you don't have to be a big fan of western liberalism to recognize that it stands atop a pile of the corpses of ideologies it has defeated
You're conflating the inability of leftists to correctly guage liberalism's staying power (an ongoing problem) with describing liberalism's moral valence. Given the fact that liberalism literally stands atop millions of actual corpses, I think they're a bit closer to the mark on the latter.
Name three of its albums tho , bet you can’t .
I dunno, it seems like since about 1980 it has had a losing record unless we’re using a broad definition that includes Reagan and Thatcher. My major immediate beef with gradualism is that it has to win a whole lot to work and it just doesn’t. It’s always on the back foot making compromises.
Neocolonialism, an underdog story.
relatedly, there is an incredibly grim irony to the modern guillotine-emoji folks---the guillotine of 1793 was first and foremost a weapon of liberalism against _all_ of its enemies---royalist, reactionary, constitutional-monarchist, _and leftist_
Shit won 2 world wars, yeah there’s more nuance than that but for the average Joe, Tommy, or Pierre I’d say it’s a fair ideological descriptor
It's a side effect of capitalism, which is still a "brand new" development in terms of world history. Change is happening, but the time-frame is generations to lifetimes, which isn't satisfyingly fast to us, but it is there. Gen-Z MUST see an end to wild-west capitalism, `cuz they can't have houses
Marxists should recognize the Hegelian implications of its continued dominance after the passing of at least nominally marxist states