How Socialist Egalitarians Differ From Liberals
Let’s try another “atomic” post clearly but succinctly delineating the differences between these two factions of the very factionalized modern Left. Each point builds on the one before it, and all are intertwined.
Socialist egalitarians are, first and foremost, anti-capitalist and pro-working class. They stick firmly to the class issues and are equally loyal to the entire working class.
Liberals are, first and foremost, anti-Republican and pro-Democrat. Their loyalty is skewed towards certain demographics in the working class above others, i.e., those that are deemed “marginalized” groups.
Socialist egalitarians seek the type of changes that would make a better world for everyone. More specifically, we seek to end class rule and take full advantage of modern technology & automation to create a secure, comfortable life for every human being in the world.
Liberals simply want the Democrats to be in charge, and to kick out the Republicans. They envision a “better” world as mere variations of the current system, but with specific demographics they have a stronger emotional affinity for predominating in positions of power, rather than seeing the concept of hierarchy eliminated altogether.
Socialist egalitarians tend to never take sides between two extremes, realizing that an (always temporary) “victory” for either will not have a good outcome for society. We also realize that it’s a logical fallacy to see two extremes as the only possible choices, and that a reasonable balance between the two is always both possible and preferable.
Liberals are quick to take the side of certain extremes, always the one that most appeals to them emotionally. They will argue that it’s either the better outcome or the “lesser evil”. They will also refuse to see the possibility of a third alternative.
Socialist egalitarians define common socio-political terms like “fascist”, “racist”, “sexist”, and “free speech” according to their traditional usage.
Liberals define those same terms according to the way the Democrats use them, which completely deviates from how they are described in dictionaries or in the Bill of Rights.
Socialist egalitarians are loyal first and foremost to a set of principles. These principles transcend any party, group, or organization.
Liberals are typically strict party and group loyalists, with principles to be considered only when convenient (e.g., if they do not get in the way of their party winning an election; do not result in the other side’s voice being heard).
Socialist egalitarians are always loyal to those aforementioned principles, not specific personalities. Any activist or politician we support must adhere to these principles stringently, and must at least lead with them if there is any disparity of agreement in their set of policies.
Liberals will support any activist or politician who happens to be a Democrat no matter what their record of conduct, both professionally and personally, happens to be. To them, the tribe and the vibe are more important than anything else.
Socialist egalitarians will be spending the next four years of the second Trump presidency urging the working class to abandon the duopoly altogether and to build a working class movement that is not loyal to any one specific party.
Liberals will be spending the next four years of the second Trump presidency trying to lead the working class back to the Democrats. Because they never learn.
Cristofer -- the way you express yourself, the way you describe yourself, and the terminology you use, remind me of my own experience many years ago when I began to consider myself a socialist. I think you are on the right track, and if you become more self-critical and learn how to evaluate your own limitations, you will make good progress . . . Jim