• davel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Liberalism has a definition, which Marxists have never forgotten, though thanks to two red scares and a cold war, others have forgotten. Now in Orwellian fashion, “liberalism” and “socialism” are floating signifiers, so we have liberals like Sanders calling themselves socialists despite never calling for the abolition of private ownership of the means of production.

    Slavery did end under liberalism, but then again liberalism started it.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Lol I’m sure Prolewiki is an unbiased source that the majority of people would agree with on the definitions of words. /s

      • Alsephina@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Where did he say that the majority of people agree with this definition?

        Well, the majority of workers in the US probably did, until the labor movements were crushed in the 60s and 70s

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          If the majority of people don’t agree on the proposed meaning of a word then that isn’t what the words mean. In other words, it is wrong.

          • Alsephina@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            It’s a materialist/Marxist definition, hence the

            Because Marxists are like seen-this-one

            https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Fascism

            All successful labor movements and mass organizations in the past have included teaching others how things work, handing out pamphlets, etc.

            And so we can choose to act towards restoring definitions to words with important meanings, so that we become capable of discussing the things they signify again.

            If we don’t use words as they mean, but instead use unorthodox terminology, then we allow the significance of such words to be lost, with no standardized alternatives in common use - i.e., no alternatives that are any more clear than the original word.

            There is a war on language. It’s primarily a subset of the class war. We can surrender, or fight what is probably the simplest fight of our life: We can use words as they were meant to be used.

            • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 months ago

              Yeah, I’m glad you’re slowly starting to comprehend the conversation. I’m informing you that making up definitions for words is wrong and is the source of confusion when you try and fail to converse with others.