and unbiased bureaucracy which serves the public and not special interest groups. The American healthcare system is a failure to live up to liberal principles. This can be said of most other policy failures in the US: housing has exploded in cost because of regulatory capture in zoning commissions, reducing supply.
Liberals are pro-capitalism
That’s a completely US-centric view. All your liberals might be capitalists, elsewhere, various forms of social liberalism are very much alive and kicking. It’s one half of the ingredient in the EU’s compromise of “social market economy”: It’s a thing both social liberals and democratic socialists can lay claim to and, indeed, in policy terms there’s gigantic spaces of overlap. Parliament-wise it’s most directly represented mostly by Green/EFA but floats in various forms and shades in pretty much all parties, especially Renew though the neolibs are also part of that one.
It’s also ancient, dating back to the mid-1800s, bringing you things such as credit unions.
From a different angle: Marx was wrong, there’s indeed petite bourgeois who are capable of class consciousness. Also, understanding macroeconomics and how trickle down is bullshit. They may be millionaires but that’s still a billion away from a billion, they want people to have money in their pockets so you have money to visit their cinema or whatever.
Also once upon a time neoliberalism meant ordoliberalism but that’s a historical note. The current use refers to BS that indeed makes the word itself a pejorative, just as “shit” is a pejorative for shit.
I’d be curious what liberal party in what country you mean.
AFAIK the liberal parties in Europe like Germany, France and UK want exactly what the US neoliberals want, to dismantle the social equality state, deregulation, private schools, private healthcare etc. But they are usually smaller third parties after Social Democrats and Conservatives. But even the Christian Conservatives in e.g. Germany are more socialist than the third party liberals, and to the left of the Democrats in the US.
Of course, ever since the “Third Way” after the fall of the USSR and Clinton, the social democratic parties of Europe also have become far more neoliberal.
The question is really who’s liberty? The liberation of the masses from economic exploitation? Or the liberty of the capitalists to exploit the masses? There is absolutely no doubt what is meant today with liberalism.
And their virtue signalling you can mostly ignore. Why would they want to solve an issue they could run on next election?
I’d be curious what liberal party in what country you mean.
AFAIK the liberal parties in Europe like Germany, France and UK want exactly what the US neoliberals want
Taking Germany as an example: The FDP, once upon a time, had a large social-liberal wing and was in coalition with the SPD, but that’s long gone by now they’re firmly neoliberal. The Greens are social-liberal, the Pirates are, and so is Volt. A social-liberal party that’s part of Renew instead of Greens/EFA would be Radikale Venstre.
The question is really who’s liberty? The liberation of the masses from economic exploitation? Or the liberty of the capitalists to exploit the masses? There is absolutely no doubt what is meant today with liberalism.
Part of the stated goals of the feed-in tariff system the German Greens cooked up was, aside from saving the planet by boosting renewables, to de-monopolise the market, to distribute ownership of the means of electricity production wider, and they indeed were successful we now have plenty of wind mills here that are owned by municipal-level cooperatives. Couple of farmers, the local machine shop, couple of pensioners, that’s enough own capital to convince the local cooperative and public banks to chime in with a credit, build the thing. Left to pure environmentalism they might’ve passed laws requiring the big monopolists to build more renewables, a more traditional leftist approach would be to build state-owned renewables, the Greens instead created, through smart regulation, market conditions that made it possible for small fish to get into the fray, out-flanking the monopolists.
That is, you missed something in your dichotomy: The liberation of the small fish from the accumulation power of the big fish. That policy is 110% ordoliberali: Regulate the market such that market failures are corrected. Neoliberals generally do the opposite, remove regulation that prevents failures because that pleases their monopolist overlords, or even regulate to fail though at that point it probably should be called straight-up kleptocracy.
And their virtue signalling you can mostly ignore. Why would they want to solve an issue they could run on next election?
Now you’re being a doomer. Yes, that happens, generally in politics not limited to any spectrum, but it’s also self-destructive as voters will consider you unfit to rule. It’s not like we’re limited to two parties over here, things can and do shift.
I agree that things in Germany are, by and large, far saner and far better than the US or the UK. The conditions of the market, the news media and government institutions is better, which allows the liberal dogma to work better. But it’s far from good enough.
And yes I’m a doomer lol. It’s simply a question of numbers: billions vs millions.
I’m not an ideologue and think a mix of ideologies is important, but the fundamental problem is the vast accumulation of wealth (=economic power) that brings unstoppable degeneration and collapse. Especially with social media being completely corrupt, and mainstream news media even in Germany only spouting misinformation and imperialist war propaganda and a pro genocide stance, things will deteriorate to the state of the US.
…and Axel Springer blasting anti-Green propaganda because the neolibs understand perfectly well how dangerous soclibs are for their programme. Neolibs rely on the narrative of “small businesspeople getting shafted”, soclibs can solve the same issue for the same clientele, but by shafting the bourgeois instead of the proletariat.
Small private businesses are not a systemic problem. Sure there’s capital accumulation going on but the “vast” is missing. The accumulation curve is exponential, at the lower end where those small businesses are it basically looks flat.
Care still has to be taken when it comes to lobbying etc, there small business interests don’t necessarily align with soclib programmes. Ironically, currently SMEs are lobbying the EU to dilute the supply chain act requiring companies to monitor human rights in their supply chain, while Nestle and other big fish lobby for it to not be diluted. But so far from what I see the soclib parties here are firm on these issues.
I agree that many who vote for liberals believe those things, but those are not the goal of liberal parties. The historical meaning of liberalism was the same as what is called neoliberalism today. Calling it a derogatory term is just pretending to be a victim. There IS such an ideology as “belief in inequality based on wealth” and that includes the right to survive through access to healthcare. That is reality.
You argue as if good arguments win, and ideology matters - it doesn’t work that way. Ideology is merely a tool. There is only power, or money that you can exchange for power. And those who desire nothing except power have a competitive advantage to gain more power and shape the world over people who want other things. There is a selection process that has been going for decades that precludes normal people like us two.
Politicians in the US might write some other virtues on their flags, or they might even delude themselves to believe them - that is actually best. But when the chips are down, only those who pursue power gain more power. I believe this could be scientifically proven with game theory and a simulation.
What you are doing is kind of denying that economic power (or capital, or billionaires) have an overwhelming influence on politics and policies. If you say that the conservatives or democrats or whoever does this or that for ideological reasons, you deny political reality and obscure paths to improve things. We need transparency and better tools and countermeasures to these mechanisms.
Politicians are chosen by capitalists among thousands of candidates, and only the fringe that happen to fit into their plans are funded. Those who want power above anything else and who have neoliberal tendencies. The useful idiots to capitalists.
So no, neoliberalism is not a derogatory term that should be avoided. It’s reality. Or how else do you explain Elon Musk running DOGE?
The historical meaning of liberalism was the same as what is called neoliberalism today
This is not true; liberalism was created as a reaction to the religious wars of the 16th and 17th centuries, as a way to prevent sectarian violence between Catholics and Protestants, and later as a way to prevent violence between rival states. I am sure there are people who believe in inequality based on wealth, but that is not what liberalism is, and that is not what US Democrats, for example, believe in.
You argue as if good arguments win, and ideology matters - it doesn’t work that way. Ideology is merely a tool. There is only power, or money that you can exchange for power. And those who desire nothing except power have a competitive advantage to gain more power and shape the world over people who want other things. There is a selection process that has been going for decades that precludes normal people like us two.
I’m not so ignorant to as to miss that what you are describing is the Marxist idea of dialectical materialism, which I personally believe is overly reductive in explaining history. Ideas do matter. The ways in which people esteem themselves and their groups do matter. It’s not all just a cynical power grab by a bunch of godless lizard people pulling the strings on us.
What you are doing is kind of denying that economic power (or capital, or billionaires) have an overwhelming influence on politics and policies. If you say that the conservatives or democrats or whoever does this or that for ideological reasons, you deny political reality and obscure paths to improve things
That is absolutely not what I am saying, nor is it even relevant to what we are talking about.
So no, neoliberalism is not a derogatory term that should be avoided. It’s reality. Or how else do you explain Elon Musk running DOGE?
Your question is so bizarre as to be meaningless. You’re asking me “There exist people who believe that the government should be restrained in how it treats people. Otherwise, how do you explain a man who believes government should not be restrained in how it treats people?”
Neoliberalism is just a catch-all for any policy right of center that leftists conflate with actual honest-to-god jackbooted fascism.
Otherwise, how do you explain a man who believes government should not be restrained in how it treats people?
You’re saying you view Elon Musk and his DOGE department favorably? If so, we can save our breaths and don’t need to argue about anything any more haha.
No, I’m obviously not saying that. Are you reading at all?
Recommend reading the book The Quiet Coup by Mehrsa Baradaran. Neoliberalism isn’t benign, could be considered akin to modern centrism, and above all else works to protect capitalism and the status quo in predictable ways that allow for exploitation. Which is exactly why corporate monarchy is now taking over our country in place of capitalism.
Unfortunately, it’s true: Linux is woke. And DEI. And gay.
We need to get Elon Musk and the DOGE team on this, stat!
