Why do people choose fascism and socialism over liberalism? It's more than evident that this philosophy is responisble for all the prosperity and freedom we enjoy today.
In the western world, nobody except for autists has since the Great Depression. Even the parties calling themselves socialist have no intention of seizing the means of production or abolishing private property.
You happen to be browsing a well disguised support group for the spectrum disorders.
CAN'T SPELL SCHISM WITHOUT ISM, HUH
>>1076872
>You happen to be browsing a well disguised support group for the spectrum disorders.
At last I truly see
>>1076872
this desu
Liberalism isn't do much a cohesive ideological program as it is a set of secular humanist values and guiding principles. It does not propose a fundamental organization to society and economic life in the way fascism or socialism does.
Liberalism is simply a byword for a civil and ethical social order in which the values of toleration, equality, and freedom of thought and expression are promoted. These values can exist in many more specific socioeconomic builds.
Even most conservatives embrace liberalism, if unknowingly. That's because liberalism has so thoroughly raised the bar and transformed the political landscape that it's basic assumptions are no considered unalienable and unquestionable norms for mainstream political life.
Liberalism is so engrained, in fact, that you are a "reactionary" if you act in ways that go against its fundamental assumptions, because in doing so you are going against the bedrock founding principles of western democratic societies.
When liberalism is abused and its freedoms become empty words, it has to be corrected. Socialists want to eliminate liberalism by bringing capital under the control of the state or eliminate it altogether. Fascists want to bring capital itself into the body of the nation, but don't want to liquidate the owners of the means of production.
People go with fascism and socialism because liberalism has no moral spine, beyond an appreciation of freedom. Without a population that comprehends virtue, this appreciation is easily turned into abuse. Hence, the need for correction, when no community can ever fully comprehend virtue.
>>1076856
All three of them are disgusting Enlightenment Totalitarianism that reduces man to a cog in a mechanical machine.
Because people born and raised in first world countries have not felt real tyranny and we havent felt it for a very long time.
>>1076856
The only reason we have any liberalism at all is because of the Leviathan that is Western society. Without such a powerful society and powerful governments, we'd be self conscious about other societies matching ours and we wouldn't be nearly as liberal.
>>1076964
>the Leviathan that is Western society.
Society isn't a Leviathan, though, the state is, you fucking idiot
>>1076976
Man, stop being so edgy. It's only going to give you a heart attack.
>>1076992
Stop being so dumb, it's only going to give everyone around you an aneurysm
>>1077000
the bantz
>>1076976
I'd argue that Western culture is a Leviathan in its own right, which is why we are fine with other cultures coming to the US and blending with ours. Our culture is so strong it will never die. Our governments are a part of our society I would say, stop being an asshole. I even said government in addition to society.
Because when the retards in power start fucking over their countries beyond repair, all in the name of "liberalism" and "tolerance," they force the formerly moderate people to choose one extreme or the other to make their voice heard.
Look at all historical fascistic dictatorships. All of them were born because the former government listened more to what noisy minorities wanted than what the average Joe wanted. And as a result, Average Joe can't get his voice heard unless he puts down his voter registration card and picks up a machine gun.
>>1077040
Are you familiar with Hobbes' theories? "Leviathan" is kind of a technical term that exactly does not refer to civil society.
>stop being an asshole
Why did you post a Hobbes picture and use the word "Leviathan?" He didn't mean anything like what you're describing when he used that word. Read a book.
>>1077077
Average joe could just vote
>>1077096
You clearly are not familiar with the book or the subsequent work philosophers have extrapolated from the book. Yeah maybe he didn't say that societies could be Leviathans but you can easily transpose his concept of a Leviathan to societies.
>>1077077
>all fascist dictatorships were born because the government listened more to minorities than to what the average joe wanted
And what did the Average Joe want? From what I remember, the Nazis were elected by the majority.
>>1077299
>And what did the Average Joe want?
not to be punished for sibling rivalry
>>1077123
>Yeah maybe he didn't say that societies could be Leviathans but you can easily transpose his concept of a Leviathan to societies.
How about you explain how instead of just saying that you can? Because I don't think you understand the distinction between state and civil society as Hobbes lays it out, and if you do I still don't get why you posted a picture of Hobbes when you're making a completely un-Hobbesian point.
>>1077077
>being this unironically American
Lockian liberalism =/= SJW shit
>>1077620
There's hardly a difference. Once you let society run loose, people will abuse their freedom.
>>1077627
True. But SJWs are opposed to freedom.
>>1077614
I was using "society" to mean something like "culture." And cultures as a whole can very much be Leviathans. A cultural-Leviathan, if you will. Hobbes talks about different types of Leviathans, namely he talks about a religious Leviathan and a state Leviathan. So what I am doing is extrapolating his concept of a Leviathan to culture. That is, I am saying Western culture is a Leviathan in that it is so much more influential (culture's synonym for "powerful") than other cultures. This is relevant to the discussion because Liberalism and/or freedom is allowed in most Western societies because these Western nations are not afraid of other cultures overthrowing their own as the dominant culture. If Western culture wasn't the most influential, I very strongly believe that the West would be more controlling and suppressive of other cultures. I did not mean to talk about a Hobbesian idea of civil society. Apologies for the confusion.
Thanks Obama
>>1077632
But they use the defence of freedom as justification to oppose it, don't underestimate the power of double-think.
>>1077627
How's that abusing freedom?
Unless government gets invovled, it's all good.
The citizens are fucking retarded inbred lead poisoned degenerate leeching traitors.
Tyranny of the majority.
>>1076872
This post gave me a giggle. Thanks, m8
>>1076856
>Why do people choose fascism and socialism over liberalism?
They don't. Liberalism has won. If people want a Conservative society they can join the mennonites and if someone wants a socialist one they can join a commune. Liberalism affords them that freedom. That said people don't becuse liberal societies are superior.
>>1077000
You are terrible.
>>1077884
I'm even worse than you think
>>1077855
If they were liberals (in the traditional sense), they would care about it.
And was the price of freedom worth it?
>>1078081
Yes, why?
>>1078081
