Are any of you unironically liberal (in the modern American sense,

Not me!

>>134833645
easy (you)'s

watch this: I believe real communism has never been tried

>>134833645
Aye. Conservative social-democrat reporting.

>>134834723

SACRILEGE

>>134834723

///////(you)\\\\\\\

File: 1494423289903.jpg (27KB, 480x445px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 480x445px

I'm pretty liberal, but I hate niggerhood. I generally don't like interacting with most blacks.
Trump is closer to what I want than Hillary.
America's always going to be a mixed economy that will have increasingly large government as more large cities develop. Our country is too stable in its execution to make drastic changes one way or the other.

I "might' have voted for Bernie. Much of what he was promising was much too lofty, and he never touched on what sacrifices Americans would need to make to actually have free college. It's true that Germany has free college, but it's also true that you don't have complete freedom over what you want to study. Liberal Arts, Humanities, Social Sciences, these all have no market value outside of a select few fields like law and business, and so they are reserved for people who demonstrate astounding academic ability. Everyone else has their options limited to what the market actually needs. This is not a bad thing, but I can already imagine how Bernie's constituents would react to this notion.

>>134836500

Least retarded liberal post I've seen today

>>134836804
There's middle ground between being a literal Nazi and 27 genders. The biggest leftists in the U.S. used to be farmers and factory workers.

>>134836500
He would have let the strategists run the middle East and soon enough he'd be leading us in war. Bernie, leading a war. We would lose so damn hard

File: ffc.png (54KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 625x626px

>>134833645
>stop triggering me in my safe space

>>134837308

I would probably be a Democrat if they represented white working class interests instead of transgender demiqueer pandakin and niggers and weren't trying to turn America into a third world brown shitstain hellhole

I am an American living in Canada for school and I've been on /pol/since 2009.
I'm a liberal. But some kind of freak postmodernist sjw anti science furry communist I am not.
I voted green in 2016 because I don't like trumps politics and I could not vote for a criminal.
Also low key jill stine fineassgilf.
I cant see myself voting dem until they party gets off this weird sjw anti-American Shit.

I would consider myself to be very anti-capitalist and do want wealth distribution just with a strong nationalist government.

>>134837912
Those social issues are basically a distraction from neoliberal economic policy. And I don't think poor urban blacks have the power to do much of anything.

>>13483810
Fucking why
I get the nationalism but why take away peoples property?
Why not introduce regulation that is more economically sensible for our economy than straight up rob people of their property.
Income inequality can be solved without fucking going full commie

>>134838103
Above post was ment for you

>>134838560
>Income inequality can be solved without fucking going full commie
In the U.S. they call you a commie for trying to make capitalism more palatable to the lower rungs of society.

>>134833645
Because most other liberals are retards, conservatives are currently on the right side of history, and the salt from people in my party whose "college educated" brains can't handle an argument different from their worldview is fucking funny.

>>134837405
Yeah, that was something else I disliked about Bernie. Trump got a medical deferment that he sat on. Great. Whatever. Bernie in the meanwhile actually took conscientious objector status for Nam. This is not meant to be a status that says "I disagree with this war," rather it's reserved for people who are actual, honest-to-god pacifists. It would've been understandable, given Bernie's past with activism.

Then 2016 rolls around and someone asks him what he thinks about war. He said "I dislike it, but I will lead this country into it if necessary" or some tripe like that. So this is a man who's perfectly brave with YOUR sons and YOUR brothers, but his own ass? Nah.

>>134838560
>>134838629

A couple of reasons. First of all most billionaires and multi millionaires aren't loyal to their nation or people, they're loyal to their shareholders and will promote degeneracies or bring in immigrants if it means more money, look up the Davos Man. Second of all, modern business practices are very cutthroat, look at Walmart and Amazon they're ruthless with competition and middle America has suffered for it. Finally, I don't want Marxism, but not everything has to be Marxism or Capitalism. Marxism is about ownership, not the distribution of money, getting checks in the mail isn't Marxism. There needs to be some type of strongly mixed economy but multinational corporations and stocks have to go.

True classical liberals in the true sense of the word are pretty based and centrist. When most of you idiots say liberal you really mean progressive, leftist, communist, socialist etc. True liberalism isn't very left wing at all and shares a lot with the libertarians.

John Locke is a great example of a true classical liberal and he wrote a lot about private property. His writings would trigger any socialist/communist.

>>134839560
But a sizeable number of progressives don't want actual socialism, they're trying to preserve liberalism.
The welfare state was created by conservatives to undermine leftists and gain support from the poor.

>>134838702
>In the U.S. they call you a commie for trying to make capitalism more palatable to the lower rungs of society.

Can absolutely be done with financial regulations that put a stop to criminal tier practices that exploits and steals from Americans.
Straight redistribution of wealth is flawed on so many levels.

File: IMG_3794.gif (3MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 320x240px

>>134839953
>The welfare state was created by conservatives to undermine leftists and gain support from the poor.

>>134839402
Jesus Christ. Not only are the left a bunch of thieves but it seems the right is too.
Ending economic exploitative practices that Shit on the working man need not come from the government appropriating all property and controlling the fucking economy.

>>134840032
They get around regulations all the time, they have whole teams to get around regulations and taxes.

>>134840295
Regan and Clinton did tons for deregulation. Before that we had plenty of policies that served to bolster positive capitalism. It can be done.
Your issues are with neoliberalism not capitalism

>>134840221
Look up somebody by the name of Otto von Bismarck, my friend.
You're a whole lot more likely to be okay with the status quo when you aren't completely cucked by poverty.

>>134840287
How autistic are you? I never talked property you're the only one who is bringing up property. I even said there needed to be a mixed economy but nope you went straight to
> controlling the fucking economy.

Read god dammit.

>>134839953
>who is LBJ

>>134840529
Nigger,von Bismarck was a Prussian from the 1800s . You precious FDR enacted the nigger and shitskin nanny state.

>>134840605
Stocks and businesses are property.
I get that you want a bit of both. But Marxism is not the way to bring big businesses to heal. Capitalism with good regulation can do that.
There is literally no reason to get rid of the proven best economic model on history.

>>134840823
>>134840833
The welfare state was created in the 19th Century German Empire and was more-or-less adopted as the standard in the rest of the first world before L.B.J. was president.

>>134839361
Yeah. Bernie was a softie and so was Obama in some ways, at least earlier on in his terms. At least Trump has something of a heart. He is a very happy middle between Bernie and Hillary. Not a warhawk but not a pacifist. We needed a middle ground between those two desperately in the middle East

>>134840904
Very broad definition of property you're using. Once again it isn't Marxism, not everything anti capitalist is Marxist. Your "good regulations" won't stop big agriculture and construction bringing in third world immigrants, outsourcing, and unemployment issues. You're trying to save a sinking ship by trying to cover the hole while at this point finding a new boat is better.

What we need is an emphasis on the local economy, rather than having Fortune 500companies like McDonalds or CVS in every town. People need to run their own local stores.

File: IMG_3267.gif (1MB, 328x198px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 328x198px

>>134840996
>was more-or-less adopted as the standard in the rest of the first world
This is factually incorrect and such an oversimplification it blows my mind that you would even attempt to use it as a rational argument. The welfare states of today are objectively driven with third world population replacement and state control and flexibility in mind. They have quite literally nothing to share in common with Bismarck's German unification scheme and the social benefits involved in creating it.

File: webb.jpg (110KB, 3000x1626px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 3000x1626px

I consider myself on the mainstream non-SJW center-left. As far as redistribution I do support an active and robust role for the public sector. Of course how our public sector is leveraged and applied is a topic on which we should all be more open minded about, education for example. As far as social issues I'm all in favor of legal equality but I recognize that "equity" is beyond the ability of government to control. I think 'society' is a thing and while I don't like to come at some issues from a moral standpoint, I do look at them through a social standpoint. I've woken up to realize the importance of family and the damage that single mothers do.

In terms of foreign policy I think it's time for our western-Atlantic civilization to reassert itself into international affairs and our civilization is unique and worth preserving. I can be fairly hawkish on military issues, although I'm not game for supporting an Iraq-style massive deployment of troops.

nothing on this site influences me. it amuses me. pol is like old b. thats why im here. im smarter and older than most posters. i enjoy the bants and hatred. still a liberal though. multi culti and all that. but i dont post. except in career threads and 90's threads.

>>134841627
The concept of providing state services to undermine leftists was first put into widespread action by the German Empire in the 19th century.
This concept was subsequently spread to most other Western countries by the mid-20th Century.
Padding your post with psuedointellectualism, aggressive condescension and "white genocide" memes doesn't change that.

>>134842093
>pot=>kettle

>>134841494
Stock and business are property. Its not an interpretation its literally what they are.
Also why can't we say "no you can't import cheap labour and no you can't outsource your labour if you want to do business in the USA"?
I get your resentment of shitty business practices but to reiterate capitalism works better than anything else ever thought of. So good luck with your neo capitalism/Marxism plan. Your only serving to aide the foolish communists.

>>134842339
How so?

File: IMG_3242.gif (1MB, 300x174px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x174px

>>134842093
>This concept was subsequently spread to most other Western countries by the mid-20th Century.
The concept does not equate to the model. Simply because the idea that welfare was needed to satiate the underclass happened to be adopted by The West that doesn't mean that the same model was used elsewhere. The welfare model in the US is vastly different from the modern European counterparts and the modern European counterparts are mere shadows of what they were in the 1800s.

You're being intellectually dishonest because you can't admit that he current welfare states in The West are not only wholly different from each other but are also corruptly utilized to supply large scale cheap labor and malleable underprivileged minds to economies looking to enrich themselves at the top only.

>>134842557
They will just do it illegally like they employ ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS now. Nobody will go after them because they control the politicians. You're only asking for the same people who control to police themselves. Regulations are only for their competitors.


Communism isn't even a problem anymore. The only communist state at this point is North Korea every other one is only communist in name. Those whiny college SJWs aren't close to power and they betrayed economic issues for cultural issues.

>capitalism works better than anything else ever thought of.

Having a high IQ is what matters.

>>134842876
>The concept does not equate to the model. Simply because the idea that welfare was needed to satiate the underclass happened to be adopted by The West that doesn't mean that the same model was used elsewhere.
But I have been referring to the concept exclusively.

>The welfare model in the US is vastly different from the modern European counterparts
I'm well aware.

>the modern European counterparts are mere shadows of what they were in the 1800s
How so?

>you can't admit that he current welfare states in The West are not only wholly different from each other
I don't recall saying otherwise.

>are also corruptly utilized to supply large scale cheap labor and malleable underprivileged minds to economies looking to enrich themselves at the top only
And again, I don't recall saying otherwise.

>>134843161
Having a high iq is what matters?
For the person drawing up the new system or like was that just off the cuff like "hey chicken is pretty good"
Or are you insinuating that there is a political economic system that has been theorized that is better than capitalism.
Also of your politics is corrupt then don't vote for those politicians. Don't vote for trump or Hillary.
Don't vote for politicians who will not enforce or introduce policy. Don't vote for Hillary or trump. Unless you also want to uproot democracy.
If you want that then you are a lost cause.

>>134843198
>But I have been referring to the concept exclusively.
Your problem is that you are conflating the two. You saying that the welfare state was created by conservatives ignores completely the numerous welfare states not created by conservatives. Just because the first "modern" welfare state was initiated by von Bismarck it does not make him the progenitor of the welfare state of the US or Canada.

>How so?
The welfare states of Europe in the 1800s were enacted as backchain supports for the industrializing and developing nations at the time. We are fully industrialized and modernized at this point and the risk of masses of starving and jobless people is but a fart in the wind. The modern welfare states are the playthings of ideologues and "virtuous" bannermen looking to fix social issues they see as problems. They're a fucking joke.

>>134833645
I think the term you're looking for is leftist, not liberal.

>>134833645
I'm a socialist but not socially liberal at all.

>>134843867
No, what I mean is that having a high IQ regardless of economic system will typically indicate if a country does well or not. It's the reason why Norway is livable but Congo isn't.

>Or are you insinuating that there is a political economic system that has been theorized that is better than capitalism.

Yes the third position.

>>134843895
>You saying that the welfare state was created by conservatives ignores completely the numerous welfare states not created by conservatives.
I am simply pointing out that the concept is not inherently leftist, and arguably has a conservative basis (undermining communists and socialists).

>Just because the first "modern" welfare state was initiated by von Bismarck it does not make him the progenitor of the welfare state of the US or Canada.
I said that the notion of the welfare state undermining the left originated with him/conservatives.

>We are fully industrialized and modernized at this point and the risk of masses of starving and jobless people is but a fart in the wind.
But the risk of poor people turning to radical ideologies is still alive and well, at least in the U.S.
Creature comforts and ideology have done a decent job of keeping people complacent, but I don't want to rely on that, particularly when many people seem to desire some sort of radical political change.

>The modern welfare states are the playthings of ideologues and "virtuous" bannermen looking to fix social issues they see as problems.
Well I certainly believe that some "social issues" are problems when they go unaddressed.
I don't know if that makes me a so-called "virtuous bannerman".

>>134841923
>>134842093
Race realism, is reality. Just putting that out there.
Calling him pseudointellectual aside any condescension, "This looks like this," does Not also necessarily mean "this Works like that" as the poster pointed out.
The welfare states of today do indeed seem to be adopted for, and being tweaked, adapted and maintained to fund a large incoming influx of non-core western populations. Populations such as refugees and latin american beaners, some cases Chinese such as in Australia I imagine.
Whatever Bismark's schemes and structure, I doubt it was for the same intentions or goals, and adopted similarities in structure aside, it is not pseudo-anything to point out the irrelevancy of the comparisons of said systems, when the contrasts, actually matter.

>>134844357
Yeah I would generally agree on that first part.
But what's the third position? A compromise between capitalism and Marxism?
If so id say that why can't we build on each idea. Why can't we amend capitalism or Marxism to our ideals. That being said we know capitalism through and though and it's much easier to forge into our ideal system as opposed to a Marxist model that has only ever failed and ended in a crazy amount of bloodshed of countrymen.
This post ultimately rhetorical tho because we've been going back and forth for over an hour and I need to sleep.

Good thread though. Good discussion not regularly found on /pol/

>>134845043
>Race realism, is reality. Just putting that out there.
What did he mean by this?

>The welfare states of today do indeed seem to be adopted for, and being tweaked, adapted and maintained to fund a large incoming influx of non-core western populations.
I can't speak for Europe, but I don't see this being the case with American social services.
Latin American immigrants are utilized as cheap, exploitable labor.

>>134845372

Agreed especially since mods regularly delete substantive discussions in favor of NIGGER HATE THREAD and TOPIC X FOR THE THIRTIETH TIME TODAY

>>134845405
First portion, that was more for the other quoted poster.

Second portion, you are indeed a leftist, anon.
It strikes me. Yes. Latin Americans are utilized as cheap, exploitable labor.
They are also utilized, as future voting blocks.
The same applies for middle easterners in Europe.
Demographic polling, and the continued history of legislation, indeed as well the language, phrasing, everything, shows this clearly;
the political left, wishes to grant amnesty to foreigners, because they will vote for their candidates and ideology when they gain the ability to do so.
Thus all the debates for amnesty, and the rest.
You? As I said. You're a leftist. Your mind is on... Walmart or Monsanto or... That essentially, solely, and them paying Pedro $5hr.

The political right's mind in all this, is on the fact of how much social services these immigrants are going and are dipping into, how the nation itself is going to change when they gain rights to vote, and the future of people, people meaning both their immediate children and simply their heritage in general, the future of those that are already here.
That is what the right thinks about in all this.
You are not wrong in what you're saying, but I were to speak for the right, I can't though I'm still going to, I would say your view is... very limited in comparison to what they're thinking about.
There's more to it than that.

>>134833645
I want an open source computer program that is checked by everyone and unhackable to distribute wealth and distribute it and keep track of people according to a level up system so we can turn life into a videogame. People don't bitch when they get rewards for quests in games. If only we had a fully electronic economy. People just want fairness.

>>134846446
But all of this has virtually nothing to do with my initial point that the welfare state was originally created to undermine the left wing.
I would consider myself a liberal, or perhaps a social democrat.
My mind is on doing what I think is necessary to maintain and preserve a liberal democratic society as ideologies like fascism and socialism grow in popularity.

>>134846885
Is that suppose to like, be a point that makes you feel better? Do you want it? Okay. Bismark did a thing. It doesn't really make me change mindset about anything, so okay. Bismark gave gibs so commies had less propaganda, I guess.

You know what might help with the fascism thing? If white people didn't feel like they were being displaced, in demographics and political power.
Huge changes in demographics, and focus on identity politics, and they have made strides, is very much the cause of the rise of these sentiments.

I never felt I'd be sympathizing with fascism, either. Why, my Indiana Jones and such. My egalitarianism.
Yet, here I am.The Cis scum, patriarchal, wall building, helicopter ride liking, identity-growing right solidifying, libertarianism-shrinking reactionary himself. Thinking over how the 14 words and a political correction in things, are starting to not look all that bad. Necessary even.
It happens.

File: 64e.jpg (21KB, 680x681px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 680x681px

>>134837539
>Safe space
>Thinks this is r*ddit

>>134847871
>Is that suppose to like, be a point that makes you feel better?
No, it's an explanation of how one not need to be a socialist to support a welfare state.

>Bismark gave gibs so commies had less propaganda, I guess.
This is the same reason I support a welfare state, which is why we're having this conversation in the first place.

>You know what might help with the fascism thing?
Economic reform.

>If white people didn't feel like they were being displaced, in demographics and political power.
Education reform too.