I’m not a liberal, I’m a marxist.

No, we’re not liberals, we’re communists. We talk shit about and dunk on liberals because we fundamentally disagree and take issue with the entire ideology. We take issue with being called liberals, because we’re not.

Liberals have nothing to do with the left.

You can’t be a liberal and a socialist at the same time, unless you’re talking about philistine and opportunist social democracy.

Non-digetic screams just summarized this whole thing perfectly.

This is pure gold lmao

We’re Marxists. We’re against liberalism. Liberalism is the ideology of capitalism as another user already told you.

You’ve been taught a false binary. This is intentional to limit your ability to think critically about capitalism. All of us were. There is no binary.

There is liberalism (subset of which include conservatism, US Republicans), Marxism, and technically you could have non-liberal reactionaries like say sincere Monarchists who prefer a return to feudalism or some other older system and reject the enlightenment. However, largely speaking there are two groups as the amount of reactionaries who genuinely reject liberalism and assert a desire to return to and an embrace of a pre-liberal philosophy is shockingly small and they have no real traction anywhere among anyone, especially among Republican voters seething and crying about liberalism as to a one those people like most parts of liberalism (many of them espousing a return to “classical liberalism” or "liberalism before all these uppity women and minorities got rights and did things I didn’t like) and embrace for example the liberal idea of free enterprise, free markets, etc.

We reject the notion that we are at the end of history, that liberalism represents some final, perfect stage of humanity as opposed to previous societal stages such as the feudal, the monarchistic, the slave-society, the tribal, hunter-gatherer primativism, etc. As Marxists we say of liberalism what many liberals said of feudalism, namely that it was a historical stage, that it may have in certain ways represented advancements over previous ways of organizing society, but that it never-the-less is inferior to our proposed successor.

Just as liberalism did not represent some sort of wacko total year-zero rejection of the societies and systems that came before it but rather proposed a radical furthering of certain rights and ideas, so too Marxism while rejecting liberalism as out-modded, out-dated, and at this point backwards and bad, does not wholly reject and want to turn all of society upside down. We are a progressive force. We are for progress. We are for emancipation. But we are against capitalism. We are against privately held means of production. We are for the people, the workers being the rulers, the dictatorship over the current owning class to impose our will, our ends, our goals, our goods over their greed. With force. To create a new society, to gradually erode away the old as liberalism eroded away previous societies before it. This is our project, this is our calling. So yes we reject liberalism.

We embrace a scientific approach, we reject many things liberals take as immutable, as unchallengable, as laws unable or unwise to be challenged by humans.

No I think you misunderstood. I agree with your idealogy. But to talk shit about liberals, when we are liberals who actually lean left (unlike Democrats who are moderates in disguise), well that’s just plain dumb. It makes you sound like a Trumpanzee.

I do not consider liberals “part of the left”. The left starts at anti-capitalism.

I’m a liberal, and I’m also a proud socialist. And so are you.

That’s an insult here. I am not a liberal (who, by definition support capitalism and private property). I am a Marxist-leninist.

I do not understand how you can come to this conclusion.