American political ideology as a whole has shifted left in recent years, but women are becoming even more liberal, according to Gallup.

The survey data, released Wednesday, shows that while the country remains largely center-right, the percentage of those identifying as or leaning liberal has increased over the past three decades, and is now just 1 percent under it’s all-time high.

Roughly 36 percent of adults identify as conservative, 25 percent as liberal and the rest identify as either moderate or unsure, according to the poll.

When broken down by gender ideology, women in the youngest and oldest age groups said they were more likely to identify as liberal.

Women ages 18-29 were 40 percent more likely to be liberal in 2023, a slight decrease from 41 percent in 2022 and 44 percent in 2020, but still higher than the 30 percent in 2013. Those ages 65 and older were 25 percent more likely to identify as liberal — a slight increase from the 21 percent reported in 2013.

  • cum@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 months ago

    Because if you’re even remotely educated on what’s going on, you’d realize republicans are just objectively evil. They are not even a political party. If anything, liberals are right wing, and republicans are just devil spawn.

      • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        The party actively working to disenfranchise people who aren’t men is losing the support of people who aren’t men. That bit seems self-explanatory.

        • 52fighters@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Or maybe the divergence of male/female voting has nothing to do with suffrage. Maybe women value social safety nets offered by Democrats or maybe they value the Democrat foreign policy or maybe they just find Donald Trump more repulsive than do men. I can think of a lot of reasons that could explain the divergence that have nothing to do with someone (who, I don’t know) wanting to repeal a woman’s right to vote.

            • 52fighters@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              In the US parties are large coalitions of a lot of different groups an interests and not all of them mesh well together. This is true of the Republican Party and the Democrat Party. To write off the divergence as being explained by upset, uneducated young males who spend a lot of time online seems naive. The population of such males is small and they are an even smaller percentage of the electorate. They might make the difference in a tight election but they do not explain the significant divergence in party association between males and females. Plus the divergence on gender between left and right is not limited to the United States. It is a phenomenon found in many other countries. So there’s a lot more to it than a small demographic in a single nation.

  • orclev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    Weird, it’s almost like electing the pussy grabber in chief turned women off from the Republican party. Strange how that happened. There’s also the whole Roe vs. Wade thing literally killing women.

      • acceptable_pumpkin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yeah, and what do you call a high risk pregnancy that would normally have ended in abortion? Now women are forced to carry the pregnancy (viable or otherwise) to term putting their health and lives at risk.

        Educate yourself on what’s going on before spouting nonsense.

          • Bangs42@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            There are in many states.

            And yet, doctors are still concerned because shit is too vague, so they just… don’t do them for any reason.

            • Econgrad@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              That’s on the doctors and I think it’s political in nature rather than as you described. I’m skeptical that this actually happens frequently.

                • Eldritch@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  It’s almost like this was a healthcare decision. That should have been left between doctors and their patients. Not a bunch of balding fascists.

                • Econgrad@lemmings.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  I’m sorry but that’s in no way an objective source. On this particular social issue, that’s like citing Fox News. I’ll take some local news website or something that lists that sources or best of all the scientific study on the reluctance of doctors to perform abortions.

                  But I will not accept an NPR editorial on abortion as evidence.

                  Also that slogan is not as pithy as you think. Lol. Kind of makes you sound like a wine mom.

              • eskimofry@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                So you want to legislate but don’t want any responsibility for your legislation? Why would anybody give a shit about what you think?

        • Econgrad@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          There should be exceptions for genuine medical life-threatening reasons for abortion. But that represents less than 1% of all abortions.

          • suigenerix@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            They’re separate arguments from your original claim that RvW is not life threatening.

            And while risk of death is fortunately relatively low in the US, it’s only one of the many negative consequences of the repeal.

            Many women survive the birth only to be inflicted with any one of a range of physical medical issues, including life long disability and chronic pain.

            There’s also deep mental issues that arise.

            Likewise, there are the potential negative health concerns for the baby to consider.

            On top of that, there’s all the many socio-economic problems.

            I’m not saying there are easy answers to all this, but I’m not minimizing the issues either.

            • Econgrad@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Because it’s not. It’s extremist state governments that are doing that not the repeal of Roe versus Wade. I attacked the statement because it is a ridiculous statement. The repeal of Roe vs Wade is not killing women.

              It’s not like roe versus Wade automatically equals total abortion bans.

              Most pro-life people accept and support exceptions like rape, incest or when the mother’s health is at risk. It’s only a small minority of pro-life people that don’t believe there should ever be any exceptions. You’re literally arguing against a straw man.

              • eskimofry@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Pro-life itself is anti-freedom. I think pro-lifers should be denied representation in government. If you have a problem with that then you’re just hypocritical. Its the same as not allowing women to have determination over their own bodies.

              • suigenerix@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                It doesn’t matter what the majority wants in regards to your claim of no deaths. That’s just unfullfilled hopes and wishes.

                We’re talking about the reality right now. And the reality is that the repeal has directly given the “extremists” the power to cause more maternal deaths, as you just acknowledged.

                Again, you’re talking about different issues.

          • eskimofry@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I actually think you shouldn’t be allowed to vote; Just like you think women can’t make determinations about their own bodies and somehow you have more care and wisdom than licensed doctors.

            If you have a problem with that you’re a hypocrite.

      • orclev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        A friend of mine was hospitalized due to a pregnancy complication. Fortunately we live in a state where abortion is still legal so they were able to perform an emergency abortion and save her life. She was still hospitalized for a week. If we lived in one of several states where it’s not legal she would have died, no question. The doctor literally told her so. So no, it’s not hyperbole, it has happened, is happening, and will continue to happen as long as abortions are illegal.

        • Econgrad@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          There should always be exceptions for legitimate health issues or when rape or incest result in pregnancy. But that represents 15% or so of all abortions. Most people who are pro-life agree that there should be exceptions for these things. There’s only a very small amount of people that are hardcore fanatics who reject abortion for any reason whatsoever, they’re just very very loud.

          • eskimofry@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            My problem with pro-lifers is you’re all just content to pretend to be the mouth-piece for babies because somehow you think you know better than the person who is carrying said baby.

            Conservatives’ advocacy for preserving life rings hollow when it’s clear they will actively oppose policies beyond birth, like free lunch programs for kids in schools, debt forgiveness for students, and proper sex education with use of contraceptives.

            It’s clear the real goal is to birth future laborers and christian missionaries. Your entire position on pro-life is actually a desperate attempt to preserve a dying religion. You’re devoid of the kindness and love taught by your own God.

            I have no respect for people who pretend to care about preserving life.

            First respect women, then you can respect their fetus: https://midwest.social/post/8438167

          • orclev@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            It doesn’t matter if there should be exceptions because the reality is that in many states today there are no exceptions. Furthermore questions about who decides what constitutes a “legitimate health issue” or not make many doctors in states where there are exceptions hesitant to perform abortions even in cases where they believe it’s in the patients best interest out of fear that it would be deemed not medically necessary after the fact. Even in cases where doctors know a pregnancy is non-viable they delay aborting it until the mother is in critical condition just so that there’s no question that it was an emergency.

          • revelrous@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Show me these exceptions.

            Did we make them Ohio for that ten year old? Are we making them in Texas? Cox was a privileged white lady with means to try the system and ability to seek treatment elsewhere. Do you think people with less will be better advocates for themselves? Apply some goddamn logic.

            You seem to love this idea about the way the world should work to the extent you ignore how it actually runs. Show me the test that indicates a pregnancy is a product of rape. Or will the woman have to wait until the sentencing? (You do understand many many rapes are never reported?) Birth control fails! A big swath of abortions are from married women with kids who just want to best provide for the families they have. So to ‘save’ a fetus we condemn other kids? How does that make any sense to you? Arguments to deny reproductive autonomy are completely illogical.

  • cbarrick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Liberal is still too far right.

    It’s high time we had a strong labor movement in this country.

  • uis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    I need my copy-pasta again:

    American “left”: maybe we shold do some student debt relief? Just a tini-tiny. If you don’t mind.

    Rest of the world right: universal education, more funding!

    Rest of the world center: universal education, state must provide students with everything(including housing and food) so they don’t worry about anything else other than learning, state must provide teachers with everything(including decent salary) so they don’t wory about anything else other than teaching, state must provide universities with all necessary equipment, buildings must be maintained in good condition(so ceiling wouldn’t fall on students’ and teachers’ heads)!

    • 52fighters@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      According to the recent Financial Times article, it isn’t just the US. This is a global phenomenon so it is more than abortion.

    • cabbage@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      They’re probably just about now realizing they should have taken away the right to vote first, the right to self-determination second. Rookie mistake.

    • Econgrad@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Your rights end where another person’s rights begin. An unborn child is a person. And when you have to weigh a trolley problem when the mother’s health is in life-threatening risk it’s a serious thing that you have to consider. Abortion should be legal for situations where the mother’s health is in literal life-threatening risk but even then it’s a very serious choice.

      • fkn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Even if we grant you your invalid position, you are still wrong. So close. You claim the unborn person has rights, but so did the mother.

        In no legal jurisdiction in the United States is one person ever required to give up their bodily autonomy for another. This the mother, according to your argument, is under no legal obligation to provide the other person, according to your argument, the mothers body for any reason. If the mother wishes to discontinue the use of her body she can. If the other person dies as a result of this decision, the mother bears no responsibility.

        This is well understood case law and common law.

        GTFO with this terrible argument.

        • Econgrad@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          It doesn’t matter what the law is. Laws can and should be changed when they’re unjust.

          You’re fundamentally radical and not living on planet Earth that you think this way about pregnancy. It’s the product of a degenerate and corrupt life you’ve lived that has allowed you to justify unjustifiable immorality.

          In other words you’ve burned your conscience to a crisp through your vices.

          It’s an abominable position you put forward. You are wholly given over to vice and darkness and sin.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        An unborn child is a person.

        You realize this is where Democrats fundamentally disagree with you, right?

      • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        A fetus is not a person its a collection of cells. It’s not up to you to weigh any problem. It’s up to the woman and their doctor.

        • Econgrad@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          A human is not a person it’s a collection of cells.

          See how ridiculously reductionist that sounds? And it’s absolutely up to me because I vote and I live in a society that is a democracy. I will vote on issues that matter to me. And you can do the same. So if you want to support policies that murder inconvenient children, most of which are black by the way which is very racist of you, then that’s your choice but I’m not going to support that with my vote or publically in the town square.

          • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            It is a scientific fact. Yo’re going to vote to see what my daughter’s future might be? I think not.

            • Econgrad@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Stating that a collection of cells is not a human being is not a fact.

              Human beings are indeed collections of cells.

              • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                A human being is a collection of cells with self awareness. People have varr6ing degrees of self awareness as you’ve displayed

                • Econgrad@lemmings.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  So people who are in comas are no longer human beings?

                  What about people who are asleep?

                  What about people who are being put under for surgery?

                  I think your definition of human being is bad.

  • cultsuperstar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    They mean to say women don’t want their bodies regulated by men that don’t know a damn thing about how a woman’s body works. Like that fucking idiot Republican politician who’s also veterinarian and said he’s done thousands of ultrasounds on pregnant animals and that makes him an authority on women’s bodies. Like how the fuck do you make that jump in your head?

  • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Well conservatism, especially in the US, is extremely hostile to women, so that makes sense. It’s also hostile to a bunch of other outgroups. And the environment. And truth.

    • Econgrad@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      That’s just nonsense. I don’t agree with the conservative movement either but how is it hostile to women? Let alone extremely hostile.

    • lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Pure anecdote but I think it’s representative of the bigger shitshow Republicans brought upon themselves:

      My MIL voted for Trump in 2016 and was a lifelong Republican. Because she has two daughters and is quite a proponent of strong independent women, after seeing the reversal of Roe and watching The Handmaid’s Tale, she is now fervently anti-Republican.

      After seeing that sudden paradigm shift in beliefs, it gave me a little hope. It also proves yet again that when Republicans actually get to implement the policy they want, it is deeply unpopular.

      • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I mean it’s good that she changed her mind but it’s a little disappointing it took trump and abortion bans for her to connect the dots. Better than nothing I guess.

        • lennybird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          I hear you. Though that just goes to show just how strong entrenched beliefs and the right-wing echo-chambers are. If it was easy to pierce the veil, there’d be no Republicans left.

  • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Does this poll support for left/right policies or just labels?

    I suspect if you properly formulate and frame questions on political issues you’d end up with the US being far left.

    • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Then you’re in a partisan bubble. The US is not even close to far left, I don’t think you could even fake it with leading questions. There are far left people but there are a lot of far right and yet more center-right people too.

    • ApostleO@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      We found the Spiders Georg of liberal women.

      But in all seriousness, how could a woman perceive the conservative agenda and NOT become more liberal in response?!

      Oppression kink?

      • meep_launcher@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        Keep conservatism in the bedroom, I’m sick and tired of them just flaunting their kink in public all the time

  • nexguy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    The United States as a whole has been shifting towards progressive policies since its creation… as has the whole world.

    • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Before its creation, people were much more egalitarian. Native American women could control their own bodies.

      Sure things look good when you start right after the last huge anti-egalitarian shift.

      • nexguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Pre-columbian Americans kept each other as slaves for centuries…at the very least. So the lie that native American women controlled their own bodies is a slap in the face of the countless who were kept as slaves. Egalitarian…hardly.

        • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I said “more” and gave a specific example in which way. The property of there being slavery didn’t change until much later, whereas the Christians immediately made life worse for women who until then controlled their own bodies.

          There is no lie. Why are you trying to catch me in one instead of having a honest discussion?

          • nexguy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            But the women never controlled their own bodies for thousands of years…likely since the first women. There are “fluctuations” where they have more rights for short stretches is time. You could cherry pick specific locations in a specific century of course. For example right now in the entire US, women have fewer rights than 10 years ago (fluctuation) but far more than 100 or more years ago.

                • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  No, it pretty explicitly mentions it, but you should read what I’m writing, not looking for a reason to get worked up.

                  Let me spell it out: losing your bodily autonomy is bad. Therefore it’s bad when there’s slavery or misogyny. And of course it’s worse when there’s both. The fact that (a fraction of) tribes had slavery doesn’t invalidate that they weren’t also misogynist. Unlike the society that followed after, which both had slavery and and believed that a good Christian woman is the property of her man.

                  So read this, then again from picking out an irrelevant detail to nitpick on.

  • karashta@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    The American political system has done nothing but ratchet to the right for about a hundred years.

    It’s so far right that people think liberals are left wing. That shit is center right lmao

    • Pratai@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Liberals/democrats ARE left wing. Always have been. By definition the term is based on seating arrangements during the French Revolution. Democrats have always been considered left wing, just as republicans have been right wing. It’s just that now:.: the tankies think they own the term.

      However- in reality… the FAR LEFT has distanced itself so far from the left wing that it doesn’t even resemble what it began as.

      • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’m sorry friend, any knowledge of history or political science is not allowed on Lemmy. You can choose either edgy leftist fan service or a series of escalating bans.

          • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            I’m banned on Reddit politics and worldnews for posting leftist opinions. Frankly I’m fine with this becoming a leftist echo chamber because I’m not interested in rehashing the same tired arguments over and over again.

            Don’t block strikes. Don’t support genocide. If you don’t need our votes ignore us. If you need our votes you have to listen to us.

            It’s pretty simple stuff really. Take it or leave it.

            • Econgrad@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              That kind of attitude leads to totalitarianism. You need robust debate for a democracy to actually succeed.

              Furthermore when you’re surrounded by echo chambers of your own opinions you get dumber over time. That applies to the left and the right and it’s a big reason why the right is so bonkers now.

              You shouldn’t support creating a maga of the left.

              • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                That kind of attitude leads to totalitarianism.

                Alright. Go solve it on Reddit then.

                You shouldn’t support creating a maga of the left.

                Why? Looks like they’ve managed to take over the Republican party. If leftists took over the Democrat party maybe it’d finally be worth a shit.

      • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        the FAR LEFT has distanced itself so far from the left wing that it doesn’t even resemble what it began as.

        Yeah they’ve really gone off the rails with this whole “don’t block strikes” and “don’t support genocide” nonsense. /s

          • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            You can call it whatever you want buddy. Only question you have to ask yourself is do you think Biden needs my vote? If not then just ignore me.

            • Econgrad@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              Words have meanings. Not every war is a genocide. There’s no attempt to exterminate Palestinians. Gaza is as dense as New York City. If they were trying to wipe out Palestinians there would be far more deaths than there have been.

              • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                Call it whatever you want. I don’t want the U.S. supporting Israel in it. I won’t be voting for Biden in 2024.

    • themadcodger@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      That was my thought when they said X identified as conservative, Y liberal, the rest moderate or unsure.

      How about none of the above since they’re all right of center?

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Are you guys referring to the labels as applied to the Democratic party, or the people who self-identify as one or the other?

        Because while I think it’s generally fair that the Democratic party is center-right (largely absorbing any half-relevant positions Republicans once had), self-identifying liberals especially of youth and women probably are leftist despite colloquially referring to liberal. In that respect I’d imagine most of these people are effectively Social Democrats by European standards; meaning a mixed bag of regulated markets combined with a strong national government and select nationalized industries (eg, medical insurance). Basically the Nordic Model.

        • DessertStorms@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          a mixed bag of regulated markets combined with a strong national government and select nationalized industries (eg, medical insurance). Basically the Nordic Model

          So liberal in exactly the same sense American democrats are… People not liking that “liberal” is a negative in any circle left of those who consider themsleves that, doesn’t change what it means…

          https://medium.com/the-simulacrum/the-nordic-model-is-not-a-socialist-model-it-is-capitalist-bbe828d17a8a

          https://truthout.org/articles/fascism-is-possible-not-in-spite-of-liberal-capitalism-but-because-of-it/

          • lennybird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            No, not necessarily. Social Democracy is one-step further left on the spectrum when considering a balance between Free Markets versus total nationalization and closed markets within the purview of a functioning Democracy. In essence, a truly mixed economy with a strong welfare foundation and regulator control rods for the markets. For all intents, the progressive-left of the Democratic party are Social Democrats while the mainline “corporate dems” are ostensibly Liberals.

            Tankies dreams’ aside, markets & trade aren’t going away anytime soon.

            • DessertStorms@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              That’s a lot of words to say you don’t understand what liberalism is… No mount of “strong welfare” counteracts support of capitalism and the oppression and inevitable fascism that comes with it. Because yes, necessarily.

              The fact that you think me saying all of this makes me a tankie is a perfect demonstration of your lack of understanding of these terms and ideas (and/or of your unwillingness to challenge your bias and think outside of the parameters capitalism has set for you).

        • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Social democrats and market socialists. The issue is that Lemmy loves to insist on the idea that liberalism and leftism are not compatible, which is an outdated, reductive idea.

          Liberalism is just the idea that individual liberty is critical to democratic agency. Myself, and basically every other contemporary leftist of consequence, would argue that democratic agency is also critical to socialism as well.

          The only place where this is a controversial take are internet forums where “leftism” means “violent revolutionary fan service” and the participants are, in turn, educated entirely within this framework which exists basically nowhere in the academic mainstream.

          • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            The issue is that Lemmy loves to insist on the idea that liberalism and leftism are not compatible, which is an outdated, reductive idea.

            Well to the previous commenter’s point, that may just be the result of two people using different definitions of the terms.

            Plenty of people do consider their “liberal” beliefs to be incompatible with “leftist” beliefs as evidenced by how many called anybody to the left of Biden as “too radical” during the 2020 primaries. We can debate about the terms but at the end of the day those people have made it clear they openly acknowledge fighting anything to the left of whatever Biden is.

  • DessertStorms@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    American political ideology as a whole has shifted left in recent years

    Pfffffffffff… 😂🤦‍♀️
    The American political landscape doesn’t even have the left on it.

    In all honesty, it’s really fucking depressing that despite the blatant and open attack by one party on women’s rights, and the complete impotence of the other to restore, or hell, even fucking address what bare minimum rights they once had, outside of a campaign speech, more women haven’t realised that no one in the system is serving them, and shift to the actual left, but sadly the propaganda seems just too powerful (or on some cases, the other privileges still too comfortable to risk, even in the face of loss of autonomy to the state).

  • S_204@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Not gonna matter when the dumbasses elect a fascist rapist criminal…

    Edit. This dumbass can’t spell…