• deathtoreddit
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 months ago

    He’s liberal in that he’s pro-capitalist and pro-oligarch (as long as they don’t joust with him directly)…

    • toomanyjoints69
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Are you absolutely certain that is the definition of liberalism? I am potentially under the misconception of what the definition is. I have been assuming for a long time that liberal meant an advocate for liberal democracy such as Norway, France, USA, or Mexico. For example, a Fascist like Mussolini would not be a liberal despite supporting both Capitalism and Oligarchs. If Putin is a Liberal, then why is Mussolini not a Liberal, or is he one?

      • deathtoreddit
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        liberal meant an advocate for liberal democracy such as Norway, France, USA, or Mexico.

        Think about it, for a sec, that liberalism, more or less, generally describes the current ideology of capitalism, even while it changes and diverges between different groups…

        For example, the same people, shown to be the forerunners of liberalism, the classical liberals, such as Thomas Jefferson and Edmund Burke, clearly only agreed on property relations, democracy and class interests, but on the latter half which they focused on, they diverge, due to differing local class interests…

        Edmund Burke, though pro-liberal representative democracy and anti-slavery, condemned the French Revolution, despite its progressive liberal and bourgeois stance, due to its anti-aristocratic and anti-monarchial nature that might indirectly lead to the destruction of such propertied interests (the old riches, so to speak)

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke#Representative_democracy

        Whereas Thomas Jefferson condoned, if not supported the French Revolution, due to its same progressive liberal bourgeois stance and republicanism, and its opposition to British interests that threatened both U.S and Revolutionary France (though the former would later outshadow UK in its atrocities)

        You can say similarly between Russia and U.S.A, though I presume Russia to be more influenced by its Soviet past to not easily let go of any essential publicly-owned oil and military assets…

        However, the emphasis on property relations isn’t necessarily on land and industry anymore, as much as it is on industry-based Russia vs finance-based American and Europe… though the two things (industry and finance) aren’t mutually exclusive