Is liberalism a failure of a political stance?

[Heralin]

I am curious about what your responses will be to the question, although I ask that no insults be exchanged here, just open discussion and understanding.
(Post revised and text removed due to hypocrisy and ignorance on my behalf, but please do continue discussing.)

[Kanaria]

If it's a failure then I suppose the scientific and industrial revolutions were failures too. Bring back the primitivists?
*rhetorical flamethrower activates*

[Mike the Progressive]

I think bad OP is bad.

[New confederate ramenia]

Liberalism may be bad, but it's not a failure.

[Pasovo-nacoBo]

I am curious about what your responses will be to the question, although I ask that no insults be exchanged here, just open discussion and understanding.
My view first and foremost to begin, is that conservatism is indeed a huge political failure, due to the fact that many conservative ideals are just that, idealistic views akin to the thoughts an elementary schooler may have on the world. They have many misinformed views on many topics from multiculturalism to xenophobia and racism. However, those are just indeed my views on conservatives themselves. Maybe conservatism has just become a term infected by idealistic and childish views of the modern conservative side we see today, and actually had a much better purpose back in the times of when it was first invented. What do you guys think?

Don't you think if you replace the word with Conservative, it sounds nearly the same? A life without fancy ideas is a life without innovation. It has been said that Conservatism and Liberalism are not stopping and continuing progress, but rather they are two approaches to the same view—progress. The reason why I replace "liberalism" with "conservatism" is that, well, there are certainly idiots on both sides of the aisle. Still, if me replacing the above with conservative bothers you, remember that's how liberals feel.
But I bid you well on open discussion, I just think the presentation is a little off putting but still you have some nice potential here.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I am curious about what your responses will be to the question, although I ask that no insults be exchanged here, just open discussion and understanding.
My view first and foremost to begin, is that liberalism is indeed a huge political failure, due to the fact that many liberal ideals are just that, idealistic views akin to the thoughts an elementary schooler may have on the world. They have many misinformed views on many topics from multiculturalism to xenophobia and racism. However, those are just indeed my views on liberals themselves. Maybe liberalism has just become a term infected by idealistic and childish views of the modern liberal side we see today, and actually had a much better purpose back in the times of when it was first invented. What do you guys think?

You're being vague.

How are liberals misinformed on multiculturalism, xenophobia, and racism? How are the views childish?

[Seperates]

What kind of liberalism?

Also, either way, no.

[Neragua]

Liberalism has been an overwhelming success. It has defined Western society for the last two centuries. The industrial revolution, capitalism, social welfare, abolition of slavery, tolerance of diversity, recognition of fundamental rights and freedoms and the enfranchisement of women and younger generations have all been the product of liberalism's thriving in the West.

Populism is on the rise at the moment and it is an ideology that requires an enemy. The last time populism was at such high levels in the West was in the Twenties and Thirties. Back then it was communists or socialists or immigrants. Nowadays the enemy is liberals and liberalism. Liberalism will survive whereas, in another decade, populism will crawl back under the rock its cowered under since WWII.

[Rhomaia]

The very fact that you are allowed to freely discuss such matters like this on a public forum free from censorship is proof enough that liberalism is not a failed ideology. For the last 300 years, it's been alive and well, and it doesn't show signs of breaking down any time soon.

[Heralin]

I am curious about what your responses will be to the question, although I ask that no insults be exchanged here, just open discussion and understanding.
My view first and foremost to begin, is that liberalism is indeed a huge political failure, due to the fact that many liberal ideals are just that, idealistic views akin to the thoughts an elementary schooler may have on the world. They have many misinformed views on many topics from multiculturalism to xenophobia and racism. However, those are just indeed my views on liberals themselves. Maybe liberalism has just become a term infected by idealistic and childish views of the modern liberal side we see today, and actually had a much better purpose back in the times of when it was first invented. What do you guys think?

You're being vague.

How are liberals misinformed on multiculturalism, xenophobia, and racism? How are the views childish?

While I do understand it is vague to state that without providing something behind it to further strengthen the commentary (and thus I will apologize), I say these things because across everywhere i've been online, there is a strong trend of taking the ideas (which I support the morals behind, but not by the way it is focused upon in the media) that people should be allowed to live somewhere regardless of their ethnicity or the ideas that all races should be given equal opportunity in things such as looking for jobs or being provided housing or just any of the basic necessities and luxuries of life and turning it into childish views such as "We should give this person a job because he is black" or "We should give this person a job because he is muslim" or "Lets start a movement disgracing whites because obviously they are all bad for not being of a certain minority!" It is childish in the fact that there is such a thing as minority quota's or racial preference based on whatever misconstrued reasoning we see many liberal extremists demonstrating. I will again apologize however, because I realize not all liberals are like this.

[Bakery Hill]

"Liberalism stems from petty-bourgeois selfishness, it places personal interests first and the interests of the revolution second, and this gives rise to ideological, political and organizational liberalism." - Combat Liberalism, MC Mao, Freshest Beats of the Chinese Civil War, 1937

[Yumyumsuppertime]

You're being vague.

How are liberals misinformed on multiculturalism, xenophobia, and racism? How are the views childish?

While I do understand it is vague to state that without providing something behind it to further strengthen the commentary (and thus I will apologize), I say these things because across everywhere i've been online, there is a strong trend of taking the ideas (which I support the morals behind, but not by the way it is focused upon in the media) that people should be allowed to live somewhere regardless of their ethnicity or the ideas that all races should be given equal opportunity in things such as looking for jobs or being provided housing or just any of the basic necessities and luxuries of life and turning it into childish views such as "We should give this person a job because he is black" or "We should give this person a job because he is muslim" or "Lets start a movement disgracing whites because obviously they are all bad for not being of a certain minority!" It is childish in the fact that there is such a thing as minority quota's or racial preference based on whatever misconstrued reasoning we see many liberal extremists demonstrating. I will again apologize however, because I realize not all liberals are like this.

Who is suggesting giving people jobs because they're black? Who is suggesting giving people jobs just because they're Muslim, outside of mosques and madrassas? What liberal movement is disgracing whites and saying that they're all bad?

None of what you've mentioned is common to liberal thought, and at least one item that you've mentioned is a position taken by radicals who despise liberals.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

"Liberalism stems from petty-bourgeois selfishness, it places personal interests first and the interests of the revolution second, and this gives rise to ideological, political and organizational liberalism." - Combat Liberalism, MC Mao, Freshest Beats of the Chinese Civil War, 1937

Fuck the revolution.

[Crockerland]

I am curious about what your responses will be to the question, although I ask that no insults be exchanged here, just open discussion and understanding.
My view first and foremost to begin, is that liberalism is indeed a huge political failure, due to the fact that many liberal ideals are just that, idealistic views akin to the thoughts an elementary schooler may have on the world. They have many misinformed views on many topics from multiculturalism to xenophobia and racism. However, those are just indeed my views on liberals themselves. Maybe liberalism has just become a term infected by idealistic and childish views of the modern liberal side we see today, and actually had a much better purpose back in the times of when it was first invented. What do you guys think?

I think you don't understand what liberalism is and/or are incapable of differentiating liberals from illiberal regressive leftists.

[Minzerland]

"Liberalism stems from petty-bourgeois selfishness, it places personal interests first and the interests of the revolution second, and this gives rise to ideological, political and organizational liberalism." - Combat Liberalism, MC Mao, Freshest Beats of the Chinese Civil War, 1937

Mao and the revolution should fuck off.

[Kanaria]

"Liberalism stems from petty-bourgeois selfishness, it places personal interests first and the interests of the revolution second, and this gives rise to ideological, political and organizational liberalism." - Combat Liberalism, MC Mao, Freshest Beats of the Chinese Civil War, 1937

Fuck the revolution.

Indeed.
Marxism is the bloodiest exponent of identity politics after tribalism.

[Bakery Hill]

"Liberalism stems from petty-bourgeois selfishness, it places personal interests first and the interests of the revolution second, and this gives rise to ideological, political and organizational liberalism." - Combat Liberalism, MC Mao, Freshest Beats of the Chinese Civil War, 1937

Fuck the revolution.

That was the Chiang Kai-Shek Klan's reply album. Didn't sell as well though.

[Bakery Hill]

"Liberalism stems from petty-bourgeois selfishness, it places personal interests first and the interests of the revolution second, and this gives rise to ideological, political and organizational liberalism." - Combat Liberalism, MC Mao, Freshest Beats of the Chinese Civil War, 1937

Mao and the revolution should fuck off.

Yeesh tough crowd.

[Bakery Hill]

Fuck the revolution.

Indeed.
Marxism is the bloodiest exponent of identity politics after tribalism.

I'm not a Maoist. But Maoism and identity politics are veeeeeery different.

[Oklahoman State]

Liberalism is failing because it corrupts morals and destroys economies.

[Minzerland]

Mao and the revolution should fuck off.

Yeesh tough crowd.

Why doesn't he go start another famine instead of wattling on about liberalism?

[Kanaria]

Liberalism is failing because it corrupts morals and destroys economies.

I don't care about morals, but I do care about economies.
It distinctly has not destroyed any economies, unless you happen to be someone technologically or otherwise unemployed; but then again, you don't have an economy as an individual.
It has certainly built some of the larger ones, though.
Unless you are thinking of American liberalism, whose record generally matches the liberalism described above.

[Oklahoman State]

Liberalism is failing because it corrupts morals and destroys economies.

I don't care about morals, but I do care about economies.
It distinctly has not destroyed any economies, unless you happen to be someone technologically or otherwise unemployed; but then again, you don't have an economy as an individual.
It has certainly built some of the larger ones, though.
Unless you are thinking of American liberalism, whose record generally matches the liberalism described above.

I'm thinking of liberalism is the American sense.

Your definition may vary.

[Bakery Hill]

Yeesh tough crowd.

Why doesn't he go start another famine instead of wattling on about liberalism?

Well Mao proved that the two aren't mutually exclusive.

[Minzerland]

Why doesn't he go start another famine instead of wattling on about liberalism?

Well Mao proved that the two aren't mutually exclusive.

Famines and wattling on about liberalism? Yes, quite right.