I've got it now.
The difference between Anglo and Continental understandings of "liberalism" is quite simple.
The Anglo understanding is: "I want to be able to have slaves, and to exploit them and get lots of money"
The Continental understanding is: "I want to be able to fuck kids and jack off in public"
Go around Europe. In fact, go around the world.
Everyone knows about French or German philosophers. They are the greatest philosophers Europe ever produced.
No one cares about "the Austrian school" (popularized by an Austrian who became a British citizen, surprise surprise) or Lockean or Burkean economics.
The whole "British liberal philosopher" thing is a LARP. It's a big fucking LARP.
They complain about the "French Empire spreading democracy" while literally wanting the British Empire to expand to cover the entire world and turn everyone into cashcows.
@Aldo2 Why he hated it ?
British/English philosophers are materialists and utilitarians.
They are obsessed with money and finding the easiest ways of getting more of it.
They are not spiritualists, like the French or Germans.
Marx's critique of Judaism applies to British philosophy.
"What is the worldly religion of the Anglo? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money.…. Money is the jealous god of the British Empire, in face of which no other god may exist. Money degrades all the gods of man – and turns them into commodities…. The bill of exchange is the real god of the Anglo. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange…. The chimerical nationality of the Anglo is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general."
It's no surprise that Marx even thought the way he did. He grew up in a materialist society that lied about its materialist slant. So Marx thought there was nothing wrong with materialism, but the world just needed "real/honest" materialism.
The British created Communism by being liars, essentially.
@Aldo2 Well to be honest I don't know much about these people don't know much about philosophy but I do agree with some libertarian views and classic liberalism I know there are a few MAPs are on that are left libertarian and classic liberal
@bulky_nerd of course some of their views are agreeable.
The problem comes when you look at them generally, or "on the whole".
Then it becomes apparent that whatever good views they have on sexuality, on "youth-liberation" on "individual rights", on "freedom", that those views are offset by views that are in direct opposition. And those oppositionary views are greater in number.
