?Liberalism?

[Philosophos]

Hello and once again I have a question. The word liberalism is kind confusing. I have heard lots of people saying that liberalism is an extencion of capitalism(Thatcher) and on the other hand I have heard people saying that they are left liberals.

Anyway I want the definition of liberalism because I've been reading stuff on the internet and they are totally different from site to site and the things I hear all around me. At the same time I want to ask if someone CAN be a communist and liberal or a liberal and capitalist.

Give me a fine definition because it drives me crazy every time I think I got the meaning of it and then something else pops up.

[The Jay]

Liberalism is the philosophy of government espoused by John Locke in his Second Treatise on Government. The word liberal either refers to this or to the common usage which can be taken as synonymous with permissive, usually of action like smoking marijuana.

[Catma]

The shortest answer is that liberals are capitalists, and communists are not.

Liberals support private property in all its forms. They support individual freedom over the welfare of all, up to and including the freedom to exploit (and beyond that actually, the ones more honest with themselves.) They support freedom OF exploitation above freedom FROM exploitation. They believe the market system works, or can be made to work with occasional intervention.

On social issues they may have similar stances to communists, but many social systems are forced to be a certain way due capitalism, and their stances are thus impossible to achieve and meaningless. Equal pay regardless of race or gender is one example of a liberal ideal that is impossible under capitalism.

(Many here simply use the definition given above without regard for the way definitions shift. It's a good way to approach the situation - if you understand where the philosophy came from, you can understand the shifts.)

[Philosophos]

Liberalism is the philosophy of government espoused by John Locke in his Second Treatise on Government. The word liberal either refers to this or to the common usage which can be taken as synonymous with permissive, usually of action like smoking marijuana.

So it's like saying we don't want cameras on the streets, we don't want lots of police force, no taping the phones, smoking marijuana, make prostitutes legal and so on?

[jookyle]

The way that the word Liberal is used in the US is simply a wrong application of the word. In the US when people say liberal, they mean progressive. In the rest of the world, a liberal is someone who supports capitalism, unregulated markets, individualism over collectivism, etc.

[The Jay]

So it's like saying we don't want cameras on the streets, we don't want lots of police force, no taping the phones, smoking marijuana, make prostitutes legal and so on?

Where I am it is.

[Manic Impressive]

The way that the word Liberal is used in the US is simply a wrong application of the word. In the US when people say liberal, they mean progressive. In the rest of the world, a liberal is someone who supports capitalism, unregulated markets, individualism over collectivism, etc.
Exactly this^

And as we have many Americans on here they tend to use the word liberal very liberally (sorry couldn't resist). The use of slurs on Revleft changes every few months when I first joined people called each other revisionists, then it was reactionary - for a long time any opinion anyone disagreed with was reactionary you rarely see it now. And at the moment the buzz word is liberal. It'll die off in a couple of months to be replaced by something new.

As for the term Libetarian socialist/communist/Marxist it simply means a socialist who fucking hates the soviet union. It generally means an anti-state capitalist and anti-state position. Personally I've always hated the term, even though I am one, I would never call myself one.

The usual argument used against the term libertarian communist is that all revolutions are authoritarian. This is a semantic argument as yes it is authoritarian to abolish the ownership of property if you view it from the owners perspective. But if you view it from the perspective of the worker it is a liberation. Liberty basically just means freedom.

In economic terms liberalism is the doctrine of capitalism as established by Adam Smith in "wealth of nations". However over the years it's gone through many changes and much of what was proposed by Smith is now opposed by his contemporaries.

[Tim Cornelis]

The way that the word Liberal is used in the US is simply a wrong application of the word. In the US when people say liberal, they mean progressive. In the rest of the world, a liberal is someone who supports capitalism, unregulated markets, individualism over collectivism, etc.

This is inaccurate. When they say "liberalism" in the US, they generally mean "social liberalism." Progressive can mean various things. Communists can be progressives for wanting to move forward, but right-wing libertarians can be progressive because they want to allow abortion, drugs, etc.

Liberalism can be:

Social Liberalism Classical liberalism Liberal mentality


Social liberalism: the believe that state authority should be limited to protecting people and providing equality of opportunity.

Classical liberalism: the believe that state authority should be limited to protecting property and people or the believe in property rights.

Liberal mentality: anyone who's considered "soft." For example, me liking freedom is considered "liberal" by many hard-liners here on revleft.

[leftistman]

Liberals believe in the electoral system, regulated capitalism, individual liberties, secular government, and some social programs like schooling and sometimes health care. That's at least how a liberal would describe their beliefs(I used to be a liberal, I would know) but if you are a communist, socialist, etc. you likely would describe them differently.

[Manic Impressive]

Actually the opening paragraph of Wikipedia is surprisingly good on the matter


Liberty is the ability of individuals to have agency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agency_%28philosophy%29) (control over their own actions). There are different conceptions of liberty, which articulate the relationship of individuals to society in different ways, including some which relate to life under a "social contract (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract)" or to existence in a "state of nature (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature)", and some which see the active exercise of freedom and rights as essential to liberty. Understanding liberty involves how we imagine the roles and responsibilities of the individual in society in relationship to conceptions of free will (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will) and determinism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism), which involves the larger domain of metaphysics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics).
Individualist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualism) and classical liberal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism) conceptions of liberty typically consist of the freedom of individuals from outside compulsion or coercion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercion), also known as negative liberty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_liberty). This conception of liberty, which coincides with the Libertarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism_%28metaphysics%29) point-of-view, suggests that people should, must, and ought to behave according to their own free will (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will), and take responsibility (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_responsibility) for their actions, while in contrast, Social liberal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalism) conceptions of (positive liberty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_liberty)) liberty place an emphasis upon social structure and agency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_and_agency) and is therefore directed toward ensuring egalitarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egalitarianism).

[Fourth Internationalist]

I think there's more than one type of liberal. Economically liberal (regulation capitalists and social democrats) and socially liberal (pro-choice, pro-LGBT, etc.).

[Fire]

It is very confusing because in American political discourse and media the word is used very differently than it has been used historically and in the rest of the world. It's not being used "wrong" so much as it is that the denotation drifted.

I think the reason for this is that moderate socialists in America and people who would be sympathetic to such ideals began using the word liberal to refer to themselves because for a long time the "Socialism" label was so badly tarnished by an extremely effective campaign of slander by the right that it was not only unpopular to call yourself any flavor of leftist but it was for a time, outright illegal. Free speech is a somewhat recent invention in America, despite what the bill of rights says.

[Камо́ Зэд]

"Liberalism" is a weird word. As has been noted, typically it means politics that support private enterprise and property. Social liberalism is typically what is meant by "liberalism" in countries like the United States, and this refers to a tendency within capitalist politics to attempt to reform institutions in such a way as to promote egalitarianism, as well as to implement, to a certain extent, certain modes of welfare. To confound things further, at least in my own extremely right-wing country, social liberalism is typically conflated with socialism, which, in the popular consciousness, means more or less the same thing as any kind of state intervention whatsoever in the private sector (in so much as it affects business interests; it isn't "socialism" if government is stuffed straight up a woman's uterus, for whatever reason). In this way, "liberalism," at least in the United States, has come to be conflated with socialism, which, as you now know, is the exact opposite of liberalism.

[#FF0000]

There are classical liberals: Locke, Malthus, and all those dead white dudes from the 1700s who killed monarchs and printed pamphlets.

There are modern liberals: The US Democratic Party, center-left wing folks who favor a regulated free market.

In Europe most "liberals" are centrist/center right and favor freer markets, iirc.

[Slavoj Zizek's Balls]

Libertarian Socialism
Libertarianism:
An extreme laissez-faire political philosophy advocating only minimal state intervention in the lives of citizens.

+

Socialism:
A political and economic theory that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the working class.

NOTE: Working class regulation can cancel out the minimal state to produce...

=

Libertarian Socialism:
A political and economic theory that requires the working class to own all means of production etc while retaining individual rights to personal property.

NOTE: With or without a state depending on where your beliefs lie.

Liberalism:
Retaining Capitalism (and the state) while allowing people to have enough civil rights to not feel extorted by said means of production.

[PetyaRostov]

does libertarian socialism necessarily include the right to private property? (yes, i know this was a tenant of the socialists with a human face)

[Slavoj Zizek's Balls]

does libertarian socialism necessarily include the right to private property? (yes, i know this was a tenant of the socialists with a human face)

Libertarian Socialism:
A political and economic theory that requires the working class to own all means of production etc while retaining individual rights to personal property.

"The revolution abolishes private ownership of the means of production and distribution, and with it goes capitalistic business. Personal possession remains only in the things you use. Thus, your watch is your own, but the watch factory belongs to the people."
-Alexander Berkman

[Камо́ Зэд]

I don't know that, by that definition, any conception of socialism hasn't been libertarian.

[PetyaRostov]

but has it? I mean are there no definitions of socialism, or even communism for that matter that include your right to own said watch. I guess there are two questions that I was asking.
1. Does the concept of a classless society necessarily exclude ownership? (i've heard of a philosopher who claimed that you could never bring about equality without getting rid of the notion of hereditary property) and_
2. Is it possible to be a libertarian socialist without concern for the right to private property (i.e. socially liberal)?
-right to free speech
sexual preference
yada yada...
[perhaps this would fall under a different tendency?]

[Slavoj Zizek's Balls]

I don't know that, by that definition, any conception of socialism hasn't been libertarian.

I'm sure that there is a difference between private property and personal property. I thought the idea of personal property is that you can't simply take something from another person, instead you must ask permission.



but has it? I mean are there no definitions of socialism, or even communism for that matter that include your right to own said watch. I guess there are two questions that I was asking.
1. Does the concept of a classless society necessarily exclude ownership? (i've heard of a philosopher who claimed that you could never bring about equality without getting rid of the notion of hereditary property) and_
2. Is it possible to be a libertarian socialist without concern for the right to private property (i.e. socially liberal)?
-right to free speech
sexual preference
yada yada...
[perhaps this would fall under a different tendency?]


1. revleft.com/vb/difference-between-private-t27576/index.html

2. The idea is that there is no private property. Personal property is different. The above thread provides a better explanation than I can give.

revleft.com/vb/personal-vs-private-t144803/index.html This one does a good job too.

NOTE: The links are to other threads on this forum but I cannot post links as my post count is too low.

[PetyaRostov]

sorry, poor wording. I failed to see the distinction in yur earlier question.
1. does classless society nessesarily exlude ownership? (extending even to personal property)
2. same question replace private with personal
(we are far from the topic i know)