>>2186
…that doesn't really have anything to do with liberty. I mean, you could debate it panders to the framework of social liberalism (the most progressive minor segment of the Democrat party) rather than liberal conservatism (most of the Democrats and most of the Republicans). So technically you could call it liberal, but so is the entire Libertarian Party by definition, most of the Republicans and a most of the Democrats. So it's a useless word within USA politics, even if USA citizens misuse it constantly to refer to progressivism and social justice.
I would like to take this opportunity to add that the left-right spectrum is garbage. No, I'm not saying ideologies are the same, I'm saying that putting them on any single arbitrary spectrum is a horrendously counter-productive, inaccurate and idealistic model of understanding them, and even worse that the definitions of 'left' and 'right' vary from person to person, country to country because its not a real word, it was a seating position in France two centuries ago.
Picrel, because screencaps are More Readable than actual historical books on liberalism or even basic wikipedia articles amirite.
