Can someone define "liberal" (in its use as an insult) for me?

Submitted ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨Hereforpron2@lemmynsfw.com⁩ to ⁨nostupidquestions@lemmy.world⁩

For the longest time, “liberal” seemed like it basically just meant “Democrat” the same way “conservative” has/had been used to mean “Republican.” Now, it seems like it means “bad Democrat” and is even worse than being MAGA the way many seem to use it. Where did its use as an insult within the [relative] political left come from, and what does it specifically accuse/identify someone of/as?

source

Comments

Sort:hotnew top

db2@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
It means “anyone who doesn’t immediately agree with anything I say/repeat” in magaspeak.

source
- ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  I think OP’s question is about why parts of the Democratic coalition are hostile to those they call liberals, not about why Republicans are hostile to Democrats.
  
  source
  - cabbage@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    If a self-proclaimed "part of the Democratic coalition" is dismissing whatever arguments you make by weirdly comparing you to John Locke as a slur, chances are they are they are not, in fact, part of the Democratic coalition. The fact that they are borrowing their slurs from the conventional fascists should be telling enough.
    
    They might even share employer.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - XeroxCool@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Because something that gets lost in the two party system is that, at its core, there’s the conservative side trying to make things best for their majority group and then there’s a dozen different types of liberals trying to make the world better in their direction. One side wants to revert back, one “side” is pulling in a hundred different directions. Should we tackle education first? Financial responsibility? Human rights? Social safety nets? Pollution? Climate change? National interest? Global interest? There’s so many different topics that liberals want to progress forward in an order each individual determines. It’s not a single liberal force, it’s a hundred forces in a trench coat. Conservatives (of any country or topic) are some kind of incumbent majority/dominating demographic while the alternatives all fall under “liberal”. So the only thing that consistently unifies the democrats is what they don’t like
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- barsquid@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Funny how it means the same thing in .ml instances.
  
  source
JimSamtanko@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Using liberal as a derogatory says far more about the person saying it, than it does about those they say it about.

source
- enbyecho@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  ^ perfect answer, IMO.
  
  source
kersploosh@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
I think others have answered your question better than me, but I’ll chip in my two cents anyway.

The definition depends on who is saying it.

Within mainstream US politics, Republicans use “liberal” as a catch-all pejorative for any person or group further to the left of themselves. It is usually aimed at Democrats but could also refer to Greens, communists, etc.

The irony is that, in a broader political context, Republicans are very much liberals, too. People outside the US political mainstream who sneer about “liberals” are usually referring to this larger group, which basically encompasses the capitalist status quo in the “western” world.

source
MyDogLovesMe@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Basically it says to me “Fuck your for being/showing/reminding me that you are smarter/more informed/more reasoned/more compassionate than me!”

Same applies to “woke”.

It’s how it’s said that speaks volumes.

source
ShepherdPie@midwest.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
It’s an insult in the US because the liberals in the Democratic party are considered to be on the right side of the political spectrum. Today’s liberals are seen as pushing the same stuff Republicans were pushing in the era of Reagan and Bush. Progressives in the party don’t really get much of a voice therefore they disparage the liberals that keep pushing the Overton window further and further right.

source
- LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  This is really just factually inaccurate though. Modern liberals are actually further to the left than they were during the bush era, and are nowhere near as far right as the bush administration. (not sure about Reagan because that was before my time but I suspect it was similar). Democrats during that era were just coming off of the very centrist Clinton administration, and have gradually been moving left ever since.
  
  The difference is the people criticizing liberals have become much more numerous and moved much further to the left than core democrats. Which is largely a good thing but I think it would help them be more strategic if they actually understood these things clearly.
  
  source
- cabbage@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Genuinely useful. I keep getting called a liberal online as a slur whenever I discuss politics, mostly by the accounts of people who could very well have been on a Russian payroll but are probably just deranged.
  
  I was wondering what the fuck they were on about.
  
  source
  - GBU_28@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Those types are fun. If pressed on LGBTQ issues, you’ll see the “progressive” front start to crack
    
    source
- Hereforpron2@lemmynsfw.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Gotcha, so it means fake leftists almost? Does it imply someone is even further right than a current “centrist”? Or more like, “the center is right wing at this point, and so much so that even the Dems who are just left of center are still on the right [but therefore less than centrists still]”? This is not meant to be obstinate, your response was just very helpful and I want to bracket in on where folks consider liberals to be on the political spectrum so I can understand/use it properly.
  
  source
  - ShepherdPie@midwest.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    You might look up the term “neoliberalism” as I think there is a lot of overlap with the information you’re seeking and those who would be called liberal perjoratively.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Sigh, I’ll wade into this river of shit.

Liberalism is broadly understood as neoliberalism, which is an ideological descendant from classical liberalism. This ideology positions itself as being broadly in favour of individual freedom within a rather tight definition of freedom. Namely liberals are concerned with the ability of people to read what they like, own what they like, marry whomever they like and so on provided they do this inside of a system of capitalist free market exchange.

Modern liberalism tends to frown on heavy government intervention in market affairs, which they see as representing the free (and thus good) exchange of goods between individuals. They also tend to be broadly in favour of the militaristic western global hegemony.

Criticism of this attitude comes from 2 places.

too much freedom.

not enough freedom.

(1) is people that want women bound up in the kitchen and walk around with an odd gate that makes you remember Indiana Jones films

(2) are people (I’m in this camp) who see liberalism as a weak ideological position that favours stability over justice and, in so doing, ignores the suffering of billions.
source
- jol@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Doesn’t the problems of the free market also fall in problem 1? The free market has been shown to not actually be self regulating, which is a sign of too much freedom.
  
  source
  - naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Reactionary ideologies are incoherent.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- Anticorp@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  
  Liberalism is broadly understood as neoliberalism
  
  By whom?
  
  source
  - naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    … everyone? hence my use of broadly? It has complete and utter ideological hegemony since like the 70s. If you study economics you study neoliberal economics and they don’t even bother specifying. All major political parties in the anglosphere and most of western Europe follow neoliberal ideology, even the green-left is largely neoliberal. There are basically no classical liberals left.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- erev@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  freedom means occasionally you have to fight to defend that freedom and what it means to you. the stability of neoliberalism lulls the masses into placidity and complacency
  
  source
  - naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    I think it’s tempting to try and be pithy but freedom is complicated. For some people freedom is an absolute, do what you want when you want. For some it is about theoretical possibilities, for example if you ask if people are free to quit there job the answer heavily depends on how someone balances theory vs practice. Others take a practical lens, freedom only counts if it’s plausible to do.
    
    Sometimes freedom is about ideals. you are free to read all the political theory you like, you umm wont because it’s boring but if someone threatened that would you be upset? At other junctures freedom because pragmatic, “what use is freedom to read if I don’t have freedom to eat? I’ll trade one for the other” someone might say.
    
    Some people rate permissions more than restrictions, some the opposite.
    
    I don’t think it’s a concept we can really pin down. Everyone has their own interpretation and it’s not universally values: much as dominant ideologies often insist it is, the rise of fascism should hint that others care much less about it.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
Cuberoot@lemmynsfw.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Phil Ochs says it better than I can:

In every American community there are varying shades of political opinion. One of the shadiest of these is the liberals. An outspoken group on many subjects, ten degrees to the left of center in good times, ten degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally.

The issues have changed slightly from the 1960s, but his song’s accusations of hypocrisy and NIMBYism among those who publicly espouse progressive causes still hit close enough to home.

source
- cabbage@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  I think a big part of the problem is that liberalism dates back to the 17th century, and western civilisation is kind of built on top of it.
  
  As a result it could fit pretty much anywhere on the political spectrum. I consider myself pretty leftist, but of course I'm a fucking liberal. I take issue with inheritance and I believe in taxing billionaires out of existence, but that's completely consistent with liberalism. And so is disagreeing with me.
  
  I guess a central thing about liberalism is refusing patriarchalism, which would explain why the stalinists and the trumpists alike get upset by it.
  
  source
- Hereforpron2@lemmynsfw.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Ahh that’s interesting, so the issue is as much having a conveniently shifting position as it is a further-right-than-progressives static position. Thanks a ton, that helps me understand a lot!
  
  source
  - Archelon@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Basically liberalism tends to be capitalist, whereas leftism tends to be anticapitalist. Historically, there’s been a pattern of centrists and capitalist allying with authoritarians and fascists against leftists, so the insult boils down to “you’d support a fascist before you went against capitalism”
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- theilleists@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Love Me, I’m a Liberal
  
  Inspired by Phil Ochs, updated for 2023.
  
  source
BackOnMyBS@lemmy.autism.place ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
I’m not really into this stuff, but from what I can tell, liberal became an insult purely because conservatives wanted to label liberals as inferior. That’s about it. Some leftists also use liberal as an insult, though to a lesser extreme.

How conservatives use it, liberal means someone that is too sensitive, accommodating, weak, and evil (especially in Christian terms).

How leftists use it, liberal means uneducated, hypocritical, insufficient, and turncoat/traitor.

source
- cabbage@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  So when self-proclaimed leftists use as a slur it's not even in relation to support for private property rights?
  
  I guess, if you're a proper communist, you could use liberal as a category of leftists who don't want to abolish property rights. As for the far right crowd, it could be a slur for anyone who doesn't want to abolish all other rights.
  
  source
  - homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    They use bougie for that
    
    source
DarkThoughts@fedia.io ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
The epitome of Shit Americans Say.

source
- homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Never in real life though, only on The Intertoons.
  
  source
Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
There are a lot of solid answers, but it’s good to remember that the US definition of a liberal, seems to be very different from the international definition. So, remember to keep context in mind, and whether it’s coming from an American or not.

source
- cabbage@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  As a non-American with political science training, I think this is key to why I have found this particularly baffling.
  
  It's like if you were having a casual conversation about pretty much anything and some overgrown child suddenly jumps in and starts screaming you're a filthy deontologist. Like, uhm, sure, but I'm not sure how that's relevant, and I also somehow doubt you know what that word means.
  
  source
  - Nemo@midwest.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Deontology is bankrupt as an ethical philosophy tho
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
[deleted]
source
- LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  I respect Nate Silver’s analysis when it comes to polling but I don’t think his divisions of the modern left make a lot of sense. Frankly, I think the left wing is way too fractured to make these types of generalizations about. He’s accurately describing at least some people on the left. But what proportion of the progressive/far left coalition does this actually apply to? To me it seems to be just one faction among several.
  
  Perhaps I am biased because I don’t really fit into the categories he has outlined, nor do most people I know. But it seems like a huge oversimplification (and a mildly demeaning one at that).
  
  source
  - ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Silver’s descriptions of what I think and of what the people who disagree with me appear to be thinking seem correct to me, but of course I know myself better that I know people who disagree with me. I think it would be interesting to have a leftist post about the division from his side’s point of view.
    
    (I’m also not claiming that these two factions are the entirety of the Democratic party. There are others, such as religious socially conservative black people who nonetheless reliably vote for the Democrats. I just think that the idea of “liberal” as an insult is driven by the conflict between these two factions.)
    
    source
- Hereforpron2@lemmynsfw.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Very helpful, thank you!
  
  source
Deceptichum@quokk.au ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Liberalism is a right wing ideology, which because America is so right shifted is seen as left in their country or at least a counterpoint to conservatism when they’re basically the same thing - deregulate, don’t tax, “free market” capitalist nonsense that’s destroying the world

source
masquenox@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Leftists have always despised liberalism - and for pretty damn obvious reasons for anyone that has a basic understanding of what left and right actually means. Liberalism is a right-wing ideology that upholds capitalism, colonialism and white supremacism, all while having a recurring habit of enabling and supporting fascism at the drop of a hat when the precious liberal order is threatened by change from below.

So yeah - as far as leftists are concerned, the term liberal is as much of an insult as the term fascist is. There is even an old leftist saying, “kill the liberal inside your head” which sums up pretty nicely what leftists think of liberals and liberalism.

source
- 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Liberalism is just letting people do what they want so long as it doesn’t interfere with letting people doing what they want
  
  Support gay marriage? That’s liberal Support corporations paying people 30¢ per hour? That’s liberal
  Support people having access to HRT? That’s liberal
  Support people owning guns? That’s liberal
  Support unrestricted immigration and trade? That’s liberal
  
  The problem is it doesn’t fit in with the US definition of “left” and “right” - it’s economically far right but socially far left, and most Americans just cannot understand that
  
  source
- jol@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Liberalism is only considered “left” in the US because it the republican party is too far right and there’s only 2 parties.
  
  source
andrewta@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
I was going to try to explain it then I made the mistake of reading the complete insanity in the comments. Think I’ll just move on. Hopefully you get your answer.

source
TachyonTele@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
I was told by hexbear that it means anyone in the west.

source
- cabbage@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  I mean... yeah, probably. John Locke is influential as fuck.
  
  source
Ziggurat@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Right winger who support economic liberalism. Indeed, on Lemmy it’s seen like an insult

source
satanmat@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
In the USA. As others in the thread have said…

It is meant to ”other” — “You” are a good person, loves your Mama; loves Jesus and America too… ( miss you Tom Petty)

But “they” are other… those dang coastal elites they are latte sipping LIBERALS and hate everything about you.

It identifies them as wanting to take everything away from you. They don’t love Jesus , not the way you do. They want EVs forced on everyone. Etc

source