this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2026
24 points (90.0% liked)

askchapo

23217 readers
84 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

  1. Posts must ask a question.

  2. If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.

  3. Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.

  4. Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

We like to say that they're the same, but there seems to be some kind of difference. In the USA, a liberal will usually prefer wine, foreign cars and food and media, basketball, CNN and The New York Times. A fascist will prefer beer, American cars and food and media, football, and Fox News. One votes for Democrats, the other votes for Republicans. One is obsessed with Russia, the other with China. One at least pays lip service to LGBTQ+ folks, the other wants them in concentration camps. One is happy to have people of color in positions of power, so long as they toe the capitalist line, while the other rages against this. One tends to have a college education, the other doesn't (although plenty of chuds work in tech or are engineers of some sort). One tends to work in offices, the other tends to be a business owner and/or landlord, although American labor unions are full of liberals and conservatives (it's the same for non-unionized blue collar workers). Liberal business owners tend to be in the service industry (especially restaurant owners, in my experience), while conservative business owners are more concerned with resource extraction or anything related to fossil fuels. Liberals tend to be more articulate (with notable exceptions), while conservatives can barely form sentences, even when they're just speaking.

What makes a person a liberal or conservative? I'm defining these people here as anyone who participates in federal elections in the USA, roughly half of the people trapped in the USA. They tend to have at least have some money and property. I guess a white male cis born in the countryside is likelier to become a fascist, while a similar person born and raised in cities will probably be more liberal. But there are plenty of exceptions. Epstein and most of his friends are kind of difficult to classify here. It seems that it's easier to tell these people apart when they're in the labor aristocracy / petite bourgeoisie, not in the haute bourgeoisie.

We determined awhile ago on Hexbear that most of the posters here come from liberal backgrounds, so what pushed us out of liberalism into communism? (We've also had this discussion several times, sorry for reviving it.) Dialectically, the contradiction of the individual versus society determines this, along with subjective factors. I remember noticing homeless people when I was five; I was drifting toward communism in high school because I was so unhappy with the pointlessness of my education, but in college I was much happier and veered back toward liberalism again, and stayed that way for years. As an adult I taught overseas, used universal health care many times, then made the mistake of returning to the USA, got involved in politics, and discovered that I was playing for the wrong team, because liberals (especially the richest and most powerful liberals) are so rabidly against universal health care, despite the fact that it costs them so much more money and so many more years of their lives to be this way. This basically radicalized me permanently. But even now, so many liberals are planning to vote for the blue genocide pedophile party over the red genocide pedophile party, it seems like nothing except years of re-education (+ the total destruction of the USA) will ever change their minds. The same for conservatives, of course.

Just some thoughts I've been meaning to post here for awhile, I'm posting for critique.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SwagliacciTheBadClown@hexbear.net 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Since we’re spitballing it could be tied to: relationship/hierarchy with regards to the means of production (as one axis) and how they view maintenance/enforcement of that relationship/hierarchy (as the other axis).

Examples

  • textile factory owner (owns production of textile, but not of raw material); therefore must discipline local labor to maintain profit (with or against state approval) as well as discipline labor upstream (raw material) and downstream (purchasers of textiles/manufacturers of finished products) to ensure there’s no weak link in the chain (eg workers in downstream getting health care, results in owners maintaining margins by purchasing upstream textile at a lower price- cutting into margins.) Also other workers might start asking for health care following that example. So ownership needs to break up/discipline labor via sowing division, state violence. I think some lib/fash differentiation comes with how they believe this discipline is to be carried out. Eg should states be allowed to have chattel slavery or an intricate system of means-tested wage extraction? Should violent deportations occur in plain sight or quietly? Should business owners be allowed to shoot strikers themselves or should they deploy the state?
  • General contractor manager (veteran, doesn’t own business nor tools). How do they view the legitimacy of the state? A tool for imperialism and resource extraction? The “world police”? Does this affect how they view their occupation? How do they view their occupation? Building things in a vacuum or do they understand how things go from raw materials to finished projects? If the price of lumber increases due to climate impacts - should the state intervene and how so? Mitigating climate impacts? Expansion of extraction via deregulation, imperialism, etc? Suppressing labor costs?
  • government worker (non supervisory). Do not own means of production, nor have disciplinary authority. Essentially acting as a cog in the state machine. How do they view the legitimacy of the state? How do they view its role in maintaining structures (either of uplift or oppression)? As they’re not inherently involved in production- do they view themselves as a consumer? How do they believe their consumer products are produced? Do they believe there should be state controls to maintain this production/cost?

Lmao. As I was writing this all out, I realized it’s way more thought than most would give their own views. So to quote the other poster

That said most Americans have no coherent political beliefs, so you could easily find someone who meets all criteria one way or another and they vote the other way, because more than anything, Americans are profoundly and proudly ignorant people

[–] MaoTheLawn@hexbear.net 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And I think in that final quote comes to another heart of the matter. Conservatives are proudly ignorant, whereas liberals are unaware of how ignorant they are - which in the grand scheme of things almost makes them more ignorant than conservatives.

It really is something. One realization I’ve had now that I’m a few decades into life is that i previously assumed everyone kind of constantly accumulated knowledge. But it seems like a significant amount of people are either beaten down or just comfortably content without intellectual curiosity. Sad really.