lothar
CONSERVATIVE
Realy, the word "Conservative" doesn't feel like the right word to use , if we're talking about Republicans in the US .their policies of late are anything but conservative. The government has changed radicaly in the last few years.
and the things they are conservative on ; preseving the institution of War, religiously based bigotry, the continued Rape of the planet, a leze fair attitude twards global poverty and misery ... i could prolly think of some more .

Agreed. Fascism isn't conservative.

Ron Paul is a real conservative. I'm voting for him.

Labels I don't mind. Its the over simplification of social and economic leanings into only two groups that really bugs me. Call it bi-partisan. Call it dichotomy. In the end it ends up as a fight between "Good vs. Evil" or "Heaven vs. Hell" depending on which side of the "fence" that you are on.

The Dems think the Reps are evil and stupid. The Reps think the Dems are evil and stupid. Everything is blown way out of proportion. No Rep can support a Dem initiated movement because Dems are always wrong, and vice-versa.

This is the most counter productive non-sense that I've ever seen. It is childish, it is what makes things not work in government.

There are more than just 2 sides to an argument, on ANY issue. The fact that we have to choose between two arbitrary 'norms' annoys me.

I don't agree 100% with either party. Not even 60%. So I am what is called Independent. And because I can't follow a bandwagon, I get less oppotunities to vote. :P

I really think that there should be at LEAST 3 main parties.

Socially I can often be class conservative, as I am a very religious man. Economically, and I'm probably liberal. Environmentally, I have my own plans that will never get enacted by either party. Basically, there is no easy fit and I'm sick of the drama :D

I'm a libertarian constitutionalist.

While it is true that there are conservative and there are liberal variants of libertarian, most libertarians cannot be easily reconciled with either Right or Left. There are just too many things both Democrats and Republicans support that we don't.
And there are too many things we stand for, like legalizing drugs and abolishing the Income Tax, that are too "extreme" for their tastes.

TitanOne
I'm a libertarian constitutionalist.

While it is true that there are conservative and there are liberal variants of libertarian, most libertarians cannot be easily reconciled with either Right or Left. There are just too many things both Democrats and Republicans support that we don't.
And there are too many things we stand for, like legalizing drugs and abolishing the Income Tax, that are too "extreme" for their tastes.

I think the Republicans are better at kowtowing to the libertarians, because there are things in libertarianism that people don't think all the way through. Most of my libertarian acquaintances get very excited about welfare in terms of money to the poor, but never look at the S&L bailouts or the vast amount of corporate welfare going on. Even libertarians that say "Yeah, I hate that too" are only paying lip service to appear consistent. I also find it interesting that libertarians many times *completely* ignore corporate feudalism.

I'm a Libertarian as far as civil liberties goes. But I think assigning "right" and "left" to parties is a bit inaccurate, because there's the money party, which holds sway over members of both sides.

This is how I define the main parties in the United States today:

Liberals seek to create a government that helps the people. They ignore the reality of governments that seek to help everyone nearly always become bloated and repressive. Instead of fighting this problem, the solution is usually another bloated and repressive government program. Many liberals have a kneejerk distrust of non-liberals, but an excessive amount of trust for liberal leadership. Among the political groups that are liberals are left wing democrats and greens. Liberals claim to hate corporations, but continue to elect politicians with corporate backing (go figure!)

Conservatives believe that there should only be a government for security of the nation. Unfortunately, they also ignore the reality that governments that seek to create security for all usually become bloated and repressive. They also tend to respect authority figures to the point where they believe these authorities do not need to be monitored for malfeasance. Among the political groups that are conservatives are all republicans and moderate democrats.

Libertarians want no government. Nope, strike that. They want no government to either help people or protect the nation. They still accept government since only governments can actually authorize corporations. Libertarians trust corporations and the "free market" over all things, though there has never been a "free market" in the history of the world and there is little likelihood there ever will be. Among the groups that are libertarian are libertarians and the reform party.

Both Libertarians and Conservatives believe that it is perfectly okay for Corporations to pay little to no tax and to receive the bulk of government funds in the form of the "commons" (land, government agency protection such as police and fire departments, government contracts).

Both Liberals and Conservatives think the other one has absolutely no point in existing and that the other is nuts.

I generally will side with the liberals, only because the damage conservatives and libertarians want to inflict on the United States outweighs any actual good they could do...and because both run on the "government sucks" platform, which always seems a bit duplicitous for someone desiring a political job to say.
___

All that being said, I don't know what I am.

I don't want a system that gives too much security to the people, because that will breed complacency and acceptance as stormtroopers start bashing in skulls.

I don't want a system where there are stormtroopers are bashing in skulls.

I also don't want a system that allows for something as perverse as a corporation to exist. Privately owned business with full liability only.

I believe that there are some government duties that can only best be performed by governments, and others that are better suited to private business.

I believe labor should be able to better set the terms for employment, and that outsourcing and illegal hiring practices should be abolished. But I don't believe that labor should never have to give in to market forces, as that can kill an economy.

I believe our country has too much power - both internally and externally - but have no desire to give that power to someone else because ... well, because I don't trust any other country or political system more than the one we're saddled with.

I also believe that a government - if it must exist - should live within it's means. Only the libertarians agree with that in theory, but they don't really they just haven't been given a chance to rule yet.

So what political view represents me? Probably a bit of socialist, but on a very limited scale. Probably a bit of an anarchist, but not to the point of demanding every individual take care of themselves at all times.

...is there a realist party?

Ronson
Libertarians want no government. Nope, strike that. They want no government to either help people or protect the nation. They still accept government since only governments can actually authorize corporations. Libertarians trust corporations and the "free market" over all things, though there has never been a "free market" in the history of the world and there is little likelihood there ever will be. Among the groups that are libertarian are libertarians and the reform party.

Both Libertarians and Conservatives believe that it is perfectly okay for Corporations to pay little to no tax and to receive the bulk of government funds in the form of the "commons" (land, government agency protection such as police and fire departments, government contracts).

Personally, I'm a populist and I detest big multinational corporations--indeed, I think they are a large part of what's wrong with our current system--they wield too much political influence.

As to the tax issue, all citizens should pay very little tax. We are grossly overtaxed.

I just read through this whole topic for the first time, because I don't usually peruse the debate forum.

I just joined my college's Libertarian party/club, and I just wanted to share this little bit of simplified definition that was in our newsletter:

Freedom Forum
Liberals want the government to be your mommy.

Conservatives want the government to be your daddy.

Libertarians want to treat you like the adult you are.

Gross simplification, yes, but it gave me a smile.

While ideologically I am very libertarian, I recognize that that form of government would never, ever happen in the US. It just wouldn't work, we're too entrenched in bureaucracy and tangled streams of money and liberal attitudes that any attempt at a libertarian government would be completely futile. ):

I used to think I was conservative. Still hold some conservative viewpoints in fact.

Then I flirted with libertarianism. Soome things in that still make sense.

Anarchism never gelled with me at all, since it would be pure tyranny.

So I don't really know what I am. My viewpoints are fragmented across the entire spectrum, depending on the issue.

I think all drugs should be legal and freely available. I also think there should be education that they're bad, and if you die of an overdose it's your own fault.

I think that abortion is a very personal choice. One I hope to never have to make for myself.

The death penalty should be applied more often, but have much stricter standards of guilt.

If your religion isn't hurting anyone (or inciting you to hurt others) then follow your bliss.

Two consenting adults should be able to marry regardless of gender. And should suffer equally in the divorce cases that arise.

So yeah... I'm registered to one party still, but none truly represent me. And I think this will only become more apparent as I grow in life.

Unfortunately, most liberatarians I've met are trust fund children -- from the house they inherited from their parents (assuming their parents are deceased, many of these self-made men still live at home, and don't even have the self-sufficiency to pay rent)

It would be fantastic if we could live in the Liberatarian ideal -- where information in the market really is transparent and people are free to make the decisions they want to without some other power group moving in to force their will on people.

But, its a fantasy, unfortunately -- one that conservatives use against them.

I prefer to defy those labels and go with federalist.
I'm too varied in my opinions and stances to be called liberal or conservative.
Libertarians can't get their act together, and I like owning private property too much to go with communist. So yeah I call myself a federalist.

mapaghimagsik
Unfortunately, most liberatarians I've met are trust fund children -- from the house they inherited from their parents (assuming their parents are deceased, many of these self-made men still live at home, and don't even have the self-sufficiency to pay rent).

I don't know if this is entirely true by itself...

I'm in my mid-thirties, so libertarianism wasn't really in vogue when I was younger. It was more the "Reagan youth" vs. the hippie movement. Nobody really outed themselves as a Libertarian back then.

But a lot fewer people in their twenties lived at home, too. Living in Mom's basement was actually something that was looked down upon, whereas today it's no big deal... and the excuses that stuff is too expensive today are just excuses. It's not like a loaf of bread cost a dime.

I'll admit there is a delicious irony in the notion that one would have the philosophy of total self-sufficience, but not even knowing how to wash one's clothes.

TitanOne
As to the tax issue, all citizens should pay very little tax. We are grossly overtaxed.

I am fine with the taxes I pay if it could guarantee a stable infrastructure (in our roads, power grid, etc.), good education for all economic classes, clean water and a minimal safety net if things go awry. I do also think a universal healthcare system is the only system that would give us the buying power to keep costs down while still improving everyone's standard of living.

Unfortunately, the parties spend so much time destroying eachother's efforts, that what we're left with is high taxes AND nothing very reliable.

There's a reason Republicans and Libertarians have been able to convince people that government is the problem and not the solution. The problem is that once you elect someone who thinks government is the problem, they go ahead and prove it.

warren

mapaghimagsik
Unfortunately, most liberatarians I've met are trust fund children -- from the house they inherited from their parents (assuming their parents are deceased, many of these self-made men still live at home, and don't even have the self-sufficiency to pay rent).

I don't know if this is entirely true by itself...

I'm in my mid-thirties, so libertarianism wasn't really in vogue when I was younger. It was more the "Reagan youth" vs. the hippie movement. Nobody really outed themselves as a Libertarian back then.

But a lot fewer people in their twenties lived at home, too. Living in Mom's basement was actually something that was looked down upon, whereas today it's no big deal... and the excuses that stuff is too expensive today are just excuses. It's not like a loaf of bread cost a dime.

I'll admit there is a delicious irony in the notion that one would have the philosophy of total self-sufficience, but not even knowing how to wash one's clothes.

The irony is delicious, and because I'm talking about libertarians I've met (and most, at that), and not some sort of "this is true of all libertarians" statement, I'd hope you'd take me at my word about those I'd met, rather than say its untrue :D

I have met other types of libertarians. I've even met the "I have my live-in-boyfriend and we cheat on welfare to get by and hate those darn welfare cheats" libertarian. And yes, there is this cycle of self-loathing to them that I could only compare to US Middle East Policy.

I've also met the, "I'm successful, so why can't everyone else be successful" libertarian. These people seem to think the market is the very greatest judge, jury, and executioner around. They cannot conceive that perhaps the market, like the people who make up the market, are emotional, illogical and capricious. They also don't realize that lawyers, unions, and government regulation *are* market forces.

I've also met the "The market is entirely fair, which is why when I make a hiring decision, I hire my bros (pronounced 'braws' here)" They never realize they completely undermine their own argument.

I don't mean to pick on libertarians too much. In general I hate your politics (humor at link)

warren

mapaghimagsik
Unfortunately, most liberatarians I've met are trust fund children -- from the house they inherited from their parents (assuming their parents are deceased, many of these self-made men still live at home, and don't even have the self-sufficiency to pay rent).

I don't know if this is entirely true by itself...

I'm not sure it would be relevant to anything if it was. Libertarianism is not about money; it's about individual responsibility and liberties.

Progressives like to complain that libertarians are greedy because they believe in free market economics; Republicans like to complain that libertarians are 'libertines' who want to turn the US into Amsterdam's red-light district. Neither characterization is accurate--libertarians are mostly dreamers (I agree with the earlier poster who said they don't have their act together) who want to live in a free country and do not perceive the modern-day US fitting that description.

Ronson

TitanOne
As to the tax issue, all citizens should pay very little tax. We are grossly overtaxed.

There's a reason Republicans and Libertarians have been able to convince people that government is the problem and not the solution. The problem is that once you elect someone who thinks government is the problem, they go ahead and prove it.

I think rhetorically that sounds good, but do you seriously believe that Bush-Cheney adhere to the old Reaganite philosophy of "government is the problem"? If so, they apparently think it should become a really, really BIG problem. All they have done, since taking office, is expand the size, budget, and powers of the federal government--the Executive Branch in particular.

TitanOne
I think rhetorically that sounds good, but do you seriously believe that Bush-Cheney adhere to the old Reaganite philosophy of "government is the problem"? If so, they apparently think it should become a really, really BIG problem. All they have done, since taking office, is expand the size, budget, and powers of the federal government--the Executive Branch in particular.

Yep, they've been very naughty conservatives.

TitanOne
I think rhetorically that sounds good, but do you seriously believe that Bush-Cheney adhere to the old Reaganite philosophy of "government is the problem"? If so, they apparently think it should become a really, really BIG problem. All they have done, since taking office, is expand the size, budget, and powers of the federal government--the Executive Branch in particular.

There's this idea called "Starving the Beast" which is not only in line with what Bush-Cheney are doing, but is part of Republican philosophy.

TitanOne

Ronson

TitanOne
As to the tax issue, all citizens should pay very little tax. We are grossly overtaxed.

There's a reason Republicans and Libertarians have been able to convince people that government is the problem and not the solution. The problem is that once you elect someone who thinks government is the problem, they go ahead and prove it.

I think rhetorically that sounds good, but do you seriously believe that Bush-Cheney adhere to the old Reaganite philosophy of "government is the problem"? If so, they apparently think it should become a really, really BIG problem. All they have done, since taking office, is expand the size, budget, and powers of the federal government--the Executive Branch in particular.

That is something that seems to contradict me, doesn't it?

But by claiming executive powers, they weaken the other two branches.

By overspending on war - where you only get one use for the buck be it bombs or bullets, you have a reason to defund social programs.

By creating programs like NCLB, you give the government a tool to defund where it is the most needed.

Overall, the government has become bloated on it's beaurocracy, and it's military industrial stuff. But that just propigates the idea that government sucks at everything but blowing stuff up.

Ronson

TitanOne

Ronson

TitanOne
As to the tax issue, all citizens should pay very little tax. We are grossly overtaxed.

There's a reason Republicans and Libertarians have been able to convince people that government is the problem and not the solution. The problem is that once you elect someone who thinks government is the problem, they go ahead and prove it.

I think rhetorically that sounds good, but do you seriously believe that Bush-Cheney adhere to the old Reaganite philosophy of "government is the problem"? If so, they apparently think it should become a really, really BIG problem. All they have done, since taking office, is expand the size, budget, and powers of the federal government--the Executive Branch in particular.

That is something that seems to contradict me, doesn't it?

But by claiming executive powers, they weaken the other two branches.

By overspending on war - where you only get one use for the buck be it bombs or bullets, you have a reason to defund social programs.

By creating programs like NCLB, you give the government a tool to defund where it is the most needed.

Overall, the government has become bloated on it's beaurocracy, and it's military industrial stuff. But that just propigates the idea that government sucks at everything but blowing stuff up.

I think it's simpler; they are just power-mad authoritarians...if ever there was an imperial presidency, it's this one. Really, by ascribing traditionally conservative ideas to this bunch, you give them too much credit. Even if you disagree strongly with the traditionally conservative ideas.

This is the worst presidential administration in American history, and they are too ideologically bankrupt, in my opinion, to even make a serious scratch on the philosophical spectrum.

DancingChaos
Are you either more conservative or liberal?

Liberal comes from liberty. I believe a true liberal is concerned with protecting individual liberties. Sometimes that means legislation to protect the little guy.

Very often the conservatives try to affect a populist stance by claiming the government should stay out of our lives and pocketbooks. This assumes that life is fair. Sometimes governmental oversight and regulation is needed to protect the little guy from faceless corporations.

The government is instituted by the people and needs to take its marching orders from the people, not selfrighteous politicians who believe they are more qualified to decide what America is all about.

I am a Liberal, and pretty damn proud.

I'm definitely fond of the term and concept of liberal. I like to have bad things changed. Some liberals piss me off, though. The ones that make a big deal and rally to change things that really aren't that bad. Other then that, i'll say i'm a liberal in the true sense of the word.

bobhh
Liberal comes from liberty. I believe a true liberal is concerned with protecting individual liberties. Sometimes that means legislation to protect the little guy.

Isn't that the party line of libertarians?

imshard

bobhh
Liberal comes from liberty. I believe a true liberal is concerned with protecting individual liberties. Sometimes that means legislation to protect the little guy.

Isn't that the party line of libertarians?

Yes many Libertarians and Green party members are liberals, the term doesn't belong to the Democratic party.

YoungNastyMan
I'm definitely fond of the term and concept of liberal. I like to have bad things changed. Some liberals piss me off, though. The ones that make a big deal and rally to change things that really aren't that bad. Other then that, i'll say i'm a liberal in the true sense of the word.

Enough of this. Where's Wonderboy?

I think I lean more towards Libertarian thought...

I took this test:

http://www.politicalcompass.org/ [politicalcompass.org]

And I am here:

I am a far left liberal. I took this quiz once and it said I was further left than the dali lama, the green party, democrats, socialists, or well, anybody.

imshard

bobhh
Liberal comes from liberty. I believe a true liberal is concerned with protecting individual liberties. Sometimes that means legislation to protect the little guy.

Isn't that the party line of libertarians?

Libertarians are economically conservative while being socially liberal, to some degree.

I don't really want to put myself with any political party. Mostly because I've seen too many people with common sense throw it out the window because their party thought a certain way, and even thought the opposite party had a good point they where still the opposite party, so hence could say nothing right.
For the most part I guess my views to be some what on the liberal side, though my mind is completely open for a well thought out argument from anyone.
There's also the problem that there are many issues I have yet to form a final opinion on. I've heard good arguments from both sides, and can see both as having a set of valid points. It's that I'm indecisive, so much as, that I'm careful. I'm a very passionate person, and if I'm not careful I tend to let the more passionate sounding side of a debate win in my mind. Of course that's not always the most rational side of things, nor the most reasonable.


One thing I know for certain, it's very hard for a passionate person to keep and open mind.

This is how I scored on the political compass:



I agree with Ladyknight17 about the folly in just going with the party line. Half of the time these days, I can't figure the Republicans from the Democrats, as far as their voting and actual actions/legislation goes on some issues.

We have reached a strange political point in history, IMO.