Liberal vs leftist

[CAleftist]

So I had a talk with a friend of mine recently. Nice guy, has a lot of common sense and is smart. I told him that I'm now a leftist and no longer a liberal. He asked, "Doesn't leftist kinda imply liberal?"

There has been a lot of confusion, particularly in America, about the differences between liberalism and leftism. Which is odd, because the two have little in common.

Liberalism is imperialistic, globalistic, and in favor of free trade and private property, and economic "opportunity" for those who can afford to pay-all things that leftism is against.

Does anyone else think the confusion stems from the extreme right's constant bashing of both liberalism and leftism, and branding anyone who disagrees with them a "socialist" (like that's a bad thing, heh)? I think that this is part of the reason people confuse them.

[AK]

Apparently you give your friend too much credit. Leftism in no way implies liberalism. Liberalism implies a sort of centre-leftism.

The confusion stems from the right's association of liberalism with leftism. It's happened in such a way that the two have lost nearly all meaning to right-wingers.

[FreeFocus]

Only those with political ignorance conflate the two. That, or they have an ideological agenda, like the right does.

[JAH23]

I encounter this problem a lot. Currently, I am in a debate (on Facebook) with an extreme right winger who called liberals in washington "socialist" for passing health care, economic regulations, etc...he's a real fucker.

This is not only annoying to me, but offensive. Socialism is an ideology which deserves respect and understanding, and should not mindlessly be grouped as liberalism. Unfortunately, this is the case most of the time. (Especially in the south). An analogy I like to give is that democrats and republicans are two paths to the same end goal: Capitalism. Socialism (and leftists in general) are on totally different paths, pursuing a totally different goal. Kindly explain to your friend the differences between liberals and socialists, and if he isn't a complete asshole, might learn something. Remember to be humble in the process, no one wants to be taught by an angry militant.

[#FF0000]

Doesn't really make them stupid. Democrats are to the left of Republicans, relatively. So, yeah.

[khad]

Does anyone else think the confusion stems from the extreme right's constant bashing of both liberalism and leftism, and branding anyone who disagrees with them a "socialist" (like that's a bad thing, heh)? I think that this is part of the reason people confuse them.
No, there are deeper historical currents at work. This should be informative:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/liberalismi-t134008/index.html?p=1734284#post1734284

[mikelepore]

In "Walden", Henry David Thoreau wrote: "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root."

Liberals are hacking at the branches and ignoring the root. They like capitalism just fine -- they only dislike capitalism's hundreds of inescapable effects.

The revolutionary wants to put a good root into the ground. There is no need to worry about the vastly improved branches that will later sprout from that new root that has been intelligently chosen.

[Adil3tr]

In "Walden", Henry David Thoreau wrote: "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root."

Liberals are hacking at the branches and ignoring the root. They like capitalism just fine -- they only dislike capitalism's hundreds of inescapable effects.


That's pretty good!

[Niccolò Rossi]

Communists are not leftists.

Nic.

[#FF0000]

Communists are not leftists.

Nic.

What

[AK]

Maybe Nic means it doesn't belong on the traditional left-right scale because it does not intend to work within the realm of Bourgeois politics (or something similar)?

[Blake's Baby]

That's exactly what Nic means. There's a saying - 'left wing, right wing, it's all the same bird'. And that bird is capitalism of course.

However, not everyone is Nic's sort of communist. A lot of people here consider themselves 'of the Left', but are in organisations that others consider to be 'the left wing of capital'.

[ed miliband]

I saw an interview with Dennis Kucinich where he was asked how he could support / be friends with Ron Paul, and he said something along the lines of 'the American eagle needs two wings to fly: a left wing, and a right wing'.

He didn't need to say anything else...

[The Ben G]

Liberalism is improving but not fixing the problem (in the American sense). It is still a capitalist ideology and has no or very very little to do with socialism.

[Blake's Baby]

The historical roots of socialism are in liberalism though. Socialism as a belief-system developed from the classical liberal ideals of 'liberty, equality and fraternity'. Socialism embodies those aims because liberalism (and capitalism) cannot, despite using them as its slogans against the aristocracy. In this sense, capitalism/liberalism cannot fulfill its own tasks and must produce a class (the working class) embodying a new social relationship (socialism) that can liberate humanity.