3 ms·

I'll break it down for you. Liberals are individualists. It's at the foundation of their worldview and philosophy. This is basic stuff. DPRK is highly illiber

I'll break it down for you. Liberals are individualists. It's at the foundation of their worldview and philosophy. This is basic stuff. DPRK is highly illiberal, un-individualistic. Engaging with DPRK culture in good faith means questioning the universality of the Western, liberal worldview. For most people, this is a non-starter (just look at this thread).

ericmay 4y ago
> so much so that it terrifies bleeding heart liberals Can you break this term down for me then?
- pphysch 4y ago
  "bleeding heart" wasn't the best choice of adjective there, I meant "passionate".
  - ericmay 4y ago
    Sure, but you have to be careful with the terms you use! :) AnimalMuppet gave a good explanation there IMO.
  - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
    Yeah, not the best choice, then. "Bleeding heart" has been used as a slur by (US political) conservatives[1] to attack (US political) liberals. It implied that the liberals suffer from an excess of empathy to the point that it clouds their judgment, or something. Nowadays it's just a slur. You're using "liberal" in a way that differs from standard US political usage, which is all right, especially since you clearly defined what you meant by the term. But "bleeding heart" sounds very US-politics, and seems really weird with your not using liberal in the US politics sense. [1] These "conservatives" would count as liberals by your definition - they still believe in individual rights.
    - pphysch 4y ago
      Frankly, I have only heard liberals self-identify as "bleeding heart", and misunderstood its definition. Then again, I don't consume US conservative media. > These "conservatives" would count as liberals by your definition - they still believe in individual rights. Of course. Virtually every faction of US politics is philosophically liberal.
      - shrimp_emoji 4y ago
        >Virtually every faction of US politics is philosophically liberal. Based US politics :sunglasses:

ericmay 4y ago

> so much so that it terrifies bleeding heart liberals Can you break this term down for me then?

pphysch 4y ago
"bleeding heart" wasn't the best choice of adjective there, I meant "passionate".
- ericmay 4y ago
  Sure, but you have to be careful with the terms you use! :) AnimalMuppet gave a good explanation there IMO.
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  Yeah, not the best choice, then. "Bleeding heart" has been used as a slur by (US political) conservatives[1] to attack (US political) liberals. It implied that the liberals suffer from an excess of empathy to the point that it clouds their judgment, or something. Nowadays it's just a slur. You're using "liberal" in a way that differs from standard US political usage, which is all right, especially since you clearly defined what you meant by the term. But "bleeding heart" sounds very US-politics, and seems really weird with your not using liberal in the US politics sense. [1] These "conservatives" would count as liberals by your definition - they still believe in individual rights.
  - pphysch 4y ago
    Frankly, I have only heard liberals self-identify as "bleeding heart", and misunderstood its definition. Then again, I don't consume US conservative media. > These "conservatives" would count as liberals by your definition - they still believe in individual rights. Of course. Virtually every faction of US politics is philosophically liberal.
    - shrimp_emoji 4y ago
      >Virtually every faction of US politics is philosophically liberal. Based US politics :sunglasses: