Damn the liberals

[CAleftist]

They are wolves in sheep's clothing. Constantly pretending to support "social justice" and "equality of opportunity", just as long as THEIR material privilege and social status isn't questioned.

Seriously, I live in a very "liberal" area, and I am surrounded by elitist snobs who think their shit doesn't stink, that they are "better" and more "educated" and "enlightened", etc. than the "poor, ignorant slobs."

They are so "nice" to you, as long as you talk about electoral politics, political parties, and "idealism", etc. You start talking actual class politics and conditions, and they will go right-wing on your ass real quick, quicker than you can say "backstabber!"

Remember: the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. Just because the liberals and conservatives fight a bourgeois civil war, doesn't mean that either of them support us.

I'm preaching to the choir here, I know. And I'm probably ranting. But I just felt that I needed to get this out.

[The Gallant Gallstone]

For the original poster:

What are your activist goals in California? What are you trying to accomplish?

Keep in mind that the liberals aren't going to see with us "eye-to-eye." You hit the nail on the head; they may have progressive elements but their material backgrounds anchor them securely in the realm of reaction.

The "bourgeois civil war" as you call it provides us with opportunities. Keep your goal (building your party, calling attention to an issue, protesting a particular thing) in primary focus and make common cause with the liberals when you can. Keep the liberals on your cell phone contact list; you may find yourself organizing an action and it may be handy to have a few of them come out.

[eric922]

In defense of liberals/progressives I will say a few things in their favor. A lot of them are much more open to socialism than conservatives, I myself started out as a social-democrat before I started studying socialism. Also, they are far more likely to work with us on certain issues than the Right, I mean most liberals want single-payer health care for instance, I don't see why he can't work together on those issues we do agree on.

[CAleftist]

For the original poster:

What are your activist goals in California? What are you trying to accomplish?

Keep in mind that the liberals aren't going to see with us "eye-to-eye." You hit the nail on the head; they may have progressive elements but their material backgrounds anchor them securely in the realm of reaction.

The "bourgeois civil war" as you call it provides us with opportunities. Keep your goal (building your party, calling attention to an issue, protesting a particular thing) in primary focus and make common cause with the liberals when you can. Keep the liberals on your cell phone contact list; you may find yourself organizing an action and it may be handy to have a few of them come out.

Well, I'm looking for an organization right now. As a community college student in the San Jose area, I'm kind of out of the way of the leftist movements of the Bay Area (most of them are in San Francisco or Oakland). So I am looking for a way to address that issue.

[RadioRaheem84]

Liberals are the worst. They really believe themselves to be the happy medium between two extremes (right and left). They view Marxists, while sympathetic, as ultimately in the same camp as right libertarians.

Try reasoning with policy wonkish Economist reading pompous technocrat liberals from the East Coast like I did several years at an East Coast College. It doesn't work.

I used to be a liberal, Economist reading, wonk and I thought Marxists were foolish.

Come the crash, losing my job opportunity, I opened up Das Kapital and boom, I was a liberal no more.

Trust me, upper crust liberals are harder to convince than the most reactionary of conservatives as most right wingers tend to actually see an establishment of some kind. Liberals tend to not believe in an establishment or think the establishment is a good thing or needs reform.

Progressives, left-progressives on the other hand are bit better to deal with and some common ground can emerge there. But for the most part, they tend to harbor the same sentiments as liberals depending on their class background.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

The other day in class something happened that was hilarious. My conservative teacher was asking us if CIA operatives going into places and assassinating people is alright. Then he said "If Qaddafi 'drowned' tomorrow we would know what really happened". Then a student asked him "why are we in Libya anyways" and his response was "I don't know, but I think we should leave". A liberal in the class responded "But we have to show our humanity, we can't just let them get killed by this dictator". Knowing the kid doesn't support the Iraq war he said "Wasn't that the rationale for going into Iraq" and the kid was caught off guard but then asked the teacher "then why don't you support what we're doing in Libya" because he knows he supported the Iraq war. Then they both just kind of stared at each other.

It was awesome and just glaringly showed the hypocrisy plaguing politics, it's alright if Obama does it because he's a liberal/it's alright if Bush does it because he's a conservative type of thinking. Same interests either way.

[RadioRaheem84]

Liberals can hide behind the humanitarian rhetoric Obama spills but in the end the Bush administration employed the same rationale. WMDs was just the main point hammered on by them, humanitarian was second. It was also the primary motive for intervention for any of the pro-war liberal-left.

[HEAD ICE]

I was planning on making a thread on why socialists seem to think that appealing to liberals is a good idea. Putting big effort into why the Democrats are no good when at least half the country doesn't even consider themselves a Democrat.

There seems to be this myth that liberals are going to be somehow more receptive to socialism. In my personal experience, rural right leaning conservative "rednecks" have been far more receptive when I talk about socialism than ANY liberal I have ever spoken too. Especially those who would be derided as "white trash" and "redneck", in my experience they mostly understand that the system is against them and have a far better understanding of class than anyone else.

The worst denunciations of communism I have ever heard were from liberals. In fact someone said this to me on my facebook just the other day, and I think it gives a good idea of what we are up against:


in the middle of the 19th century, the anglo-saxon liberal movement ended slavery, which had transcended all economic systems and had existed since the beginning of human civilization

in the 1910s and 1930s, real liberals lifted millions of... senior citizens out of abject poverty with social security and medicare, they ended child labor and sweat shops in this country, the New Deal coalition would eventually begin to fight for real gender and race equality over the next few decades, they built one of the greatest infrastructures of any civilization in human history, etc.

what did the marxists do in the same time period?


Liberals are the strongest and most apt defenders of capitalist exploitation and nothing warrants any extra attention on their part. Workers, liberal and conservative, are the same in the manner they are exploited by the capitalist class.

[Aspiring Humanist]

I wouldn't even go so far as to say the enemy of theirs is my enemy. Liberals and conservatives differ in petty matters. A bourgeois is a bourgeois.

[Spawn of Stalin]

Except this isn't about the bourgeoisie, this is about rank and file liberals and conservatives, people with real lives, jobs, families to feed. Conservative politicians and liberal politicians only disagree on minor issues and ultimately represent the exact same thing, but in my experience, poor conservatives are far more likely to support a bill/candidate/law that they believe is actually going to make their lives better, while liberals just want to feel proud of themselves like they did when they got Obama elected, I was talking to an American liberal a few months ago and he told me that although he was disappointed that Obama hasn't really done anything good, it's ok because he is our president, meaning, we have to support him just because we got him elected. I am in no way endorsing conservatism, but in terms of being principled, I find conservative workers to be far more consistent in both America and Europe. Liberals don't even believe in liberalism as a school of thought, they just support the word.

[RadioRaheem84]

A right wing "redneck" would be far more receptive to Marxism if you don't word it as Marxism. This happens all the time. A liberal though recognizes Marxism right off the bat and disassociates himself immediately.

Liberals represent the worst of social elitism and class bias.

[False Consciousness]

I'm also extremely frustrated with liberalism in America.

As a gay man and someone very interested in Queer theory and the LGBT struggle in general, it is incredibly frustrating that liberal ideology seems to have a stranglehold over the LGBT community. By dangling short term, reformist advances such as equal marriage rights or anti-discrimination laws above our heads, LGBT proletarians are bamboozled into supporting the Democrats and adopting their thoroughly bourgeois ideology. From what I've seen, these act as blinders, causing a great majority of our community to completely discount any sort of revolutionary change in society.


Obviously liberalism is a ideology that simply serves to preserve the power of the Bourgeoisie, though I'm not completely sure on what the proper course of action to take in this scenario is. I'm sure many of us were silly liberals at some point, and we were able to "see the light," so to speak. Though liberalism seems to be associated with a really vile sort of elitism in America, something I think would really impede any sort of attempt to introduce socialist ideas. Hmm....

[HEAD ICE]

A right wing "redneck" would be far more receptive to Marxism if you don't word it as Marxism. This happens all the time. A liberal though recognizes Marxism right off the bat and disassociates himself immediately.

Liberals represent the worst of social elitism and class bias.

Not only that, but when liberals bash socialism they often use the most reactionary arguments against it. I can handle a right winger who hates socialism because he or she thinks it is "evil" over someone who thinks it is "good in theory/on paper." That is essentially a human nature argument that says workers are incapable of taking control of their own lives.

[Dumb]

There are liberals, and then there are liberals. I know of three general types with regards to Marxism:

-Ideologically committed liberals who sincerely want nothing to do with the Left;
-Neo-liberals who can't get on board with the Republican Party's theocratic tendencies; and
-Liberals who actually agree with Marx, but who are discouraged from the lack of a viable, bona fide socialist alternative.

We can actually get somewhere working with this last group. They will not start something; but, once something does get started, they will join. *Attempts to avoid lame "Field of Dreams" reference*

[wunderbar]

"A liberal is someone who leaves the room when a fight breaks out." - Big Bill Haywood

[Aurorus Ruber]

There seems to be this myth that liberals are going to be somehow more receptive to socialism. In my personal experience, rural right leaning conservative "rednecks" have been far more receptive when I talk about socialism than ANY liberal I have ever spoken too. Especially those who would be derided as "white trash" and "redneck", in my experience they mostly understand that the system is against them and have a far better understanding of class than anyone else.

I've had largely the opposite experience, myself. Both the liberals (however few this area offers) and conservatives with whom I've talked firmly reject socialism, of course, but in different ways and with different intensities. The liberals I have met often sympathize with the general underpinnings of socialism but consider it unworkable as an actual political philosophy. The conservatives won't even give the idea a fair hearing. Any attempt to broach the idea provokes a pretty negative response, accusations of treason, invocations of God and country, and so forth. The few times I've tried discussing it with "rednecks" have been downright harrowing.

[Dimmu]

I've had largely the opposite experience, myself. Both the liberals (however few this area offers) and conservatives with whom I've talked firmly reject socialism, of course, but in different ways and with different intensities. The liberals I have met often sympathize with the general underpinnings of socialism but consider it unworkable as an actual political philosophy. The conservatives won't even give the idea a fair hearing. Any attempt to broach the idea provokes a pretty negative response, accusations of treason, invocations of God and country, and so forth. The few times I've tried discussing it with "rednecks" have been downright harrowing.


I have had the same experiences. The people on the right reject any idea of socialism straight out, but at least they are honest about that.

Liberals might agree on the injustices that are happening in the world, but they believe that modern western capitalist system is the "only working" system. They all use the old argument of "look at Soviet Union" to somehow prove that socialism does not work. Actually the right-wingers know more about socialism-communism then the liberals.

[RadioRaheem84]

That idea about looking to the USSR to see the failure of socialism is a tired canard they use.

The love liberal democracy but don't realize that it failed to, when France succumbed to Bonapartist rule, when Europe tilted back and forth from Republic to Monarchy, and the to fucking Fascism for crying out loud.

Socialism fell once, even after it lifted the most backward of nations into the 20th century, and all of a sudden it's a colossal failure?

Gimme a break.

[Aurorus Ruber]

Liberals might agree on the injustices that are happening in the world, but they believe that modern western capitalist system is the "only working" system. They all use the old argument of "look at Soviet Union" to somehow prove that socialism does not work.

I would not underestimate the value of finding agreement that the world is full of injustice, by the way. Simply getting conservatives to admit that poor people do not bring poverty on themselves through laziness, or that other countries have suffered at American hands, has proven nearly impossible for me. Compared to that, debating possible solutions to the problem of this injustice is a breeze.


Actually the right-wingers know more about socialism-communism then the liberals.

Considering that a great many think Obama is radically socialist, I would have to question that. Keep in mind that most of these people get their ideas on socialism from Glenn Beck and Red Dawn, about as poor an education as you can imagine.

[RadioRaheem84]

Talk to any right winger about the Class Analysis or Marx's conception of the State as being the managerial department of the upper crust and they will agree with you.

Everyone accepts the class analysis, because it's evident.

Only indoctrinated, well educated right libertarians who read Thomas Sowell, or William Buckley or Dinesh D'Souza will disagree.

Your average Rush Limbaugh listener will not.

That is because the pundits use the class analysis but flip it to make it seem like the real people to blame are themselves, the government, or poor people.

It's only when you start talking about solutions, i.e. redistribute wealth, that right wingers become rabid eyed.