Are liberals redeemable?

Thugs = thugs

I think the question itself is flawed. Many Beriecrats are fully succdem, not strictly liberal, and they are the ripest ground for recruitment.
Sauce: I'm an organizer.

this

Why are dweebs so spooked by appearances
If the liberal is a capitalist apologist and still think "MUH HYUMAN NATCHA" then they are irredeemable
I have seen liberals say anticapitalist sentiments but it's just not enough, they need to understand capitalism produces racism, sexism and all those other bad things. I don't want liberals pretending they're radical.

Liberals

Tankies

Anarchists

Are all the street lights in TX fucked up like that?

Yeah but the issue by numbers isn't the authoritarian idpol ones. Id say liberals are more politically apathetic than conservatives because they are tired of their own ideology unaware of other appealing options.

Liberals belong in the trash. Attempting to fix them will just make you and all your friends stink of garbage and get you very little in return.

Smugglypuff is top tier radicalization actually. Remember they fucked with the police, and refused to snitch on who it was that smacked Lauren Southern.

Not an argument.

Oh fuuuuuuck. that's my alma mater sticker in my college town. Well fuck. I know where I'm smashing next.

lmao no she's not

there literally no good organized radicals in UoT

t. university of toronto alum

fuck off back to reddit already you ill read fucking liberal

At least you admit you're fascists ;^)

No just in Nacogdoches Tx. It's more Louisiana than Texas, tbh.

WEW I WONDER WHO WAS DOING THAT HISTORICALLY

I've had better success with "guns and freedom" libertarians than with liberals. Let that sink in.

Not an argument.

I can't tell if you're saying the Soviet Union betrayed kekalonia or if fascists were socialists, either way it's retarded. Watch this:
youtube.com/watch?v=3ufTFRGPrCM

Misanthropy gets us nowhere. I am curious, what did you do to move them left?

Not surprising. Liberatrians at least question the current society, and are therefore more open to radical viewpoints. Getting liberals to actually question society is the most important redpill.

If it doesn't come as immediately obvious to you than "libertarians" who only care about guns, weed, and vague freedom, are actually just one piece of information from being leftists, you're a silly man. Of course they are. They just need to be despooked about property and the lolbert masses would easily go full Nechayev. I'd know, I was ayncrap.

What was the reason you included that picture?

On the left It depicts a man wearing a choker, gauges, and lipstick

On the right there is a chubby person who looks pretty normal

What did you mean by this?

Take the broader view, comrad. Look at what liberals liking or supporting 'socialism' has looked like and what its resulted in over the past few decades.
Liberals have often thought of themselves as 'socialists.' Teenage idpol essjaydubz already think they're being radical and really fighting the system. Some can be actually truly redpilled but the better part of them can't be, not easily enough to actually make it happen. They were anti-authority and anti-government under bush, now as theirguy(tm) has left office and the guy they dont like is an "outsider", they're highly capitalist and pro-government.
If you get liberals to support the 'left', it'll just make the left look like dumb liberals without doing much to achieve any of its goals, in the long term. Lolberts are a better bet.

Bourgeois liberals? No, fuck them.

But your average everyday democrat? Absolutely. It's necessary.

by bourgoise do you actually mean the owners of companies and their kids or do you just mean 'upper class' liberals
I mean, its true either way, but its best not to misuse the terms like that. detracts from the emphasis on material conditions and relations to the means of production.

i mostly meant CEOs and people like that but a lot of these upper class liberals are pretty irredeemable too. there's probably hope for some of them though.

Clearly not. Also what gender are those specimens posted in the OP?

They're your significant others

I used to identify as a liberal, until I found Richard Wolff, Chris Hedges, and Murray Bookchin

Of course they're redeemable. I used to be a liberal, and I'm sure many of you did too.

If they are open to rhetoric then I say try, otherwise, no.

I used to have this idea that I think a lot of Americans have because they have been confronted with a caricature of far leftism for most of their life. I thought liberal was basically anything that wasn't conservative/right or communist (gorillions). In this definition people like Hillary, Obama and Schumer weren't the real "liberals." People like me who wanted an eventual end to capitalism and a gradual reworking of our society to be more worker oriented were. I know now my definition was wrong, but even after reading some theorists and such it wasn't an easily broken assertion. Some people are hard wired ideologically to think liberal is a good term in America despite their politics at the very least being closer to our beliefs than a liberals by true definition. I think these type of people aren't even necessarily "redeemable" they're already of us and don't know it yet. Which is why I always say a little nudging here toward correct definitions could make all the difference to a lot of misinformed Americans.

People in other countries seem to know the definitions are muddled but I'm not sure how much they understand or how the grasp of liberalism has come to claim a lot of other ideologies under the banner. The ironic thing is about ten years ago you couldn't get a single democrat to claim they were liberal even. Even at the start of Hillaries campaign she wanted to be seen as a centrist because she thought this was 1982 and political labels still scared people. Now they desperately want to be seen as the dregs they duped into a label neither group should want.

This. Unless all you people were born fucking communists, surely before you understood about economics, capitalism and leftism a lot of you were what you would define as liberal. I know I was.

This.

Exactly. Unless your family was commie, you grew up as either a liberal or conservative and converted over time or rapidly depending on circumstance.

No.

wew

Hey at worst they can be meatshields right

why is leftist organization so shit in Toronto?

You fucking piece of shit, stop posting that terrible video

Pure LARPing.

Sorry for violating the NAP bro.

I wonder if all the larpers wanting to literally kill liberals have ever read a book in their lives.

Yes. Former liberul as well. Even when I was I had many gripes with capitalism.

some of you guys are so fucking retarded holy shit

nationalized property is still private property. it's in the hands of the state.

...

Not the same but pretty similar tbh.

One of the meanings (it has like three) of lumpenprole is "proles that hold no class consciousness and/or help the bourgeoisie".

Oh come on user, let's not………….. lump them all into one category.