The eleventh amendment was a "bug fix" to the constitution. The original constitution had wording that accidentally allowed a citizen to file a suit against a state directly in the supreme court. Nobody in the government intended for this to be possible, but citizens began suing states and this conduct was upheld as constitutional.

At the time (1794), this was resolved by amending the constitution to make the desired change. If the same unintended wording had gone unnoticed until today, it is very likely that the supreme court would simply decide that the outcome as written was not desirable and throw out the suits.

Actually 10 distinctions between "liberals" and "progressives", demonstrating that there are many criteria by which progressives are closer to communists than to liberals.

> I would think anyone below the center line vertically (so anarchists to free market libertarians) would support what you call “cancel culture” since is a powerful form of direct action.

No liberal is the other alike, but some would argue that privacy is a prerequisite of freedom. Calling out someone with intent of harm is a violation of their privacy and civil rights. This can have a chilling effect and promote homogeneous thought and expression, which is inconsistent with basic liberal values. Maybe a distinction between anarchism and liberalism is that the former want no regulation at all, while the latter embrace legislation that protect civil and human rights.