I feel like a lot of people on here seem to think that saying “I am socially liberal and would like the government to be too” is cringe so we get these eccentric deployments of “neoliberal” or whatever instead.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
I also think some people don’t like to admit they care about some things more than others? So rather than go “I hate policy x” it all has to be one thing.
I mean, I do think there's a bit more to it than that - stuff like the fiscal straitjackets, Streeting's occasional 'no money only reform' broadsides for the papers, the headbanging on disability benefits, or Reeves' weird bats and newts thing is just aggravating to a lot of people
But the fiscal straitjacket is not a “neoliberal” or “get a job in the City” thing either, it is a “get elected” calculation. Nor are any of the others, one of which is pure vibes also.
I mean yes, these are the standard things random people on the left say when they're angry at Labour and I'm not saying they have a joined up theory of the case here, but if we want to outline 'why Labour is having problems on their left flank' then it is not /just/ about social liberalism
Sure, but none of that means that it’s not babytalk. People should say “I dislike the government’s policy on x” not say ridiculous things like “this government is shilling for jobs in the private sector”.
Fundamentally you can't do the winter fuel allowance thing with no warning while banging on about DIFFICULT DECISIONS TO APPEASE THE MARKETS, and then act surprised that people left of a certain point are less willing to give you the benefit of the doubt
Apologies if that wasn't clear, but I do mean Rachel Reeves and the Labour Party, who are quite obviously a bit dazed by the fact that they have far more problems on their left flank right out of the gate than, say, Blair managed to generate by this point in his government
…are they? I don’t think that is true. If anything one problem is that they are far too blase about those problems (see: bats and newts, the fact some in government really do think they don’t need to do two child in this term).
I think they're definitely convinced they're doing the right things and it'll pay off, but also despite actively denying themselves any of that cushion they expected 40% and a honeymoon and the fact that none of that happened added a weird element of panic to everything they said over autumn
I guess I sort of fall into this sometimes except calling myself "socially liberal" feels iffy when I support compulsory voting, think we're too soft on vaccination, am intrigued by nationalising alcohol, etc
I don't think a social liberal necessarily has to reject those sorts of things. Indeed what sets social liberals apart from classical liberals is that they are concerned with wider societal freedoms rather than just narrow individualist freedoms.
Yeah, this is what happens when the idea gets around that 'socialist' means 'especially radical left-liberal'. You can certainly be both. Plenty of people are. However.
Is it the "insider voice" thing? You know, "real voters" are left on economics and right on social issues, therefore someone whose problem is that Labour are too authoritarian / socially conservative must stick to attacking them for being too pro-business.
I think it might be the reason for the cringe? Like I'm one of these people and I do feel that pressure online to focus on "real people's concerns" and not the attacks on, say, trans people's bodily autonomy or disabled people's living standards.
Yeah I think you’re exactly right, in that what usually happens is someone appears in my mentions and goes “they’re so rightwing”, “I go: they palpably are not”, they say some silly stuff before getting to something true but “niche”. (Tho bodily autonomy shouldn’t be seen as niche, he liberalled)
But yeah I've experienced what you have, too. Maybe it's related to the thing where the right convinced normies that whatever the craziest "progressive" said on Twitter on any given day in 2014 was in fact the platform of the Democratic party? And now progressives feel the need to self-censor? idk
Yeh like, personally I'm terrified by the way trans rights, for the sake of trans people, but also just anyone who violates trad sex/gender norms (gay, abortion, even looking queer). I don't know what the right political/comms strategy is here, but like I'm just some person I can have my opinion??
Comments
Nothing annoys me more than people pretending stuff is simple or that what they want is magically only not happening because of "x" or "y"
(I'd go for "progressive" if I had to use an overarching description)
When is editing coming to Bluesky stg