6 ms·

They didn't say that. Misrepresenting popular / successful struggles as peaceful and overstating the effectiveness of pacifism are liberal tendencies though.

• SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
  The parent poster, mathieuh, says exactly that: "Do not allow liberals to sanitise history."
  • Joeboy 13y ago
    'Do not allow liberals to sanitise history.' vs '"liberals" are trying to sanitise history more than anyone else' It is possible [Edit: and, I think, reasonable] to think the former but not the latter.
    • SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
      What reasonable interpretation, "only allow right-wingers to sanitise history"? I apologise for the clumsy phrase. The semantics of that doesn't matter, I just want to know what mathieuh is trying to say by calling special attention to "liberals" and not mentioning anyone else. I suspect trolling. Mandela was deeply "liberal".
      • Joeboy 13y ago
        Presumably mathieuh used the word liberal as they were drawing attention to a liberal fallacy. I have no idea if they're an introspective leftist with a critique of pacifism or a paid Koch shill or something in between. The thing they said seems entirely reasonable to me though.
      • mathieuh 13y ago
        I am about as far from the right as is possible to get. I am calling special attention to liberals because at this moment liberal media are writing him off as having been a 'peaceful protestor' or some such banality. I don't know why you are reading so much into this, I meant only what I wrote, I wasn't implying anything else. I am fully aware (as I assumed most people were) that the right has labelled him a terrorist, and that until as recently as 2008 he was officially a terrorist according to the US.
        • SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
          I read what you wrote, I still have no idea what you meant.
          • jessedhillon 13y ago
            matthieuh seems to be saying, don't buy the story that rosy nonviolence accomplished all this. Strategic use of violence, and the threat of it, were necessary to force negotiations and compromise. So liberals are singled-out apparently because they tend towards this particular narrative of pure nonviolence.
            • SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
              Probably, and you are correct about the ANC's "Strategic use of violence, and the threat of it" But as discussed in other comments, he could mean anything by "liberals" so we have no idea why he calls them out.
        • sanderjd 13y ago
          Language is hard... You appear to be using different definitions for "left" and "liberal" than many of us are familiar with. Perhaps because you are from a different country or culture than those of us who are confused (seems like mostly Americans), or perhaps it is because you usually talk to people in a "bubble" where everybody recognizes the same definitions (I'm personally more familiar with the unique word definitions of more right-leaning "bubbles"). Either way, once confusion arises, saying "I meant what I wrote" is not all that helpful in resolving it.
        • mikeash 13y ago
          I hope you'll think about what kind of replies you got here the next time you post something like this. You may have had a point, but your phrasing was atrocious, essentially built to generate conflict and suppress any rational thought. You could have made your point in a much better way such that people would actually reflect on what you said, rather than start political fights.
    • alan_cx 13y ago
      He had to include the word "liberals". In other words, excluding every one else. Given the tone of the use of the word liberal and the unfounded accusation, its reasonable to assume he is a right wing type, and there for means to exclude the right from the accusation. There for he must be suggesting the "liberals" alone are likely to try to rewrite history, because, you know, the right would never do such a thing... From here in the UK, Americans sneering the word liberal is a give away for a right wing nut job. Glen Beck etc. To us, well, me at least, it is highly amusing that so called right wing patriots wet them selves over the USA which is supposed to champion liberty, while using the word liberal as some sort of insult. Mean while, the right seem to actually support liberty in gun ownership etc. Very strange. Actually, very funny.
      • mathieuh 13y ago
        I am neither a right-winger nor an American. I am very much left-wing. You should be aware that the left is vehemently against liberalism, as it presents such a rosy view of current society that it reduces the terrible things happening to being some floaty idea that doesn't apply to Me. As liberal media are doing currently by saying that Mandela was just a peaceful protestor.
        • SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
          > You should be aware that the left is vehemently against liberalism What does that statement even mean?
          • md224 13y ago
            This might help clarify, the semantics can be a bit confusing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_liberalism_in_the_United_States#American_versus_European_use_of_the_term_.22liberalism.22 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_liberalism_in_the_United...
          • Crito 13y ago
            Much of this terminology is muddled, particularly in America, which makes this difficult to talk about in a clear manner, but my understanding is that some leftists believe that liberals stand in the way of the true reform that leftist's want, and often take credit for the achievements of leftists to boot. (Perhaps it is easier to consider that right wingers and conservatives are not necessarily the same thing, and can very easily be in conflict with each other. I'm not entirely sure if that helps..) In this instance, it seems to me that mathieuh is very much a leftist, and likely considers Mandela to be the same. Certainly he seems to approve of what Mandela did (I think several people here are misinterpreting what mathieuh has said as criticism of Mandela). He thinks that liberals are attempting to co-opt Mandela as one of their own and apply ideologies associated with liberalism (nonviolence as an ends of its own) to Mandela, even if those associations are not grounded in history. In doing this, they obscure Mandela's true leftist ideologies, which were exceedingly successful. By rewriting leftist victories as liberal victories, diminishing the perceived value of leftist techniques, they present a threat to leftists.
• dragonwriter 13y ago
  > Misrepresenting popular / successful struggles as peaceful and overstating the effectiveness of pacifism are liberal tendencies though. Seem to be more pacifist tendencies than liberal tendencies. Most pacifists may be liberals, but the converse is not even approximately true.
  • SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
    The truth of what you say depend entirely on which of the many meanings of "liberal" you are thinking of.