>Why is any of this bad tho??
Bad for whom? Good for whom?
>>548131It's good for everyone.
>>548131Does /leftypol/ have any defense against classical liberalism?
>>548129>free market and laissez-faire economicsthis part
>>548143So free markets are.. bad? How?
>>548137Go to booru and search adam_smith.
People often mock "classical neoliberals" for not really reading their own theory.
Much of marxist economic analysis is based on authors like ricardo and adam smith, marx and engel improved the theory. Is that simple
>>548145yes, you could even say that they are… le bad
>>548147>>548148>>548149So why do mainstreamers (who are mostly boomer voters) use Smith as an example for their ideology when he was against richboomer landlording?
>>548153That is the funny part
>>548129>Why is any of this bad tho??Liberalism is progressive when compared to feudalist monarchy. Liberal revolutionareis deserve all the credit and admiration they get. Socialist argue that they are more progressive than liberals who let the revolution half way without equality or brotherhood.
>>548132Its bad for proletarians but petit-porkies and very fat porkies are happy with the current system.
Imagine viewing politics in terms of 'good/bad' or thinking in abstract terms like 'freedom' 😂😂😂😂
>>548158Most spooked shit fr, not thinking in terms of class interests.
>>548137Why? It's a dead and extinct ideology.
>>548145Individuals should not own private property, but only companies; and companies should be limited to how much wealthy they can acquire and accumulate. Also, only companies registered locally can hold real-estate and financial assets in the country, thus if a company want access to certain domestic market it has to pay taxes just like any other business in the country.
>>548153Because people dont read adam smith
They just think he is the "capitalist guy"
I say he is the "free trade" guy who is implicitly anticapitalist
It's called classical for a reason.
Liberalism was revolutionary when it killed Kings, destroyed the feudal lords, wiped out all the restrictions on trade and all that jazz. It won, in other words, and after winning it became the ideology of the new ruling class.
It's been superseded by the development of the proletariat and communism on the one hand and the extinction of free market capitalism on the other. Liberalism now is nothing more than justification for the rule of monopoly capital, state suppression of the working class, etc
>>548129>free market and laissez-faire economics Results in huge inequalities and the domination of a property-owning class. Not even more efficient or productive than more interventionist market economies. No way to correct market failures, no way to provide public goods, and no way to provide for the needs of people who don't receive factor payments.
>civil liberties under the rule of lawThis is actually good.
>individual autonomyI don't know what they mean by this.
>limited governmentUnable to provide the menagerie of very useful things the government does. We need public infrastructure, education, social programs, national parks, libraries, and a million other things.
>economic freedomlol
>freedom of speechThis is mostly a good thing.
>>548250Capitalism's inequality doesnt come from a free market though, it comes from capitalism's class origins via bourgeois appropriation, which marx calls primitive accumulation.
Also limited government is a flexible term. What people tend to mean is that the government shouldnt intefere in people's private lives. Infrastructure and public services by comparison dont intrude upon "the private" except by contrivance.
I'll give you can example. A local pub was building a fence on its property. Suddenly the council (who are functionally useless and corrupt) stepped in and tried to demolish the construction done since it wasnt properly regulation and/or taxed.
This is the government getting in your business (literally) while they let potholes accumulate.
> Why are you not a neo-monarchism? Don't you know that kings were the progressive force and liberated the people from the patricians of the ancient times? The monarchists killed all the patricians and liberated all the plebeians, they are our guys! The kings and queens are the wholesome chungus good guys, and if you don't like them, you are a reactionary.
>>548220Syndicalism is the only solution for that, I do not support Bolshevism (it has nothing to do with communism , and everything to do with corruption , dystopia and elitism/tribalism). The employees own companies, instead of bankers, and they will support themselves by increasing wages, saving up money collectively for sabbaticals, invest in new employees’ education of the trade, pensions, social benefits, transportation etc. The only way bankers can own shares— also, for limited predetermined periods—is bu providing liquidity in form of debt to these kind of organizations— to protect their interests , or investment. Everything has to be fair and everyone treated rightly; and exploitation eliminated, worldwide by fighting jewish malignant globalism.
Unique IPs: 14