As noted, no such thing as rootless individual. You're conceptualizing individuals that don't exist.

I never said that a rootless individual exists. I actually said that they don't. I said that Liberalism denies the State the right to coerce the individual into being subservient to the state. I told you that individuals are rooted in many things, you ignored it and acted like the state is the root of individuals. It's a Fascist argument, but like all Leftist ideologies, it's wrong.

Yeah, this isn't a serious discussion, I wish I saw this earlier lol.

Keep pretending their antisemitism isn't real either. Racialist Marxists are just National Socialists.

and you're deflecting onto leftism as if liberalism isn't the dominant ideology in our society, as if the system isn't built on liberalism, and as if liberal values and ideals don't lead to this very things when they do. And no, marxists and communists aren't the modern left, as modern left is fully in service of the capital.

The dominant ideology in our society is not Liberalism, it is simply Leftism using Liberalism as a skin suit to make it palatable. That's been the name of the game because Americans repeatedly react badly to the rhetoric of Socialsim, because it is contradictory to Liberal values. While American cultural millieu embraces Liberalism, it's institutions have been decidedly since the Roosevelt administration, but you could argue that the Federal government had embraced Leftism under Wilson.

And this is why you don't understand it.

No, I understand it honestly. This is why Leftist groups and whole political wings have repeatedly taken up contradictory positions on the exact same topics. They will side with anyone, including Islamists, Anarchists, Nazis, and Royalists, so long as there is a promise at power. The common equation for Leftism is about the seizure of power. What to do with that power has always been irrelevant Leftist leadership, and the outcomes of the use of that power are also irrelevant to the leadership. If you take power as a Leftist to end starvation, and 90% of the population starves, this is never considered a failure of any Leftist policy or government by the Left. To an ideology that currently preaches equality of outcomes; it is a fact that outcomes of their policies are always irrelevant to the Left. The only thing that matters is whether or not they have achieved power. Nothing more, nothing else, ever.

No Leftist holds a position of principal; only of power. To a Leftist, principals exist only to manipulate useful idiots into doing their bidding. Principals are a tactical weakness to a Leftist. It exposes them to position they must defend. They will abandon any and all principals for a tactical advantage. They must always change their position to a more defensible 'moral high ground' if their current position is too threatened. They always do. The most consistent thread of the Left is it's focus on power, and it's seizure thereof. The consistency of their tactics is unquestionable. The Left, will never voluntarily hold a position that weakens their grip on power, but maintains some principal.

"Right wing" ideologies do the opposite. They are all principled, whatever they may be. A royalist will remain a royalist, no matter it's utility in seizing power. A Theocrat will remain a Theocrat. A Liberal will remain a Liberal. A Militarist will remain a Militarist. An Anarchist will remain an Anarchist. This means that the "right" will maintain a position that may become indefensible if properly subverted. This the purpose of all Leftist aggression: to subvert or attack the enemy position until it is indefensible, then destroy it. Once destroyed, the ground may be held by any Leftist occupying the territory. A Leftist can and will hold any ideological ground. Whatever ideological moral high ground is the most defensible, becomes avowed principal of the Left in that specific time, at that specific place. Take my examples: A Leftist Liberal is a "Social Democrat", a Leftist Anarchist is an "Anachro-Communist", a Militarist Leftist is a "Revolutionary Gaurdsmen", a Theocratic Leftist is an advocate for "Liberation Theology", a Leftist Royalist is a follower of Napoleon.

Leftism has only one principal of note: War. The seizure of power by conquest of will. Nothing else. Not even the maintenance of power, just the seizure of it.

Which is also my response to this:

It's not about rhetoric, it's about values.

Leftism has no values beyond power. Within Leftism, there is nothing of value besides power. There never is, never was, and never will be. Leftism does not need Liberal values for anything. Leftism simply claims values that may prove useful during it's current campaign, but they are never held sincerely. They are nothing but a temporary means to an end. Liberal values are no different than any other set of values under Leftism. Liberal values may even be held in conjunction with other contradictory values simultaneously! The Anarcho-Communist is an excellent example. An anarchist that espouses the values of anarchism and a rejection of authoritarian systems... demanding full-throated totalitarianism among all things as a rabid collectivist to fulfill asserted demands of homogeneous outcome. A Communist system can never be Anarchist. They are a contradiction in terms. But, the values of anarchism may be an attractive weapon for the purposes of the Leftist. That is all that is needed. The values are now weaponized.

It is about rhetoric. Liberal values are particularly attractive to many individuals. Hence, they are weaponized. Leftism needs no special affiliation with Liberalism, Anarchism, Tradtionalism, or any other ideological foundation. Leftism is independent of all standard philosophical ideologies. It is only a philosophy of War.

On that same note:

And no, marxists and communists aren't the modern left, as modern left is fully in service of the capital.

Capital is simply another means to power. This is why all Socialist systems inevitably generate Corporatism. The concentration of power over the economy requires it's corporatization and cartelization into a cast of ruling elites subservient to the party/state.

You might as well be saying that the Left is fully in the service of firearms. It's a meaningless statement. To Leftist, it is just another commodity that exists to be exploited for power.