an ideology doesn’t need to get elected to office to exist.

(Especially ideologies who see the state as illegitimate, say anarchism)

You don’t have to have a party for an ideology to exist.

We just keep it wrapped?

1984 Here we come. The Thoughtpolice have arrived.

Incase anyone finds it useful.

Using a redirect to this website can be quite nice as well.

http://removepaywall.com/

Children were forbidden to speak Ukrainian or display Ukrainian symbols while being forced to participate in pro-Russian events and sing Russian anthem.

This is called Cultural Genocide

Usually, it ends up in the hands of the elite.

Otherwise they wouldn’t lobby for it.

ALL STATES ARE ARTIFICIAL PUTIN!

Imperialist Russian settler-colonial conquest of Siberia wasn’t “natural” either.

Don’t be shy to put up a book donation flyer in the local wallmart or something if allowed.

Lot of people have books rotting away in basements they wanna offload.

Yeah I was about to say.

Maybe a hierarchical political system requires lying to exist. Humans don’t tend to accept hierarchies otherwise.

(My conclusion is fuck hierarchical systems obviously, not trying to say lying is a “necessary evil”)

Xitter blocked it recently as well…

As of June 30, 2025, approximately 4.31 million people who left Ukraine as a result of Russia’s full-scale invasion have temporary protection status in EU countries.

These data were published on August 11 by Eurostat, according to Ukrinform.

Among EU countries, the largest number of temporary protection status recipients from Ukraine were accepted by Germany (1,196,645 people; 27.8% of the total), Poland (992,505; 23%), and the Czech Republic (378,420; 8.8%).

Ah, me a pillar of my insanity.

Abolish the State

Edit: Are you from the US? Because sometimes in the US they refer to “social liberalism” as liberalism. If so then the arguments you are trying to make make far more sense. Vis à vis social liberalism. From Wikipedia

In Europe and North America, the establishment of social liberalism(often called simply liberalism in the United States)

Previous comment: Oh my god. No it isn’t. Liberalism is a political philsophy based on enlightenment ideals.

Like Locke’s social contract theory, hence the idea (that often fails in practice) of “consent of the governed”.

Liberalism did give us the declaration of human rights. It also gave us capitalism. It’s a complex ideology that has been dominant in the west for the past couple centuries. It is not synonymous with “Human rights”, and it is not the only ideology that claims to promote them.

Plenty of anti-capitalist ideologies arguably promote them more.

And famous liberals throughout history have been slave owners. So please please learn nuance.

Dude when did I ever say I’m anti human rights???

This conversation is so frustrating its like talking to a wall.

GB News has claimed a major milestone for its TV ratings as it beat BBC News Channel and Sky News for average viewership in several key slots in July.

However Press Gazette understands the total weekly reach for the BBC News Channel through July remained more than twice the size of GB News while Sky News was almost double.

This means GB News appears to be engaging fewer people in total each month but the high average viewership means their audience stay watching for longer.

I have a hard time believing your good faith. Are you seriously arguing there’s no pro-human rights ideology except liberalism?

Liberalism ≠ Human Rights

If so please please learn about political philosophy. There’s a lot more than “liberals” and “conservatives”.

Liberalism promotes capitalism. Which isn’t great for human rights.

So no, criticising liberalism as an ideology, built upon capitalist and statist-nationalist ideals does not make me an evil person trying to “catch the smurfs”.