Neither, the idea is that the impact of the Romans is strongly felt even millennia after their fall, so it makes no sense to expect Africa to “get over” colonialism within the span of a few decades, yet that’s exactly what colonialism apologia does.

Thus approximately 15.7% of all incarcerated are in the USA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States

It seems it peaked at around 25% in 2009, but has been declining since.

Every time someone pushes for Medicare for all they get there asses kick in the election.

Can we get a list of those multiple times? Also to be clear a strong majority of the US population wants universal healthcare as of 2024.

Wouldn’t the market just expand to absorb the extra demand?

According to betteridge’s law: No.

Holy bootlicking batman. You already had your argument dismantled elsewhere so I won’t do so myself, but what the fuck how delicious does the boot have to be for you to so persistently defend such blatant cruelty? This is “you don’t know why those IDF soldiers shot children in the head” levels of apologia and you should think deep and hard about why you’re doing this.

We have no idea what actually transpired here, but there’s no viable chain of events that would make it acceptable to evict a 93 years old. Full stop.

These clauses don’t apply to the rich.

Clearly the meme is referring to rebellions against the interests of the country in question. So since they brought up Ireland: How supportive were the British of the Irish war of independence? What about the IRA during the Troubles? How does France react when its neocolonial empire in Africa is disrupted? Before 2023, what was your average European’s image of Palestinian resistance? What’s the verdict on the Houthi “rebels” again? And so on. With some exceptions, these supposed liberatory ethos are thrown out the window the moment they become inconvenient.

Don’t join the army and don’t be a cop, especially not in 2025. Odds are you’ll be sent to beat up protesters.

Background people not smuggies, immersion broken.

Gee, I wonder if there’s a formative event in the early 90s that could’ve had some effect on this. Maybe a decline in quality of life that would make people liable to embrace a rightwing dictator. Perhaps neoliberals could be involved? Nah, no way.

how is this take any different than the u.s. propoganda that would say very similar shit about communism.

It’s true, that’s how it’s different. There’s nothing “complicated” about how Britain installed the Shah in Iran or America helped Saddam wage a war with Iran that killed half a million people. Some things are just fucking evil.

C’mon you can’t bring up Ireland as representative of the West when they’re the OG colony. By that metric the West is anti-Zionist.

High-quality ragebait, upvoted.

As a wise man once said: Things will have to get worse before they get better. The average American will need to suffer a lot more before they’re ready to think about taking their guns to protests, let alone using them.

Africa moment.

You never stated your disagreement with the core propositions I had identified.

It’s that they’re not the core propositions of liberalism, at least according to the father of liberalism.

Locke is often credited for describing private property as a natural right,

If you’re not at least in broad agreement with John Locke (and other Enlightenment thinkers subscribing to the same philosophy) about what constitutes a natural right, you can’t call yourself a liberal, for the same reason you can’t have liberalism without freedom of religion.

Is whatever you’re criticizing due to a proposition of the philosophy or due to an act that departs from the philosophy?

Due to a proposition of the philosophy: the sanctity of private property rights. And no, there is no private property under socialism, you’re thinking of personal property. That’s your house, your car, your toothbrush, nobody wants to take those away. Private property is a wider concept, which includes among other things the means of production. You can’t argue that private property is sacred (a fundamental proposition of liberalism) and then seize the privately owned means of production; that’s a contradiction.

Likewise, knowing only liberals who are capitalists, doesn’t imply liberalism is capitalist.

I read your link about liberal socialism, and my takeaway is that these guys range from reformist socialists with a veneer of liberalism (again, they’re out the moment they advocate for seizing the means of production) or liberals with a veneer of reformist socialism (those not advocating for seizing the means of production). I mean the article lists fucking Proudhon for ffs we already know how liberals think about Proudhon’s ideas.

Now you’re just admitting ignorance of socialism, which permits private property & even markets.

See above. Only personal property is permitted under socialism.

Finally, counterexamples have already been provided: liberal socialism.

See above.

If we’re going to drag in the performance of actual governments, though, then liberal democracies in Europe, Canada, East Asia, Australia including those social democracies you dismiss beat most communist states (China, Vietnam, Laos, Cuba) in lower economic inequality: check out the detailed view of this world map of gini coefficients.

First, these all liberalized; I don’t consider any of them a success on the socialism front. Second, China at least is fucking big, which does matter. Notably,

One of the lowest ever recorded Gina was for urban China in the late 1970’s, with a figure of around 0.11. Czechoslovakia also recorded a Gini of 0.17 in the 1980’s.

Also again, social democracy in Scandinavia is currently being peeled off by the far right, so it’s not exactly the success you’re painting it as.

Oh shit you caught me. 🎣