The rulers-subjects distinction simply precurses the myriad oppressor-oppressed distinctions that abound in late-modernity.
You're asserting a historical dialectic as if it follows that ruler inevitably leads to oppressor. You are assuming the Leftist dialectic from the start.
Once the rulers are overthrown, the logic of the political value of freedom demands that new oppressors are identified and overthrown
No. You are extending the concept of liberation beyond all reasonable scope. Gravity is not political oppression.
Any logical system taken to the extremes passed it's boundary conditions inevitably fails.
What you want to do is bound Liberalism such that its logic does not unfold beyond the ruler-subjects distinction: Liberalism stops at political equality. This is nonsense, since there is no way that freedom can reliably be bounded.
This is an argument from totalitarianism. Everything is political, so therefore political freedom must be pursued against the political oppression of gravity. No. Again, Goodell's Incompleteness Theorem actually has weight here: No logical system can be both complete, and consistent. Ever. Under any circumstance. Even arithmetic. Something which has an unbounded scope will never be consistent. Something which is consistent will always be limited in scope. Logical deduction does not even escape this conclusion.
The bounds of Liberal models end at the boundary of politics, and not everything is within the realm of political debate. And even within the realm of political debate, most things never meet the standard of oppression or tyranny.
The only solution, then, is a re-evaluation of values such that freedom and equality are simply eliminated from our value system.
"If I remove the variable from my spreadsheet, then the variable no longer exists, and my utopia will be complete." Wrong. A society that eliminates the value of freedom does not prevent anything, but instead fosters the resentment you are hoping to cut-off at the head.
Authoritarian collectivism is ultimately the only sustainable alternative to civilizational collapse. The world's longest surviving civilizations, all of them authoritarian collectivists, such as the thousand-year Byzantine Empire, attest to the truth of that fact.
This is comically wrong. The exact level of authoritarianism, autocracy, and collectivism you cite has lead (and always leads) to the utter ruination of the civilization that imposes it, as it has no mechanism to decline. The Byzantine Empire was more liberal than most of the empires around it, and it was exterminated after it became more and more centralized. The Ottoman Empire was exterminated. The Golden Horde were exterminated. The Assyrians were exterminated. The Spartans decayed into extermination. Roman culture was exterminated. They never even had the ability to reform or morph into something else. They were simply eradicated as their institutions were, sometimes practically overnight. Within a few centuries, the entire civilization is lost entirely to myth. The children that lived in the ruins of Assyrian cities did not even know that they were the decedents of their own predecessors whom lived in those cities merely 400 years earlier. The very social and cultural ordering of these civilizations were evaporated into thin air, and the best anyone could do was pantomime the ruins.
There are no meaningful differences between Leftism and Liberalism: that's just your outdated version
You admit there is a distinction, and you assert that the Leftist re-definition is correct. Perhaps you will tell me why a transwoman is a woman. Afterall, the Leftist re-definition must be the correct one. All original definitions and meanings must be burned at the pyre of rhetorical warfare.
Finally, I can't help but note that the Leftist's reasoning in the last line is identical to yours: he wishes to 'remove all of the structures preventing you' from self-actualizing.
Again, you intentionally conflate the Leftist's totalitarianism with anti-totalitarianism. Gravity is not oppression. Gravity does not prevent you from """"""self-actualizing"""".
Bullets do prevent you from self-actualizing. They also prevent you from breathing, eating, thinking, or pretty much everything once jammed into your skull at 2,000 feet per second. That is a form of actual oppression.
You're asserting a historical dialectic as if it follows that ruler inevitably leads to oppressor. You are assuming the Leftist dialectic from the start.
No. You are extending the concept of liberation beyond all reasonable scope. Gravity is not political oppression.
Any logical system taken to the extremes passed it's boundary conditions inevitably fails.
This is an argument from totalitarianism. Everything is political, so therefore political freedom must be pursued against the political oppression of gravity. No. Again, Goodell's Incompleteness Theorem actually has weight here: No logical system can be both complete, and consistent. Ever. Under any circumstance. Even arithmetic. Something which has an unbounded scope will never be consistent. Something which is consistent will always be limited in scope. Logical deduction does not even escape this conclusion.
The bounds of Liberal models end at the boundary of politics, and not everything is within the realm of political debate. And even within the realm of political debate, most things never meet the standard of oppression or tyranny.
"If I remove the variable from my spreadsheet, then the variable no longer exists, and my utopia will be complete." Wrong. A society that eliminates the value of freedom does not prevent anything, but instead fosters the resentment you are hoping to cut-off at the head.
This is comically wrong. The exact level of authoritarianism, autocracy, and collectivism you cite has lead (and always leads) to the utter ruination of the civilization that imposes it, as it has no mechanism to decline. The Byzantine Empire was more liberal than most of the empires around it, and it was exterminated after it became more and more centralized. The Ottoman Empire was exterminated. The Golden Horde were exterminated. The Assyrians were exterminated. The Spartans decayed into extermination. Roman culture was exterminated. They never even had the ability to reform or morph into something else. They were simply eradicated as their institutions were, sometimes practically overnight. Within a few centuries, the entire civilization is lost entirely to myth. The children that lived in the ruins of Assyrian cities did not even know that they were the decedents of their own predecessors whom lived in those cities merely 400 years earlier. The very social and cultural ordering of these civilizations were evaporated into thin air, and the best anyone could do was pantomime the ruins.
You admit there is a distinction, and you assert that the Leftist re-definition is correct. Perhaps you will tell me why a transwoman is a woman. Afterall, the Leftist re-definition must be the correct one. All original definitions and meanings must be burned at the pyre of rhetorical warfare.
Again, you intentionally conflate the Leftist's totalitarianism with anti-totalitarianism. Gravity is not oppression. Gravity does not prevent you from """"""self-actualizing"""".
Bullets do prevent you from self-actualizing. They also prevent you from breathing, eating, thinking, or pretty much everything once jammed into your skull at 2,000 feet per second. That is a form of actual oppression.