The word Liberal as an insult.

[smokedout]

All stripe of liberal have one thing in common: They're whining little fucks to a man.

whines - why isn't anyone doing anything about gentrfication, it's not fair

whines - why did you smash up the cereaf cafe on your gentrification demo when there were banks down the road

whines - why did you smash up the banks, violence solves nothing and it just made everyone look bad

whines - why did you hold the sit down protest, it just held up the demo and I missed the speech by Owen Jones

whines - why did the government and the media ignore our demonstration

starts writing whiny petition

and on and fucking on. for centuries.

 

[umop apisdn]

IRL, using "liberal" as an insult will most likely get you laughed at or ignored. If you want to provoke a reaction, there are more effective words and phrases

 

[redsquirrel]

I think my problem is that I'm stuck with some older meaning / usage of the word, not the economic one.

You mean the recent "economic one" that has only been in use for the last couple of centuries

So being called a liberal as an insult by someone (this instance) who thinks that event in shoreditch the other week, the one involving flaming torches and throwing coco-pops at hipsters etc) was an entirely good and pointful thing.. does that mean I am too left or too right for him? I'm still a bit confused.

Why don't you ask them

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I dont think the purpose of insulting someone to have any lasting effect on the insulted. It's more about letting off steam on the part of the insulter.

Well, sure, but you're really just setting yourself up to be more annoyed in the future in this instance. At least if you call somebody a Tory as an insult they probably know what about their opinion you are objecting to. "Liberal" has become just a byword for "decent", "reasonable", "fair" in popular discourse—and that needs to be challenged but it doesn't happen on its own. So if you call somebody a liberal without specifying the details then you now have them thinking you have something against being fair etc.

 

[butchersapron]

Well, sure, but you're really just setting yourself up to be more annoyed in the future in this instance. At least if you call somebody a Tory as an insult they probably know what about their opinion you are objecting to. "Liberal" has become just a byword for "decent", "reasonable", "fair" in popular discourse—and that needs to be challenged but it doesn't happen on its own. So if you call somebody a liberal without specifying the details then you now have them thinking you have something against being fair etc.

Has liberal became that? Not in my experience. It means lack of rigour and sentimental and naive. And in this specific case it's clear that the meaning was not 'socially liberal' - how often do the 'class war club' have a go at people for not being homophobic etc?

edit: also, the context of use will surely contain the latter stuff you suggest that it should. Unless you're ern or something.

 

[Maurice Picarda]

Liberalism, if it is anything, has some sort of rights theory underpinning it. It's not libertarianism, sure, but there's more than an etymological kinship.

And rights theory is always unsatisfactory.

 

[umop apisdn]

It means lack of rigour and sentimental and naive.

I'd wager it means fuck all to most people.

 

[butchersapron]

I'd wager it means fuck all to most people.

So what? That doesn't change the intent or meaning of people who do use it.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Has liberal became that? Not in my experience. It means lack of rigour and sentimental and naive. And in this specific case it's clear that the meaning was not 'socially liberal' - how often do the 'class war club' have a go at people for not being homophobic etc?

I think a lot of people—sentimental and naive people, quite possibly—who self-describe as "liberal" do think that that is what they're saying. "I believe in tolerance, equality, rationality, not being too radical, being sensible." It's not seen as an ideological position IME (how could it be? it's not linked to a political party!) but as general "goodness"; it's the transparent position. We've had years of the idea of "liberal values" promoted as an ecumenical principle that decent people subscribe to above and beyond party affiliation.

I'm not saying this is a universal perception at all (it's clearly not) but it's pretty strong amongst liberals.

 

[umop apisdn]

So what? That doesn't change the intent or meaning of people who do use it.

Isn't an insult meant to make the recipient think? Else what's the point?

 

[butchersapron]

I think a lot of people—sentimental and naive people, quite possibly—who self-describe as "liberal" do think that that is what they're saying. "I believe in tolerance, equality, rationality, not being too radical, being sensible." It's not seen as an ideological position IME (how could it be? it's not linked to a political party!) but as general "goodness"; it's the transparent position. We've had years of the idea of "liberal values" promoted as an ecumenical principle that decent people subscribe to above and beyond party affiliation.

I'm not saying this is a universal perception at all (it's clearly not) but it's pretty strong amongst liberals.

There's self-description then and there's what people outside say. And tbh ,i just don't come across people self-describing like this. I really cannot think of anyone actively claiming liberal as a tenet beyond lib-dem candiates and hacks pretty much ever.

And often, the sort of social liberalism these types say they applaud has taken hold away from them - it's those actual 'liberals' who are calling them liberals as an insult.

 

[butchersapron]

Isn't an insult meant to make the recipient think? Else what's the point?

To insult. That's the point. Cock.

 

[umop apisdn]

To insult. That's the point. Cock.

If people aren't insulted though, then it's meaningless. Dat's my point. Cock.

 

[killer b]

Well, sure, but you're really just setting yourself up to be more annoyed in the future in this instance. At least if you call somebody a Tory as an insult they probably know what about their opinion you are objecting to. "Liberal" has become just a byword for "decent", "reasonable", "fair" in popular discourse—and that needs to be challenged but it doesn't happen on its own. So if you call somebody a liberal without specifying the details then you now have them thinking you have something against being fair etc.

it's only come to mean all that in popular discourse among liberals though.

 

[Chick Webb]

I'd wager it means fuck all to most people.

I don't like agreeing with BA (since I consider him a bit of a liberal) but he's right here.

 

[butchersapron]

If people aren't insulted though, then it's meaningless. Dat's my point. Cock.

No it wasn't.

 

[umop apisdn]

I don't like agreeing with BA (since I consider him a bit of a liberal) but he's right here.

Right in what way? I'm happy to have my mind changed.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

There's self-description then and there's what people outside say. And tbh ,i just don't come across people self-describing like this. I really cannot think of anyone actively claiming liberal as a tenet beyond lib-dem candiates and hacks pretty much ever.

And often, the sort of social liberalism these types say they applaud has taken hold away from them - it's those actual 'liberals' who are calling them liberals as an insult.

No, that's fair, I don't think people actively self-describe as "liberals" a lot, but that's just part of it being the transparent position surely. Nobody claims it as a tenet because it's not a tenet, it's common decency, it's non-ideological, right?

I mean, this thread was started by somebody who really didn't understand what about being called a liberal was an insult. I don't think they're lying about that.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

it's only come to mean all that in popular discourse among liberals though.

Oh yes. But there's a lot of it about and they don't accept that it's an actual ideology. So they don't know what you mean.

 

[butchersapron]

No, that's fair, I don't think people actively self-describe as "liberals" a lot, but that's just part of it being the transparent position surely. Nobody claims it as a tenet because it's not a tenet, it's common decency, it's non-ideological, right?

I mean, this thread was started by somebody who really didn't understand what about being called a liberal was an insult. I don't think they're lying about that.

Well that's it. We've taken their formal liberalism away from them and made it a bit of a social reality. There are no longer any grounds for them to claim it as specifically theirs.

The OP, well it was just the sentimental/soppy etc element that was used against them and i'm pretty sure they knew that.

 

[umop apisdn]

I mean, this thread was started by somebody who really didn't understand what about being called a liberal was an insult. I don't think they're lying about that.

You're right: they're not lying. Being called a liberal is not insulting to most people outside of this forum. As insults go, it's very tame.

 

[Chick Webb]

Right in what way? I'm happy to have my mind changed.

He's saying that liberalism is associated with being unprincipled. I agree, but I also think liberalism is offensive on a deeper level than just laziness.

 

[8115]

Is the premise of this thread basically "someone called me a liberal, well that's no insult in my book"? Which is basically the most liberal thing to say.

I know what a liberal is, I just can't explain it well. It's not too much of any political viewpoint.

 

[umop apisdn]

He's saying that liberalism is associated with being unprincipled. I agree, but I also think liberalism is offensive on a deeper level than just laziness.

Liberalism as immoral? Interesting POV.

 

[Chick Webb]

Liberalism as immoral? Interesting POV.

Don't put words in my mouth. Uprincipled is not the same as immoral.

 

[umop apisdn]

Don't put words in my mouth. Uprincipled is not the same as immoral.

Not the same, but not dissimilar.

 

[campanula]

Mmm, I tend to define it as opposite to conservative...and also to break it up into more specific categories - social liberalism etc...and I don't really have a fixed idea of where 'liberal' fits in my value spectrum either. hopeless really.
As an insult though, it is a bit vague...along with the much derided 'middle class'...

 

[butchersapron]

Mmm, I tend to define it as opposite to conservative...and also to break it up into more specific categories - social liberalism etc...and I don't really have a fixed idea of where 'liberal' fits in my value spectrum either. hopeless really.

If it's opposed to conservatism then how come most conservatives are now socially liberal?

 

[campanula]

Precisely - I have to be specific - ie.socially liberal yet fiscally conservative (or some such drivel)...it isn't a term I could use as a wide-ranging description, without some clarification because it is a bit meaningless or too vague to have any concise definition. And, as already stated, it is a term which has many nuances - such as the liberating aspect of questioning laws, rules and norms etc.etc.

 

[butchersapron]

I've never called someone a liberal who wasn't. It's easy.