• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    05 months ago

    Of course the word has multiple definitions, that definition just obscures the shit out of everything and isn’t very useful. It literally obscures that conservatives are also liberals (in the more meaningful sense) and obscures the difference between left and liberal.

    • @Kecessa
      link
      05 months ago

      It literally obscures that conservatives are also liberals (in the more meaningful sense) and obscures the difference between left and liberal.

      Only if you use another definition of the word.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -15 months ago

        How do you talk about liberal hegemony (marxist definition) while using the nonsense definition in a non-bulky way?

        • @Kecessa
          link
          05 months ago

          First of all, I already answered that question many times and second of all, you calling it a “nonsense” definition shows that you’re just arguing in bad faith because you’re not ready to accept that you just didn’t know that the word has multiple definitions depending on context.

          Good night.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -1
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            No, no you haven’t, you’ve just been smug.

            But I’m glad we are the point of the pigeon shitting all over the board and flying away, if that is how you insist on acting.

            you’re just arguing in bad faith because you’re not ready to accept that you just didn’t know that the word has multiple definitions depending on context.

            Do you think anyone born in the US doesn’t know the most common definition? The rejection of it is because it is a bad definition that serves to obscure how politics actually functions. I also literally reference this, but you insist that I dont know that words can have multiple meanings. Who is arguing in bad faith?