• driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    1 day ago

    Is not conservatism but peak liberalism, where the problems aren’t the power structures but that the people on power are not good enough. This is why at the end of the series no structural changes are done, the only thing that changes is the people in power is the Good Ones®.

      • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        Huh? Maybe at this day and age, sure, but liberal means progressive at the time when its ideas were being formulated. They opposed feudalism and monarchies at the time, which are the conservatives at the time.

        What is considered conservative today is considered liberal in the past. And what is considered liberal today is considered unthinkable in the past. It just that the Overton window shifted.

        • glilimith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 day ago

          Uh, sure, I guess I’ll agree it’s less conservative than feudalism, but I’m not sure what that has to do with whether HP is conservative? It’s not as if the story is about overthrowing a monarchy to establish modern capitalism (a different common story structure with its own problems); it’s about removing all the bad people in positions of authority so that the good people can make society work like it should while changing nothing systemically.

          • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            Okay, fair. But the way your previous comment make it sound like in broad sense liberals are conservatives, which is not really the case.

            • glilimith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              23 hours ago

              They are, though. Liberal is often used in American politics to imply progressive/leftist, but that’s not what it means. Liberalism is pro- status quo and, like the heroes of HP, supports the idea that our current system would work great if not for the Bad People messing it up.

              • Zagorath@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                14 hours ago

                Liberalism is pro- status quo

                No, that’s conservatism. Liberalism is pro individual liberties. Which is today’s status quo, and so today liberals are conservative. But it’s not the definition. Which is what you seem to be implying it is with phrases like “by nature”.

                Today, we live in a liberal hegemony. So liberals are conservative. At the time of the French revolution, liberals were fighting against absolute monarchy, and were extremely progressive as a result. If we were living under socialism, liberals would be radicals.

              • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                22 hours ago

                Liberalism is pro- status quo

                As people would say, context is king. So it depends. The OG liberals were anti-status quo and open to radical changes. But now since liberalism has become the status quo, liberals are now the conservatives and some prefer moderated approach, which unfortunately enables fascism. But even so, some liberals still believe in radical changes if push comes to shove.

                • glilimith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  20 hours ago

                  I’m just not really sure what point you’re trying to make. Why are you bringing up people who have been dead for hundreds of years? Their context was so radically different than anything we have ever or will ever experience that their liberalism is a fundamentally different movement than the liberalism of today.

                  • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    19 hours ago

                    Yes, but read the last part of my comment. There are still some liberals today who would not be considered conservative. They still believe in liberal democracy, individual freedom and open to revolution if it comes to it, but they are skeptical of economic liberalism. So yes, context still matters, which transcends time and space.