Liberals are not conservative. They are against misogyny, bigotry,racism.

So right-wing Female supremacists, Trans supremacists and Afro-supremacists.
That’s your problem there.

If all of them are complacent with rampant problems in liberal democracies like:

• Campaign fraud
• Worker exploitation
• Imperialist propaganda
• Bribes
• Blackmail
• Inside trading
• Usury
• Private gambling institutions
• Landlords
• Consumer good poisoning
• Monopolized rent consumer goods

Then THEY’RE NOT LEFT-WING!

And the US hasn’t had a left-wing party, not even a social democratic one, since the 1990s,
as social democratic parties only seem to thrive if there’s a socialist nation to look up to
and the Soviet Union fell apart as it lacked resources (coal) to do anything against the US petrodollar scheme,
That’s why Bill Clinton had been called a Repubic-lite during his reign
and Obama never delivered on his “Hope & Change”.

The only semi-left-wing ideas I see coming from US contemporaries “progressives”,
is that they’re pro-green, because that at least will help people have the resources to go left in the future.

The right stands for a ruling merchant class and a gatekeeping judicial class.
The judicial class has noble ideas for itself as a ruling class,
but they need campaign money in order to be elected as a ruler,
which the merchant class has in spades, but want their favorable laws for them to be implemented in return.
And thus the merchant class becomes the ruling class and the judicial class their gatekeepers.
That’s what the right-wing stands for, unless they’re even more regressive
and long for a kings and priests to rule over them.

Centrists, social democratic wing like FDR, try to curb the power of the merchant class,
but a true left wing will replace it with a ruling engineering class and gatekeeping scholar class that will replace liberal democracy with a people’s democracy that can focus on creating a classless society,
because only a people’s democracy can tackle the issue of campaign fraud,
which is systemic in a liberal democracy.
And this systemic problem becomes larger and larger the more a society automates
as it causes the power of merchants to be more and more concentrated.

The US democratic party is only slowly returning to become a social democratic party
with Zohran Mamdami firmly in the democratic socialist side.

But looking from the outside, the US is like the Star Control II Ur-Quan alien race, where the US democratic party plays the role of the Kzer-za that wants the rest of the world/galaxy enslaved and the US republican party playing the role of the bloodthirsty Kohr-Ah that wants the rest of the world dead. The only thing missing in the US is a civil war between the two.

Wouldn’t the quiet geek engineer be Richard Stallman?

Social Democrats and to a lesser extend Pure Identity Politics Progressives.

But social democrats first and foremost, because the social democrats usually have a couple of charismatic intellectual gurus.
For the US it’s Noam Chomsky
Greece has Yanis Varoufakis
the Netherlands has Maarten van Rossem

No, it makes it okay for a foreign country to invade with just cause when there was…

1. A coup
2. The next election was won through the popularity of a tv series, where the election winner played president on tv. This was not a coincidence.
3. It became very clear that the policies of these two presidents that it would completely isolate Ukraine from Russia, despite half of Ukraine being Russian and the other half semi-Russian.
4. This upset parts of Ukraine that have deep economic ties with Russia so much, that they declared independence of Ukraine to join Russia, starting with Crimea.
5. This in turn was painted by US/UK media as aggressive annexation by Putin.
6. It also became clear that Zelensky wanted to join the EU at all costs.
7. This concerned Russia as the EU doesn’t seem to be independent of NATO policy and having nukes placed close to Russia’s border aimed at Moscow in areas where xx% of the population would consider themselves Russian wanting to join Russia is considered a nightmare scenario for Russia if separatist conflict would be taking place there.
8. Russia then made negotiations with Ukraine to address both concerns and Ukraine did not uphold their part of the agreement. This happened twice and in both cases this ended up with military victory for Russia and the separatist areas.
9. Russia also negotiated with NATO, since NATO was supplying Ukraine with arms to end this conflict and it became clear that NATO and the EU were pushing Ukraine to further the conflict.
10. At this point Russia decided that it was time to act before things would get further out of control, showing Ukraine’s president that they were willing to wage war in order to prevent high otential nuclear conflict, by doing a small flash invasion, while preparing for world war III.
11. Ukraine’s president then flipped, saying he was willing to take the situation serious, but then flopped when UK’s former prime minister came to visit him telling Zelensky that NATO was prepared to fully support Ukraine with whatever military equipment he needed.