8 ms·

What is your opinion on liberals being compared to Soviet and Chinese communists?

OrvalWintermute 5y ago
are we talking about someone that believes in free speech, a free press, private property, the Rule of Law, opposes cancel-culture, believes in social policies, free elections, Separation of church & State, supports a progressive taxation, abhors violence as a way to change govt, and generally supports the constitution? Or, are we talking about someone that believes in controlled/regulated speech, a controlled press, speech codes, reductions in private property, Law as a living construct, supports cancel-culture, thinks of the State as the Church, wants massive wealth redistribution, supports violence as a means to change govt, and does not support the constitution?
- luffapi 5y ago
  Both your personas are oddly constructed and not really representative of a political quadrant with state-individual empowerment on the vertical access and state backed private property on the horizontal. Free speech, reduction of private property, dissolution of centralized state and wealth redistribution are all very classic bottom left (anarchist) principles for instance. I would think anyone below the center line vertically (so anarchists to free market libertarians) would support what you call “cancel culture” since is a powerful form of direct action.
  - s7atic 5y ago
    > I would think anyone below the center line vertically (so anarchists to free market libertarians) would support what you call “cancel culture” since is a powerful form of direct action. No liberal is the other alike, but some would argue that privacy is a prerequisite of freedom. Calling out someone with intent of harm is a violation of their privacy and civil rights. This can have a chilling effect and promote homogeneous thought and expression, which is inconsistent with basic liberal values. Maybe a distinction between anarchism and liberalism is that the former want no regulation at all, while the latter embrace legislation that protect civil and human rights.
- namdnay 5y ago
  What wrong with “law as a living construct”? So only the bill of rights is valid and we should drop the other amendments?
  - somebodynew 5y ago
    The eleventh amendment was a "bug fix" to the constitution. The original constitution had wording that accidentally allowed a citizen to file a suit against a state directly in the supreme court. Nobody in the government intended for this to be possible, but citizens began suing states and this conduct was upheld as constitutional. At the time (1794), this was resolved by amending the constitution to make the desired change. If the same unintended wording had gone unnoticed until today, it is very likely that the supreme court would simply decide that the outcome as written was not desirable and throw out the suits.
    - leereeves 5y ago
      Good example. Opposing "law as a living construct" doesn't mean the law shouldn't be amended or "we should drop the other amendments", it means the courts should follow the law as written (including amendments) and not redefine it as they choose.
      - namdnay 5y ago
        So a civil law system, rather than common law? Yeah they have that in France, it comes with its own issues (very slow to adapt - women only got the vote in the 60s, and the death penalty was still there until the 80s if I remember correctly)
        leereeves 5y ago
        Not just in France. Most of Europe and the Americas use a civil law system, except for former British colonies.[1] This includes many nations that gave women the right to vote before the US did. And as for the death penalty, well, the US still has that.[2] So your examples haven't convinced me that civil law is slow to adapt. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law#/media/File:Map_of_the_Legal_systems_of_the_world_(en).png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law#/media/File:Map_of_... 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dustin_Higgs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dustin_Higgs
- anigbrowl 5y ago
  Ooh! 21 tropes in 2 sentences, that's very impressive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
  - leereeves 5y ago
    Actually 10 distinctions between "liberals" and "progressives", demonstrating that there are many criteria by which progressives are closer to communists than to liberals.

are we talking about someone that believes in free speech, a free press, private property, the Rule of Law, opposes cancel-culture, believes in social policies, free elections, Separation of church & State, supports a progressive taxation, abhors violence as a way to change govt, and generally supports the constitution? Or, are we talking about someone that believes in controlled/regulated speech, a controlled press, speech codes, reductions in private property, Law as a living construct, supports cancel-culture, thinks of the State as the Church, wants massive wealth redistribution, supports violence as a means to change govt, and does not support the constitution?

luffapi 5y ago
Both your personas are oddly constructed and not really representative of a political quadrant with state-individual empowerment on the vertical access and state backed private property on the horizontal. Free speech, reduction of private property, dissolution of centralized state and wealth redistribution are all very classic bottom left (anarchist) principles for instance. I would think anyone below the center line vertically (so anarchists to free market libertarians) would support what you call “cancel culture” since is a powerful form of direct action.
- s7atic 5y ago
  > I would think anyone below the center line vertically (so anarchists to free market libertarians) would support what you call “cancel culture” since is a powerful form of direct action. No liberal is the other alike, but some would argue that privacy is a prerequisite of freedom. Calling out someone with intent of harm is a violation of their privacy and civil rights. This can have a chilling effect and promote homogeneous thought and expression, which is inconsistent with basic liberal values. Maybe a distinction between anarchism and liberalism is that the former want no regulation at all, while the latter embrace legislation that protect civil and human rights.
namdnay 5y ago
What wrong with “law as a living construct”? So only the bill of rights is valid and we should drop the other amendments?
- somebodynew 5y ago
  The eleventh amendment was a "bug fix" to the constitution. The original constitution had wording that accidentally allowed a citizen to file a suit against a state directly in the supreme court. Nobody in the government intended for this to be possible, but citizens began suing states and this conduct was upheld as constitutional. At the time (1794), this was resolved by amending the constitution to make the desired change. If the same unintended wording had gone unnoticed until today, it is very likely that the supreme court would simply decide that the outcome as written was not desirable and throw out the suits.
  - leereeves 5y ago
    Good example. Opposing "law as a living construct" doesn't mean the law shouldn't be amended or "we should drop the other amendments", it means the courts should follow the law as written (including amendments) and not redefine it as they choose.
    - namdnay 5y ago
      So a civil law system, rather than common law? Yeah they have that in France, it comes with its own issues (very slow to adapt - women only got the vote in the 60s, and the death penalty was still there until the 80s if I remember correctly)
      - leereeves 5y ago
        Not just in France. Most of Europe and the Americas use a civil law system, except for former British colonies.[1] This includes many nations that gave women the right to vote before the US did. And as for the death penalty, well, the US still has that.[2] So your examples haven't convinced me that civil law is slow to adapt. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law#/media/File:Map_of_the_Legal_systems_of_the_world_(en).png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law#/media/File:Map_of_... 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dustin_Higgs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dustin_Higgs
anigbrowl 5y ago
Ooh! 21 tropes in 2 sentences, that's very impressive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
- leereeves 5y ago
  Actually 10 distinctions between "liberals" and "progressives", demonstrating that there are many criteria by which progressives are closer to communists than to liberals.