• Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    5 个月前

    Overton Window, maybe, but that’s not a particularly useful categorization. Parties represent relatively fixed views, not directions.

    • KazuyaDarklight@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 个月前

      In the US it’s a spectrum combining party policy and Overton Window. As you move left, you go deeper and deeper into increasingly extreme thoughts on policy regarding what we consider classic liberal topics such as social justice, corporate power, various societal and economic reforms, etc till it hits an extreme that’s considered radical to the average, the same goes for the right and classic conservative views.

      Hugging the middle/mixed gray zone are the Centrist.

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        5 个月前

        I think you’re a bit confused on terms.

        Social Justice isn’t really a “Liberal” topic. It’s a topic many US Liberals generally are progressive on, but that doesn’t make it “Liberal.” Liberalism is also not about reforming the economy but maintaining “healthy” Capitalism.

        Liberal views are therefore views in line with Liberalism itself, and Liberal Parties like the DNC represent Liberalism and movements towards Liberalism, not movements towards the left.

        Social Democracy, ie what Scandinavian Countries have, would be centrist.