Me too. Thanks.

    • SuddenDownpour
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      For most of the 19th century and most of the 20th one, liberals were divided at best and opposed at worst when it came to positive rights (this is, rights tied to positive freedoms that the state must ensure you have, as opposed to not preventing you from reaching them, such as getting access to social housing even if you’re bankrupt); while left-wing ideologies (save for leninists) were promoting both political and social rights.

      Even if you want to refer to contemporary liberals in the current year 2024 (and forget what liberals were doing in 2007), the leaders of political liberalism in the US aren’t keen in creating real public housing options (while the cost of housing skyrockets) or public healthcare options (while medicare eats away the government’s budget (without offering full coverage for everything to everyone) because it’s paying a premium, since it depends on private prices). In Europe, liberals are the ones who promote market economy over social rights, with their only saving grace being that they aren’t as batshit crazy as plenty of parties to their right. If you want to find political camps that defend both political and social rights, you have to look at socialdemocrats and socialists.

      https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberty-positive-negative/

      • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Present some examples, I’ve never met self-identified liberals who oppose public healthcare or housing. Literally all of the public healthcare and housing options available in the USA were from progressive reform from what the media often refers to as “liberals”. Where are these supposed “Negative Liberty Liberals” that you people keep ranting about? That Stanford paper you brought up uses an example from 70 years ago, when Liberal was a moniker chosen by Laissez-Faire Market and Anti-Tax proponents who today would align with what is referred to as Libertarian.

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

          That Stanford paper you brought up uses an example from 70 years ago,

          The Standford paper explains the development of the historical debate of the issue.

          when Liberal was a moniker chosen by Laissez-Faire Market and Anti-Tax proponents who today would align with what is referred to as Libertarian.

          This framing is proof that you don’t understand where liberalism comes from. What were liberals defending in 1800, in 1850, in 1900, in 1950?

          As for the examples you ask for:

          Trudeau Liberals vote to allow for-profit health care system, NDP blasts flip-flop

          (Article in Spanish) The origins of the healthcare collapse: the cuts of CiU and the tri-party ; Note: Catalan politics have long consisted a competition between liberal, socialdemocratic and left-wing parties, where the liberal ones have always incentivized private companies over public services, with the support of minoritarian Conservative parties.

          In Germany, founders of private hospital companies are bankrolling the pro-business party FDP: FDP is the liberal party in Germany (with conservative parties to their right and socialdemocratic, left-leaning and green parties to their left). At the bottom of the article:

          There is little doubt that the positions of the FDP on healthcare could be shared by the businessmen who built their fortune on private for-profit clinics. In its electoral platform, the party says: “We reject unequal treatment of private, public and non-profit hospitals operators just as strongly as we reject a planning sovereignty of the health insurance funds for health care structures”. That means that the FDP thinks that private hospitals should, for example, get the same amount of public investment than public and non-profit hospitals.

          Which is ultimately a form of corrupting the basis of a public healthcare system, making people think they will receive worse care if they won’t pay for private services and pushing the public system towards its collapse.

          Present some examples, I’ve never met self-identified liberals who oppose public healthcare or housing

          Yeah, no shit? The average voter in the US doesn’t understand the difference between liberalism, socialdemocracy and socialism, so they’ll call themselves liberals even if they don’t understand the nuances of the term, while the average Democratic politician understands that they shouldn’t express opposition to public policies that poll well with voters, even if they certainly don’t intend to promote them. Because they barely have any politicians competing against them from their left, they aren’t exposed not defending an actual public option.

          • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Your ass in here making me study Canadian Politics all of a sudden, but fine I’m game. Two things:

            1. The Liberal Party of Canada is the oldest party of Canada founded in 1867, their name by now has absolutely zero bearing on the definition of the words. That said, Trudeau is more unpopular with Canadians with each passing day, clearly not aligned with his constituents. The conservative proposal by Doug Jones was discussed by Liberal Party members in September as something they oppose.

            2. I literally cannot find that vote that NDP talks about in the current session of the 44th Parliament of Canada, not saying I don’t believe you, but I cannot actually find out more about it because none of the articles actually mention the name of the Bill. I did, however, find information about the Pharmacare Act C-64 which will potentially make medications for Diabetes as well as contraceptives free for all citizens and funded by the public entity. So, I guess you have the “fake” liberals to thank for it.