7 ms·
> One sign of a sea shift - liberal is an old word, and speech codes, measures against hate speech, blocking presidents on platforms like Twitter, canceling and
by OrvalWintermute 5y ago
> One sign of a sea shift - liberal is an old word, and speech codes, measures against hate speech, blocking presidents on platforms like Twitter, canceling and the like are departures from liberalism. The groups and institutions which formerly supported freedom of speech are now in favor of different things. There may or may not be good reasons for this but it is a departure from liberalism. That these institutions and groups which formerly embraced liberal ideals with regards to speech have now abandoned them is a sign of changes within the institutions he discusses. Liberalism hasn't changed, the formerly liberal groups and institutions have abandoned aspects of liberalism, for good or ill.
I think the divides between progressives and liberals are becoming more stark.
I live in a deep blue area, and some of my friends proudly proclaim they are liberals and not progressive. Was talking with a neighbor recently and she mentioned her background in the Intelligence Community, and her support for law enforcement. She is friends with local LE , and helped them with a recent case. Emphasizing that she is totally against defunding, her ideas on police reform was 100% body cameras, and beefing up their training. Not a progressive.
- gizmo385 5y ago"Defunding the police" is often bandied around and characterized as though the most common position amongst progressives is a full defunding of the police and a society without any law enforcement. Are their progressives that advocate for that? Absolutely! But I don't believe that belief represents the majority (or even really a significant percentage) of progressives. I consider myself a progressive and I simply believe that we have, over the decades, thrust the management and resolution of societies ills onto law enforcement. At the same time, we haven't also invested in the kind of training for officers that would help them effectively occupy that role. So instead of having them occupying that role while also thrusting billions of dollars to militarize them at the same time, how about we talk a large portion of that money and use it to fund the communities that are struggling? Let's fund mental health counseling and other social programs that can help address some of the root causes of criminal activity instead of pushing all of that money into enforcement, which merely seeks to crush the problem after the fact with overwhelming force instead of addressing the underlying systemic issues. I personally don't think that is an unreasonable or radical position, and one that I think a large number of American progressives would agree with. I don't think a large number of American progressives would agree with the proposition of entirely refunding law enforcement (and neither do any Democratic senators, as shown by the vote earlier this week).