#Liberalism has been typically suckered into #Libertarian definitions of #Freedom that are wildly incorrect.

#Liberty is not to be #free from #authority. It is the capacity to actualize.

Like, mathematically we can talk about a systems degrees of freedom. So if we are intent on maximizing liberty, we would be intent to maximize the median individuals degrees of freedom.

(Likely better, the average of the log of the degrees of freedom)

We can see, quite plainly, that the individual exhausted from hunger has fewer degrees of freedom than one restricted from murder by an authority but well fed.

Thus a #Liberal inherently should seek to support any change which improves our metric of average freedom. Which would imply a need to feed and house people.

#Moderates are not #liberals, they are #BootLickers. Liberalism is solidly a #Leftist philosophy, and inherently progressive. Supposed #ClassicLiberals are just wrong.

I'm hearing so many attacks on #democracy and so many calls from people I would respect otherwise to have “less democracy”… All those (#ThaddeusRussell, #GarettJones, #MenciusMoldbug…) seem to be confusing “smaller State” with “less democracy”.
When we #ClassicLiberals criticise the tyranny of the majority, what we are saying is that no State or institutional power should intrude so deeply into personal matters — not that we would prefer those intrusions to be orchestrated by dictators, oligarchs or technocrats instead of democratic institutions (imperfect and fallible as they may be)! We want less #coercion overall (ie, less #State) — not to move the extant coercive power from democracy to #autarchy.
Please reflect about that distinction if you find yourself dissatisfied with the status quo and flirting with the ideas of #NRx, #DarkEnlightenment, autarchy, #monarchy, etc.