Classical liberalism #1: What is classical liberalism? | Emily Chamlee-Wright | Big Think

[@bigthink]

Want to get Smarter, Faster? Subscribe for DAILY videos: bigth.ink/GetSmarter

[@unpaintedcanvas]

Wow people are so triggered by the title that they don't even give 15 seconds to notice that the video isn't even about liberals in the party sense. Smfh...

[@swordarmstudios6052]

Well it's about the original 'Liberals' that actually have something of a conservative view point on a fair number of issues, but are also liberal ( as in left ) socially. It's nice to see the sensible center is starting to coagulate around a political identity. In a way, Classical Liberals are the great peace makers in our society.

[@DingusBobingus5555]

@@swordarmstudios6052 Amen.

[@younglord7805]

@@swordarmstudios6052 Libertarians are the most aligned with Classical Liberalism.

[@shauntharp3983]

Classical liberals are Nazis!!!! According to blm and antifa.

[@unpaintedcanvas]

@@shauntharp3983 You have the political literacy of a coconut.

[@NoFace-Killah]

Rave Dubin approved of this video

[@DingusBobingus5555]

Lmao damn you.

[@stevenreese7204]

Dave Rubin?

[@dansonoflightning2277]

I a-guh-ree with that

[@chrisgk7494]

Ok looking the like dislike ration and don't get why is so divisive, the video is not a case for classical liberalism just where it came from and what it represent. What's wrong with that?

[@TraversyMedia]

I would bet my let nut that 70% of the dislikes did not even watch. They are just such snowflakes, they are so triggered by the word "liberal". People are becoming so God damn stupid and hateful

[@swordarmstudios6052]

@Me Me That's a dumb way to look at it. How about this - all societies commit all atrocities. Liberal societies commit the least, and have the temerity to at least feel partially guilty and self reflective about it, and they tend to commit less, while also having richer people. Liberal ( in the classical sense ) is a very very hard thing for a society to do, and they often fail. That doesn't mean we aren't liberal societies, and the self-declared liberal societies are certainly far more human than other socities. Also we weren't quite liberal when Africa was being enslaved, or native tribes being decimated. Politically we were more imperialist and nationalist then, but there were liberal influences.

[@jasoncrow6048]

I don't understand why so many people dislike this video. She is giving a scientific explaination of the liberal notion. Also, imagine a non liberal world where the state for example, gives a shit about you (the individual) while forcing certain behaviours or structurs on you, like in socialism/monarchy/any dictatorship. This would be hell for you! Because you would feel like a slave, this could turn intro civil war or even a long lasting symbiotic relationship of the majority of the people and some sort of elite, which is portrait in literature and stories like "The Hunger Games" for example. Maybe people dislike this video because of the current political situation of the american government. But as an outsider, a 22 year old german like me, I am extremly sure that liberalism is the bedrock of a working and healthy society. Just exame the last 100 years of history and the regimes that existed. Life can be so fucking bad and classical liberalism is such a great proposal for the greater good of all people.

[@bloke7901]

i think its just people disliking simply because its talking about liberalism in an educated and informed way, rather than just saying "liberalism is bad"

[@sathalel4084]

@@bloke7901 nah shes astro turfing an incredibly right wing ideology

[@SharKShadows]

This would never work grand scale. There are too many ‘Me’s’ to consider, solutions cannot be found with millions of people focusing on me, me, me everyday, certainly not through the government on a grand scale.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

classic liberalism is the unhindered rule of the merchant class. It's the worst possible form of government because those that rule have zero obligation to the people or the republics that are ruled. As Adam Smith put it in Wealth of Nations "he who does best for himself, does best for society" i.e complete and total greed and selfishness of the merchant elite are lauded as the greatest virtues of classic liberalism. Monarchy is the way to go. Classic liberalism is a satanic scheme, which is why the freemasons, illuminati and jews love it so much.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

@@SharKShadows 99% of those "me's" don't count. only the selfishness of civil society counts. the commonwealth is just cattle.

[@Bejunckt]

So many people seemingly triggered by the title they didn't even care to try to understand what she was saying

[@LikeATreeOnAMountain]

"Classical liberalism" seems to be used mostly by Americans who support the philosophy of Liberalism, but reject the Democratic parties unusual take on it. Internationally there are as many liberal right parties (example Australia) as there are left parties. Usage of the term liberal in the US is so unusual because of how strongly American liberals reject one of the cornerstones of liberalism, economic liberty.

[@AholeAtheist]

Incorrect. You must take in a lot of American media, because the Democrats are right wing economically. The main reason they're not actually classical liberals, is because they are too socially authoritarian, being dragged that way by the right wing of the American electorate as they are lead that way by corporate media.

[@AholeAtheist]

There's only a handful of Democrat candidates who are economically left wing.. Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, Ro Khanna, AOC, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, and maybe a couple others. And they're all on the center left.

[@AholeAtheist]

Any reason those people have to turn their back on the Democratic party isn't to do with economic liberty, if it is, then they don't mind the, not only more extreme economically conservative ideals of the Republicans, but also the more extreme social conservatism/authoritarianism of the Republicans. In which case they are no where near classical liberal. If they vote for the Libertarian candidate, or a Dem candidate like Andrew Yang, then they are classical liberals.

[@nokoolaid]

There is a difference between liberalism and progressivism. Both left and right have their version of progressivism that requires authority to achieve their goals. Conservatives label progressives liberals, which is a mislabeling a lot of the time. Many conservatives aren't classically liberal in spite of their reliance on "founding principles", which if they understood, would realize they are not and the left, while choosing some liberal principles, fail with their desire to use government to enact their own pre and proscriptions. One is for social justice or their version of it domestically, the other believes in making the world safe for democracy through force. Both want progress in some way or form. True liberals allow for people to find their own way, which is to say, act according to one's will limited only by the equal rights we all share. So the left likes the social aspects of liberalism, the right might like the economic aspects, but both fail at embracing it completely because they have their own social and/or economic agendas which causes them to be at odds with one another. Robert Heinlein said that politics falls into two camps: those that want other people controlled and those that do not. True liberals, classical liberals fall into the latter camp.

[@swordarmstudios6052]

The Word Liberal is a bit warped here, but at least in the United States, Classical Liberalism is essentially a somewhat centrist version of libertarianism. You'll find a fair amount of support for certain kinds of social safety nets for example in classical liberal thinking, and many people who wear that label also consider themselves center-left, pragmatic democrats. Their main contention is toleration, openness and the sovereignty of the individual, which has roots in both left and right thinking. Much of the partisanship of today's era I think is how different liberal principles are now housed in different parties. I like Classical Liberal better than Libertarianism because it doesn't have the weird anti-goverment dogmatism attached to it. Yeah governments are often stupid and cruel, but not all things can be priced by a market. I think it's fine to say markets should solve 'most' problems. Not all, but certainly most - and there is a good amount of evidence that when you have an actual open market, things do get better for humans over the long term.

[@SaratChandran]

Watching the video at 1.25x might help.

[@derekd.4156]

Sarat Chandran it sounds like a female Ben Shapiro

[@themarexaanstoryteller8335]

Thanks

[@poopsniffer4436]

That’s what I’m doing 😂

[@JoshuaDHarvey]

Thanks for a informative video!

[@mrnarason]

Read up Milton Friedman comment on classical liberalism vs "liberalism" of today

[@Adrian101882]

Victor P. “Liberalism” of today in a nutshell: 1st commandment - Orange man bad 2nd commandment - White people are (just as) bad (ie “white supremacy”) 3rd commandment - Men are like, the worst, and women are like, the best (ie “smash the patriarchy” / end “rape culture” / hashtag PoundMeToo) 4th commandment - anything and everything done in the name of “social justice” is good and beautiful and amazing and justified and right 5th commandment - If you’re not with us, you’re against us

[@Bejunckt]

@@Adrian101882 You're a willful ignorant, Friedman died in 2006.....

[@andrewbsfootballarchives4247]

@@Adrian101882 beautifully stated and hilarious! I'd like to add in a couple more: 6. Your gun WILL BE confiscated 7. Marxism is king! Sure some socialism failed, but OUR brand has never been tried yet. Capitalism is the devil, and must be obliterated!

[@sathalel4084]

@@Adrian101882 you have only talked to children and watched "SJW GETS OWNED PART 47" videos on youtube to genuinely think that lol

[@seanmcmahon2110]

I was a hard right winger for awhile until I did more self discovery of myself. I’m proud to be a classical liberal myself :)

[@דוד-כ1נ]

Same here dude

[@דוד-כ1נ]

Proud to be a classical liberal

[@charliewatts333]

Classical liberalism is basically right wing in modern America, since the left wing promotes ever more ideas which are illiberal. Namely, more people the mainstream right would call "liberals" embrace censorship over freedom of speech, and creating hostile environments backed up by intimidation tactics to force people to participate in programs they may not agree with. That's not liberalism. It's a slippery slope towards extremism. They would consider people proclaiming classical liberalism to be problematic because they don't conform to their narrow view of how we should progress society. Classical liberalism now is essentially libertarianism, which I had a friend tell me is just for selfish people while meanwhile she proclaims to be a socialist. I believe in liberal values and always will, but as the American left shifts further left I am more alienated by them and find it very hard to find common ground.

[@sathalel4084]

classic liberals are still extremely conservative and right wing.

[@damianm-nordhorn116]

​@@sathalel4084 Isn't it beautiful how this issue unites you and right-wing Charlie? ..like two sides of the same medal or coin 🤣

[@saurabhmahajan4698]

We as human beings share "anxiety, fear, love, happiness, jealousy, anger, symapthy, empathy, confusion, chaos, pleasure, pain, sorrow, etc" together cause every human being goes through all these emotions and feelings at certain times in their lives! We're surely equal on this ground, all of us

[@katfrog98]

You missed the driving force of liberalism, and that is a dynamic free market. Liberalism is the philosophy of capitalism.

[@sstuddert]

Nah. Liberalism existed over half a century before industrial capitalism even started. The driving force of liberalism is that the political liberty of each individual should be maximised to the extent that it is consistent with the similar liberty of all others; the best social and political arrangement is that which best facilitates this ideal. This is why even Smith suggests that government interference in the market is justifiable in some cases; it is why, in _The Principles of Political Economy,_ Mill actually advocates for worker control and ownership of production (making him a socialist). Smith and Mill both knew that the "free market" is only desirable to the extent that it does not decrease the liberty of any individual. In fact, considering the historical roots of liberalism, even the _labour theory of value_ has a more central place in its philosophy than any supposed love for the market. But if you're committed to the labour theory of value in the world of today, then you must also be committed to a set of pretty radically anti-capitalist propositions.

[@JustinWeltmer]

@@sstuddert actually, worker ownership and control of the means of production makes you a syndicalist, not a socialist. Syndicalism is completely compatible with capitalism, it just turns out that in most (but not all cases, ex: lawyers in law firms) ownership and control in corporate hierarchies are more effective.

[@sstuddert]

@@JustinWeltmer No, this is wrong. Socialism is actually worker control of production. All of the orthodox socialist literature affirms that. The sort of syndicalism you're referring to is itself a kind of socialism popular among libertarian socialists.

[@RRC879]

Exactly

[@willsabol8391]

"freedom of" entails "freedom from" - you must have the option of saying "I would prefer not to" - an exit strategy as she puts it.

[@lexlex44]

What is classical liberalism ? It's cool stuff, always say yes to it, cuz it's the best thing that ever happened, politics wise.Classical liberalism is a political ideology and a branch of liberalism that advocates free market, civil liberties under the rule of law with an emphasis on limited government, economic freedom, and political freedom

[@lifeisactuallyveryboring.7771]

I use to be a conservative but as I talked more with one of my liberal friends he pointed out old ideas that stem from white supremacy and racism fundamentally speaking. Also America for the longest time was a racist country and still is, I'm not saying conservatives are racist but they appear to brush over that fact about segregation in America and as white people, it should be our moral obligation to push back against that error of the past and create more equality for everyone. No matter what your political views are the fact of the matter is that colonialism has created a certain degree of white supremacy across the globe.

[@JamesMaximum]

Classical Liberalism 💪🇺🇸🇫🇷

[@araucaria5173]

Thanks, very interesting.

[@theloniousMac]

Sounds much more like modern conservatism as opposed to contemporary liberalism. Contemporary liberalism is a loose coalition of various identity/victim groups who are concerned with social Justice and the elimination of oppression, whether real or imaginary. Contemporary liberalism does not emphasize the individual. Just the opposite. Contemporary liberalism prefers collectivism. I.e. socialism/communism.

[@montithered4741]

Liberalism is the leftward impetus through capitalism, socialism, and communism which, taken to its utter finality, ending with anarchism. Illiberalism is a rightward push through traditionalism, authoritarianism, fascism, and ends in totalitarianism.

[@emina4627]

Zero knowledge in, zero out

[@vladanlausevic1733]

And the funny thing is that many left-wingers and right-wingers worldwide will watch this video and see this as a big evil and something to be abolished

[@nilaychaturvedi5243]

ht emost interesting part is that in our society people are so certain about everything- ex whether their political leaning is left-right or center/ without thinking it over or giving it a thought they just launch up a banner, in our society people give more thought to their mcdonalds menu than political leaning- which results in for example currently people across the world protesting against lockdown, but if u ask them why r they protesting they wouldn't hav a clue besides the obvious script

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

what do you expect? look at the systems of propaganda we live under. We are indoctrinated all day, every day from birth to death. We can't even pump our gas or stand in line to buy groceries without being subjected to screens propagandizing us.

[@TraversyMedia]

Looking at dislkes, this video really triggered conservatives (Trumpists) just by the title. They either did not watch (most likely) or did not listen. The video is completley unbias and logical.

[@ea1766]

This comment is so stupid. Pathetic

[@akshimjames5011]

@@ea1766 Looks like you have 300 IQ

[@StigHelmer]

She's wrong about one major point - every time she says "respect" she ought to say "tolerate". We should tolerate differences in people.

[@RichOrElse]

Tolerance is overrated. Differences should be celebrated.

[@avengersprime5431]

I love how salty the neoliberals in the chat are getting after they watch the video and realize that classical liberalism is anti-communist/anti-socialist.

[@moretreesplease9379]

😂 They just found out that they’re the baddies.

[@sodapopkitt648]

that moment when you call anti-capitalists neoliberals despite the fact that the term neoliberal was created to criticize liberals who are tied too much to corporations and existing status quo

[@tmacphd7871]

So classic liberalism is basically the implementation of the Bill of Rights!

[@dostthouevenlogicbrethren1739]

The classical liberal approach to social interest is that two individuals both pursuing their own self-interest can promote the self-interest...because only when two people are free to agree for themselves, while pursuing their own self-interest, can they come to an agreement that benefits both. Capitalism is the very context of the application of liberalism to economics. It is amazing to see today, how modern "liberals" absolutely despise, and actively undermine true liberalism.

[@xxcrysad3000xx]

Classical liberalism ignores all asymmetries of power, which inherently corrupt the so-called "voluntary" nature of exchange. When I own no property and your property holdings are vast, I am at your mercy in any negotiation, because I depend on you for access to resources. Modern liberalism is an attempt to acknowledge these imbalances and promote an ideal of positive liberty--it is a shift from "freedom from" to "freedom to".

[@joshyak1]

This woman really twists the individuality component of classical liberalism like a pretzel to suit her personal beliefs of liberal collectivism.

[@SmellsLikeNow]

So what is the basis for claiming the dignity of the individual? Or is that just a matter of faith?

[@jamesscottvideos]

Same for any ideology.

[@sathalel4084]

there is no basis its a required and presumed notion for liberalism.

[@hpsauce1078]

I don't really see why this video has such a large number of dislikes, it pretty accurately describes what a classically liberal society ought to look like.... My only niggles is when she says a liberal society lifts up individuals and groups within society, liberally thinking all groups should be voluntary collections of individuals so ideally (not realistically) you shouldn't get any preferential treatment by the state for being a member of a group. Other than that though it seems pretty on point...

[@lhouse52]

Today's Classic Liberal is a Libertarian.

[@prodigalson6166]

The United States of America is Not an "experiment" Our predecessors the Haudenosaunee have stood for nearly a thousand years. This is the sustainability our Constitution is based upon. (HR 231 100 Congress 2nd session 1988) Liberalism is not a pluralistic philosophy any more than it is an individualistic philosophy it is an Animistic Philosophy. We never have been and never will be about groupthink nor the whims of wicked selfishness

[@maksudurrahman1769]

Appreciate

So how it deals with the inequalities that already exists in our society? I don't like how this is unfolded in a philosophical way and not concerned in actual problems of the world. I mean, love the talk but lets focus on people starving while 1% gets all the money.

[@MCAPrince]

The ethical foundation of Liberalism is Utilitarianism, the view that morality is based on creating the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people. The view was that by allowing people to enter the market those that want something the most, are the most willing to pay for it. Therefore all goods an services in a market system would be allocated to those who need/want it the most. Since everybody gets what they desire, all desires are met, and everyone is happy. You can be the judge if the capitalist market system actually does this. What I do find interesting to think about if a true Utilitarian Liberal, whose Liberal-Capitalist political-economic view is based on Utilitarian ethics, would realise that the market system is not creating the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people, would they alter their political-economic views, or would they abandon their moral framework? If they do the latter what do they replace it with?

[@xxcrysad3000xx]

@@MCAPrince Classical liberalism's utilitarian pretenses are a joke. It's beyond obvious that the sum total of happiness could be increased by taking a million dollars from Jeff Bezos and distributing it to 100 poor people, because the marginal benefit of each additional unit of money is greater to a poor person than it is to a wealthy person.

[@oifikd1]

Before liberalism, almost everyone was starving but now in the countries where it has been practiced almost nobody starves. Classical liberalism isn't really concerned about inequality if it happens under a free market and equality before the law because it's impossible to redistribute wealth without violence.

[@Corarii]

right wingers saying youre classically liberal...girlie you are still a right winger

[@virvisquevir3320]

It would be nice if Middle Eastern tribal-oriented groups would play our Classical Liberal/individualistic game... but, alas... Tribe/cabal/cult first? Or free individuals first? The fake "War on Terror" on behalf of one tribal state in the Middle East predicated on a questionable "terrorist attack" in 2001 is one example. Banking monopolies is another. Special interest - tribalist - lobbying groups like AIPAC is another... Not all cultures have the same conscious or subconscious assumptions. For Classical Liberalism to flourish, all must share in the same spirit. Not one group taking advantage of the openness of the rest while staying closed themselves.

[@DemasiadamenteStudios]

We have to radically promote freedom and voluntary engagement. Ok. So I can decide I don't want to pay taxes and everyone else should respect that freedom, right?

[@rogercamel]

It's just difficult to allow the opting out of taxes, as then you have no right to the privileges they pay for. No roads, no police, no law, no ... well money. It doesn't really work as an option unfortunately.

[@DemasiadamenteStudios]

@@rogercamel Totally agree on that. That's why a 'let everyone do whatever they want' can't work. It's a nice idea, but as realistic as a unicorns and rainbows world.

[@rogercamel]

​@@DemasiadamenteStudios There are very few (probably none) political movements you can take to their logical extremes. That doesn't mean you throw the baby out with the bathwater. But if you think the ideology is generally a good thing, you adhere to it until you don't think it makes sense to any more. Just because you find some examples where voluntary engagement doesn't work doesn't mean you can't aspire to allow voluntary engagement in every instance that it could possibly make sense.

[@DemasiadamenteStudios]

@@rogercamel Also on board with that. I think the missing piece, that Emily didn't mention, is responsability. The best freedom you can give someone is owning the results of their actions. When you only demand having freedom but not consecuences, the system fails. Most people talk about rights and things society owns them but not how they earn that rights.

[@rogercamel]

@@DemasiadamenteStudios Yes, but ... (I'll assume you're referring in part there against the social safety net, income redistribution, health care for all and for being taxed less on what you earn) everything involves risk. You can take actions you believe will have positive consequences and end up worse off. The intention of a lot of these "socialist"-leaning systems isn't to take away reward and consequence, but just to dampen it a little so that a bit of bad luck, or a choice that was bad in retrospect doesn't result in your demise. Providing these kinds of assurances lets you move through life more confidently and ultimately take more smart risks. We have engineered civilisation to provide us with many benefits to lawful participation, and that is often one of them.

[@zebrashark_talks]

well yes, but actually no

[@Suped_BIGRIG_350mph]

Shoutouts to the people that read the title and thumbs-down before watching the video.

[@Firehazerd5444]

Why is liberalism hated so much now today? I can see being angry with JWs and the like...but in all intentions, they aren't liberal, or at least classical liberal.

[@micraan1579]

If the current ratio really is indicative of what the people think of human dignity and personal freedom, this world is truly fucked.

[@mrmagoo-i2l]

MechanizedMan Maybe because the meaning has been twisted by halfwit yanks. Liberal does not mean leftist in the rest of the world. Leftists are authoritarian bum holes. Liberals are the opposite.

[@sttate]

@@Firehazerd5444 The term's associated with the far-left now, even if they are far from classical liberals. It's a shame.

[@Suped_BIGRIG_350mph]

Fantastic Dunning-Kruger mindset on display from the dude that equates leftism with authoritarianism. Who would have guessed anarchism was part of authoritarian thought.

[@charlee6128]

As an American, US liberals today do not recognize true liberty in most senses of the word. I would personally say they take the ideal of liberalism to further their racist agenda & to further their power. We should love and value each other’s cultures and share all of our cultures rather than separating each other. I hate both parties but could just be my personal opinion lol but I do not agree w “liberal” Americans at all despite having liberty as one of my most important values.

[@SharKShadows]

What a bunch of BS, especially the last 2 minutes. Classical Liberalism also conveniently leaves out the gaping holes in these ideals, and why they do not work in a functioning society. This is all of the sales talk and attractive sounding explanations that reel people in. But she said one specific sentence that when explored, exposes why this way of thinking on grand scale does not work. ‘As long as it optional and there is an Exit’ in regards to rules and goals as a community. If you cannot enforce a community goal of say- we will not kill children (babies) or we will help others as long as it does not completely deplete our own resources as a country with limited amounts of everything for its own citizens- then in the end it results in chaos, because no one person believes the same on a variety of issues. So it only ends up with non stop fighting and zero agreement when a society is based on self only. Rarely do people agree on any one issue that results in a solution. So you need a government to enforce morality for all of the many who do not have it automatically. Classical Liberalism is so focused on self rights, it will overlook atrocities being done by its own citizens-‘as long as it doesn’t impede on individual freedom’…

[@Historia.Magistra.Vitae.]

_"So you need a government to enforce morality for all of the many who do not have it automatically."_ And this is why people like you are the problem. You don't seem to understand the simple basic fact, that you cannot magically enforce moral values with secular laws. For example you cannot magically make people to adhere Christian values just because you wrote them into the Law. That's not how morality works, hun. People's moral values come from the inside.

[@importantname]

when are we allowed to do what we want, when we want to? Are there no Laws?

[@rchuso]

Wrong about respecting "all human beings". Respect is earned. Wrong about equality: we're not all capable of being a Wilt Chamberlain or Nikola Tesla, regardless of how much money you throw at us. Your ideas may be internally consistent, but that doesn't make them right. If your Liberal society is so good and tolerant, why did it morph into one that hates White Men? Your Liberal politicians brought in Welfare, destroyed the marriage contract, dropped the birthrate, and brought in policies to replace the current population with economic migrants posing as Refugees. You accept ideologies like Islam, which are the opposite of what you claim to support. It's time to move on and embrace Conservatism, and abandon your ideas that don't match reality.

[@j.c5078]

Very well said!

[@rchuso]

@Rebecca Leeman - That "10 Commandments" list wasn't _moral_ as much as it was liturgical. There are better moral codes going back much further in the early Mesopotamian civilization. Besides, you'd have to specify you mean the list in Exodus 20 (which makes no mention of "tablets of stone" or even "ten commandments" in the actual text, only in the linear notes provided by scribes who were embarrassed by the other list) or Exodus 34 (which are actually called the "ten commandments" in the text, and mentions they're written on "tablets of stone". That's a much more entertaining list anyway - especially the 10th about not boiling a kid-goat in its mother's milk (a religious practice from the area just North of Palestine).

[@reiayanami6873]

Nice dialogue tree you got there

[@lil10dot]

it's trash, one step above ancap, are u kidding me

[@lampelampe7234]

The majority of the claims made in this video are wrong. Inherent in the execution of liberal ideology since the beginning has been a collection of like minded against certain outsiders. The protections of individuals' freedoms includes the freedom to operate with racial, religious and/or class bias in personal, business and democratic affairs. Which then becomes established in structural norms. This leads to systemic injustice, always has. Who benefits depends on this situation but the resulting models have always channeled wealth, power and well-being from certain groups to other groups. In the beginning this was slaves to the rising middle class and/or the nobility to said rising middle class. After that it was the colonized and indigenous to the established liberal nations. Today it's from the vast majority of the world's population to the corporations and billionaires. And by the way, no; no one has the freedom to choose to not be a part of it. We invade, bomb and bankrupt those people.

[@hamishcounsell5579]

Ok comrade

[@BM-fz9yc]

Why do I always see this same script over and over and over again. So substance. Just reading the script. Sm