I’ll take major publications linked before (NPR, ProPublica, Gallup, Vox, etc) over Lemmy as less biased representations of conventions & conventional language.
European ones, understand this delineation
This goes back to regional language differences & (Eurocentric) bias.
Cultural is affected by the people in the culture. Communities by the people in the community.
Not the same as a language community: no such thing as Lemmy English.
This is still a discussion site of people from various regional language communities.
The line between liberalism and leftism
Gee look, I was NOT claiming that.
liberals should be considered rightwing
Now you’re being obtuse & contradictory.
Here it is a few more times.
line between liberalism and leftism
line between
line
as if you can draw a line between them in a Venn diagram indicating no overlap.
It’s like talking about “the line” between color & shape: they’re just independent concepts, there is no line.
Learn to read.
Did it & read it back to you: own up to your own words.
We all learned to compare and contrast in middle school. Just because apples and oranges are both round and fruits, does not mean we should make apples and oranges mean the same thing or be the same word.
I’m sorry this concept of regional language variations is so hard for you.
Also, that logic or the idea of conjunction is too hard for you: liberal & left shouldn’t be a hard concept, nor that left is usually understood with the word liberal in North America, nor that it’s plainly observable in major publications shown to you.
Do you have as much trouble understanding something can have both color & shape and there is no “line” between them?
Please read The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order before responding again. It literally explains why liberals should be considered rightwing.
As was presented multiple times with basic logic, liberal can be left & doesn’t imply right-wing (or left-wing).
It takes bias & motivated reasoning to disregard the obvious.
Reading an argument that contradicts logic would be like reading an argument that true is false or 1+1=3.
We could, but anyone with a basic grasp of logic already knows the claim has been refuted—no valid argument undoes that.
When your belief conflicts with logic & evidence, the reasonable course is to update belief.
I suspect your thinking is too ideological to do that.
I’ll take major publications linked before (NPR, ProPublica, Gallup, Vox, etc) over Lemmy as less biased representations of conventions & conventional language.
This goes back to regional language differences & (Eurocentric) bias.
Not the same as a language community: no such thing as Lemmy English. This is still a discussion site of people from various regional language communities.
Now you’re being obtuse & contradictory. Here it is a few more times.
as if you can draw a line between them in a Venn diagram indicating no overlap.
It’s like talking about “the line” between color & shape: they’re just independent concepts, there is no line.
Did it & read it back to you: own up to your own words.
I’m sorry this concept of regional language variations is so hard for you. Also, that logic or the idea of conjunction is too hard for you: liberal & left shouldn’t be a hard concept, nor that left is usually understood with the word liberal in North America, nor that it’s plainly observable in major publications shown to you.
Do you have as much trouble understanding something can have both color & shape and there is no “line” between them?
As was presented multiple times with basic logic, liberal can be left & doesn’t imply right-wing (or left-wing). It takes bias & motivated reasoning to disregard the obvious.
Reading an argument that contradicts logic would be like reading an argument that true is false or 1+1=3. We could, but anyone with a basic grasp of logic already knows the claim has been refuted—no valid argument undoes that.
When your belief conflicts with logic & evidence, the reasonable course is to update belief. I suspect your thinking is too ideological to do that.