True you do hold the mirror to your own face.
I'm the mirror. I'm only showing you who you are :)
I literally said the terms became more broad as centuries passed, blatantly saying they changed. At least get that right when you preach.
Saying it and understanding it are two different things. When you claim that I don't understand the left and you give me the state of the left of the first french assemblee... It gives me the message that you don't really get how it evolved.
And once again, stick to how things are now, instead of using your own idealism to create new versions of words under the guise of "language evolves." Your versions are yours alone.
My version is not my "own".. it's simply how leftism is today. Like I already told you many times before, I'm not an extrem leftist and I'm mainly showing you things that make consensus on the left.
Idealism was part of leftism 3 hundreds years ago. That's why it's not pertinent to talk about a real conflict between materialism and idealism then (even tho it was already there), the problem was the monarchy and to defeat it, we needed to be idealists and materialist at the same time, we needed to think outside of the divine carcan.
This is not the case anymore. Now, we can see why idealism do not work and why a materialist approach is a necessity. THIS, is the current state of the right VS the left today.
So yeah, you don't get that, because where you live (if I recall you live in the US ?), idealists have the power when materialists are not even organized enough to fight the streets efficiently.
This is not me inventing words or relying on the evolution of language.
This is the state of the major conflict today, that might change our society forever !
ANYONE that call themselves an idealist and a leftist today, do not understand their real place on the political spectrum !