Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 121 to 160 of 167

Thread: Are you a leftist or a rightist?

  1. #121
    Fatal Error bgoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    go away
    Posts
    710
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    lol@ the flag

    Last edited by bgoat; 02-14-2019 at 09:08 AM.
    fart

  2. #122
    Fatal Error bgoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    TIM
    go away
    Posts
    710
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    :( master race
    fart

  3. #123
    Vizany's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    blumpfistan
    TIM
    epic gamer
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chakram View Post
    Other than the fact that this thread seems to have a good amount of people from both left and right, where are you pulling fascism out of this? Do you think that everybody that doesn't hold the same opinions as you are immediately fascists?
    The left has a heavy demographic ranking system (with many competitions) where the higher you rank on the list, the more power you are given over the direction of the movement (as long as you are a part of it in the first place). Therefore, you only need to investigate the most "oppressed" members of the left and see what ideas they support to figure out where it will head next and why it is going there, as all members lower in the ranking system who disagree are deemed oppressive and kicked out to the roadside. This is a fear regulated social system based on competitions of who can convince the group of which demographic(s) needs the most care and attention, and since people want to help the weak and oppressed (without violating the expectations of the group), they feel a need to raise awareness as a sort of labor or servitude and fulfill the person's requests, no matter how increasingly petty and trivial they become. This is to pay off the debt of privilege or make the world a better place for those who really believe in it and gain social status/security for those who don't. As a result, there is a continuous demand for an elongating spectrum or "path" of leftism that tugs the right along with it on a generational basis due to the education system, corporations, etc. being focused on what the ranking system decides and telling everyone that they should be focused on it too. Since the right is pulled left, all rightist terminology like conservative, populist, fascist, nazi, etc. are pulled as well and become increasingly warped and lose their meaning due to having to fulfill the increasingly lower standards that the left requires of them.
    ILI-Ni2-H - 5w4 4w5 9w1 sx/sp - Anglo-Amerikaner - EthNat - Agnostic Apostate - Probably the youngest person on the forums

  4. #124
    Alomoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    LIE ENTj
    Posts
    480
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Liberatarian right of course. We should be free to censor the media.

    No, kidding. Center leaning left. Slightly athoritarian or liberatarian depending on the test.
    Figured it out. LIE. I'm extraverted, which is incredibly counter intuitive for a person who doesn't tend to go out much. Don't know how often I'll be on, but don't expect me to respond often. Only option I'm willing to debate is Si vs Ni right now. Mission accomplished.

  5. #125
    Alomoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    TIM
    LIE ENTj
    Posts
    480
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Er.JPG
    Finally, success. That took too long.

    Ignore the photo I accidentally attatched. I thought I had a political test result page.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Figured it out. LIE. I'm extraverted, which is incredibly counter intuitive for a person who doesn't tend to go out much. Don't know how often I'll be on, but don't expect me to respond often. Only option I'm willing to debate is Si vs Ni right now. Mission accomplished.

  6. #126
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Ancapistan
    Posts
    2,386
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default


  7. #127
    Uncle Ave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,473
    Mentioned
    112 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Right-wing because I see equality as immoral, Left-wing because I believe in progress and innovation rather than tradition.


  8. #128
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Ancapistan
    Posts
    2,386
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ave View Post
    Right-wing because I see equality as immoral, Left-wing because I believe in progress and innovation rather than tradition.
    My views toward politics are not binary in the manner you seem to state here regarding yours, correct if me I'm wrong. Equality can be good or bad depending on an ass ton of variables and the method which it is achieve. Same goes for progress versus tradition. It all depends on whether those traditions have any value truly worth keeping, and if innovation will truly help us in the end.

    For example some traditions might look dumb and senseless on the surface but when you look at the grand effect of those traditions that could be playing a key role in making people's overall lives happier, even though it may not be visible or obvious. Progress isn't always good either. The industrial revolution made countless people's lives shitter and we currently live under the threat of a multitude of man-induced apocalypses that were made possible because of progress and innovation.

    Of course, I do think there are lot backwards non-beneficial traditions that we should discard and that there have been goods things that have come from innovation but I'm sure you get my point here.

  9. #129
    Uncle Ave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,473
    Mentioned
    112 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddy View Post
    My views toward politics are not binary in the manner you seem to state here regarding yours, correct if me I'm wrong. Equality can be good or bad depending on an ass ton of variables and the method which it is achieve. Same goes for progress versus tradition. It all depends on whether those traditions have any value truly worth keeping, and if innovation will truly help us in the end.

    For example some traditions might look dumb and senseless on the surface but when you look at the grand effect of those traditions that could be playing a key role in making people's overall lives happier, even though it may not be visible or obvious. Progress isn't always good either. The industrial revolution made countless people's lives shitter and we currently live under the threat of a multitude of man-induced apocalypses that were made possible because of progress and innovation.

    Of course, I do think there are lot backwards non-beneficial traditions that we should discard and that there have been goods things that have come from innovation but I'm sure you get my point here.
    I pretty much agree with what you're saying here.

    My post was purposefully stated in a binary manner to prove how stupid grouping people's views into "left" vs "right" is.

    Not that what I wrote was insencere, in terms of the content, just in how I said it.

    The reason I say equality is immoral is because I don't think it can be acheived in a large group of people. Perhaps the better term to describe ineqaulity would be unjust, rather than immoral. The consequences of trying to establish ineqaulity, though, such as communist regimes killing people in the name of equality (as per the idea of class struggle) is immoral, though, I should specify. Some formal equality can be maintained in small groups but even then it's only a formality to keep the group pacified.

    I agree about tradition. Some can be beneficial, but my point was that people tend to cling to traditions more for emotional reasons than because of reason. It kind of reminds me of Russel Kirk who I read about, he said that conservatism is more of a sensibility than something that is chosen purely out of reason. I could be miscontruing Kirk's views here but he seems to argue that emotional attachment is a justification for that thing being preserved. Obviously there are other factors that come into play whe considering if a tradition should be preserved, according to Kirk, at least I think.

    I basically disagree with this view, though; emotional attachment is not a valid justification for doing something a certain way. For example, earlier today on facebook my first girlfriend posted something about how some US schools were removing old school clocks from classrooms because kids didn't know how to read them. She seemed to regret this, and yeah, it's always better to know more than to know less, I could say the same about archeology. But knowing archeology is not necessary to make it in the world, and I think kids will do fine not knowing how to read old clocks. Think about it. The reason the clock is circular is because the first humans told time by inserting a stick in the ground and watching the shadow of the stick cast against the sunlight hitting the ground. This had a circular motion. This is also why the dials move in a circular pattern. The way most objects are designed does not reflect their function, because humans cling to tradition.

    As far as innovation and progress go, I agree that technology, which brings these things, can also bring equal amounts of disasters, depeding on how humans use it. I don't think the industrial revolution made people's lives worse though. I'm not saying the children working in mines during the 19th century had it easy, but I don't think plowing fields in cow manure (which is what they did before there were factories, mines, and soot) was the life, either, lol.


  10. #130
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Ancapistan
    Posts
    2,386
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ave View Post

    The reason I say equality is immoral is because I don't think it can be achieved in a large group of people. Perhaps the better term to describe ineqaulity would be unjust, rather than immoral. The consequences of trying to establish ineqaulity, though, such as communist regimes killing people in the name of equality (as per the idea of class struggle) is immoral, though, I should specify. Some formal equality can be maintained in small groups but even then it's only a formality to keep the group pacified.
    Can't speak for other communist countries like Cambodia under Pol Pot as I simply don't know anything about them but The USSR and Communist China at least never killed people solely because of their class. The people they killed were either in support of opposing regimes or were actively resisting policies the communist were putting forth. The Ukrainian holodomar for example happened because the kulaks (wealthy farmers) resisted Stalin's policy of food collectivization and protested by killing their own livestock. The kulaks got sent to the gulags not because they were just bourgeoisie but because they resisted the law and caused others to starve in the process. In Mao's case the mass deaths were caused more by peasant confusion over how food would be provided to them under Mao which led to over consumption of what they had available. In both these cases these was also bad weather that devastated crops which obviously made the situations even worse.

    There could of course been some in ranks of USSR and China that carried out class motivated violence and were nutjobs, like every army has. The regimes themselves though never called for killing people based on class.

    You could however argue that the laws the communist put forth were too forceful and idealistic. This is what China learned after Mao and instead why they opted for a much slower but more feasible means of eventually achieving communism that they continue moving towards this day. The deaths all comes down to how it was executed and not the communist ideology itself.

  11. #131
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Ancapistan
    Posts
    2,386
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Second take:


  12. #132
    miss BabyDoll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    TIM
    LSI-se
    Posts
    340
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    http://www.politiscales.net/en_US/re...a=100&comp=100

    left/right is a false dichotomy. ideally, i'm for catholic monarchism.
    ipsa scientia potestas est-adaequatio intellectus et rei

  13. #133
    Kill4Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    TIM
    SLE-Ti 8w7 so/sp
    Posts
    2,243
    Mentioned
    221 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm easily right....but I've made winter coats out of the lot of them....left, right, up, down....both sides has its share of gutless cowards. I remember when a swarm of Spanish thugs came charging through the park weapons in hand...I fired off a few warning shots (gratuitous) in the air just above them to let them know you come any further, you meet God. I won't get you all but a few I assure you I will...we go to hell together. I found my guys all hiding in a ditch once swarm retreated and dust settled. I hate that. If somebody shows backbone, they can believe the earth is flat and the sun is pluto...I'll give 'em more respect than I would to a coward who agreed with my politics hook, line and sinker.
    Last edited by Kill4Me; 04-05-2019 at 12:50 PM.

  14. #134
    DRANG NACH BETA NF Oppai Anschluss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    In the place
    TIM
    Beta ST 683 sx/so
    Posts
    397
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by miss BabyDoll View Post
    http://www.politiscales.net/en_US/re...a=100&comp=100

    left/right is a false dichotomy. ideally, i'm for catholic monarchism.
    Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat
    Beta ST 6w5 8w9 3w4 sx/so

    Every problem on earth can be solved by the liberal application of ordnance

    "Ultimately, man should not ask what the meaning of his life is, but rather he must recognize that it is he who is asked. In a word, each man is questioned by life; and he can only answer to life by answering for his own life."


  15. #135
    miss BabyDoll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    TIM
    LSI-se
    Posts
    340
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oppai Anschluss View Post
    Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat

    Ipsi soli imperium,laus et iubilatio per saecula saeculorum
    ipsa scientia potestas est-adaequatio intellectus et rei

  16. #136
    atlascog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    TIM
    IEI 459 sp/so
    Posts
    339
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  17. #137
    Grendel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    /t16t/
    Posts
    1,182
    Mentioned
    64 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    spooky shit





    i prefer to just discover my positions and let whatever that makes me just emerge
    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Shut the fuck up, dumbass.


  18. #138
    queentiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    TIM
    EIE-Fe 3w4-7w8-8w7
    Posts
    310
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Right Libertarian, according to political compass
    "You're just like me, you're out your mind
    I know it's strange, we're both the crazy kind
    You're tellin' me that I'm insane
    Boy, don't pretend that you don't love the pain"

    EIE-Fe
    3w4-7w8-8w7 sx/so

  19. #139
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,727
    Mentioned
    191 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've come to terms with the fact that I'm likely either a centrist or a left-libertarian overall despite having a lot of my views that are strictly left wing or strictly right wing with some in the center. In the same time, I've become more tolerant of those that are ardently leftist or rightist overall because expecting them to move more towards the center is like them expecting me to move towards the left or the right. In the end of the day, people have their reasons for believing what they do via life experience and upbringing that's built into them.

    People may eventually change their minds on views and stances that are harmful on their own and have a reasonable outlook on things. So while I do still think that the left/right dichotomy is a social construct that is a very limited way of interpreting politics and should be taken with a grain of salt, I still can't really blame people for being deeply immersed into politics regardless of the side they happen to fall under because they have very real logical and ethical reasons for doing so.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  20. #140
    Number 9 large's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Baking bread
    TIM
    ESTP 7w8
    Posts
    2,733
    Mentioned
    199 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    What do u guys think of ben shapiro gettin rekt

    https://youtu.be/6VixqvOcK8E

  21. #141
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Ancapistan
    Posts
    2,386
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Number 9 large View Post
    What do u guys think of ben shapiro gettin rekt

    https://youtu.be/6VixqvOcK8E
    I think his emotions might of possibility got in the way of facts and logic.

  22. #142
    Ice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    255
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    ~Psychosophy LFEV
    ~Enneagram 594 sp/so
    ~Phlegmatic-Choleric

  23. #143
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,727
    Mentioned
    191 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    2004 election in a nutshell (Bush vs. Kerry - Both Skull and Bones members):

    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  24. #144
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    5,312
    Mentioned
    661 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raver View Post
    2004 election in a nutshell (Bush vs. Kerry - Both Skull and Bones members):
    One served in Viet Nam and became a war protester, one avoided armed service and became a war monger.

  25. #145
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,727
    Mentioned
    191 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    One served in Viet Nam and became a war protester, one avoided armed service and became a war monger.
    I am not going to deny that Kerry was better than Bush in terms of his policies, but the 2004 election was redundant as the war had already started and I doubt Kerry would of ended the war right away anyways. He probably would of just done the Obama route anyways that happened 4 years later. The election that really mattered for war was the 2000 election and some argue that it was stolen due to election fraud because of the Florida recount. Would the Afghanistan and Iraq war of happened if Al Gore was in office? I could see the Afghanistan war still happening after 9/11, but I have a hard time seeing Al Gore go to war with Iraq because GWB had motivation to finish what his father started.
    Last edited by Raver; 05-23-2019 at 02:09 AM.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  26. #146
    Hacking your soul since the beginning of time Hitta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    In your mom's uterus
    Posts
    4,074
    Mentioned
    179 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    If communism could arise out of voluntaryism, I would support it. I've thought for a while that this actually may be somewhat possible, therefore I don't like to really split my political beliefs so harshly. I do think that it is possible that people will come together through communal property given enough time, and function as a sort collectivist group that arose from individualism. I'm not convinced that all aspects of the economy will be guided by this, but I do believe it is highly probable that communal property will form in order to help the poor, welfarism, etc. What I do not believe in though is coercion(unless of course an individual has trampled all over another's individual rights such as murder/theft.. I sort of believe in the most limited form of government/though I'm not discounting the idea that the free market could could solve these problems in the absence of a government body). As such I don't believe in leftism or rightism... only in limiting coercive forces.
    Model X Will Save Us!

    *randomwarelinkremoved

    jessica129:scrotums r hot

    :" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"

  27. #147
    user title The Perpetual Now's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    474
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    shapiro's blind spot is his religion. all facts and logic fly out the window when he tries to explain certain positions with his moral/religious views as a base framework.

  28. #148
    atlascog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    TIM
    IEI 459 sp/so
    Posts
    339
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm very left-wing on economic and labour issues, civil rights, foreign policy (anti-war) and environmental politics (pro-veganism). I have some socially conservative values too, the most notable being my pro-life stance. With this messy combination of opinions I find it very hard, if not impossible, to find a political party with which I fully and wholeheartedly agree. For this reason I'm open to the idea of implementing direct democracy, or at the very least more of it.

  29. #149
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Ancapistan
    Posts
    2,386
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hitta View Post
    If communism could arise out of voluntaryism, I would support it. I've thought for a while that this actually may be somewhat possible, therefore I don't like to really split my political beliefs so harshly. I do think that it is possible that people will come together through communal property given enough time, and function as a sort collectivist group that arose from individualism. I'm not convinced that all aspects of the economy will be guided by this, but I do believe it is highly probable that communal property will form in order to help the poor, welfarism, etc. What I do not believe in though is coercion(unless of course an individual has trampled all over another's individual rights such as murder/theft.. I sort of believe in the most limited form of government/though I'm not discounting the idea that the free market could could solve these problems in the absence of a government body). As such I don't believe in leftism or rightism... only in limiting coercive forces.
    Agree. A major problem I've noticed with communist political groups is that they tend to attract and become dominated by angry low quality fanatics who will attack anyone further "right" then themselves, even the more moderate members within their own group. I completely agree that common ownership of production is ultimately a good thing, but we need a pragmatic, method based means of getting there that most self-described "communist" overlook.

  30. #150
    Uncle Ave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,473
    Mentioned
    112 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hitta View Post
    If communism could arise out of voluntaryism
    That's a very big "if".

    I get what you mean I think but communist voluntaryism actually sounds like a square circle.

    Communism is a negation of individualism, and voluntary actions can only arise out of a system that respects for individualism (capitalism).
    Last edited by Uncle Ave; 05-25-2019 at 02:56 PM.


  31. #151
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Ancapistan
    Posts
    2,386
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ave View Post
    individualism (capitalism)
    The only system/ideology you can say respects the individual is pure anarchy. Capitalism requires the state to exist which is a collective and coercive entity, not to mention how coercive corporations (which inevitably emerge in capitalism) themselves are to individuals.

  32. #152
    FreelancePoliceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Maizistan
    TIM
    LII(?)
    Posts
    237
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ave View Post
    That's a very big "if".

    I get what you mean I think but communist voluntaryism actually sounds like a square circle.

    Communism is a negation of individualism, and voluntary actions can only arise out of a system that respects for individualism (capitalism).
    "The choice between working 50 hours a week to enrich your boss and starvation is the highest form of individualism."
    "Individualism is when your boss is free to fire you."
    "The progressive homogenization of architecture, art, and culture, which has occurred everywhere in the world in proportion to its degree of capitalist development, reflects respect for individualism."

    Don't try liberalism kids, not even once.

    I'd love to hear your thoughts about what the hell you believe communism to be. And pick up a book sometime. The German Ideology, off the top of my head, is a defense of individualism, since you seem interested in the subject.
    Last edited by FreelancePoliceman; 05-28-2019 at 06:46 PM.
    Cattle die; kinsmen die;
    Thyself too soon will die;
    One thing, I ween, shall never die:
    Fair fame for one who has earned.

    Cattle die; kinsmen die;
    Thyself too soon must die;
    One thing, I ween, shall never die:
    The doom over each one’s head.


  33. #153
    Uncle Ave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,473
    Mentioned
    112 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddy View Post
    The only system/ideology you can say respects the individual is pure anarchy. Capitalism requires the state to exist which is a collective and coercive entity, not to mention how coercive corporations (which inevitably emerge in capitalism) themselves are to individuals.
    The problem with anarchy is the non-neutrality law and order, which is necessary to maintain individual rights. How would you stop the next guy from killing you without some maintenance of law and order? Ancaps say privatize everything, but does opening the use of force to profit really sound like a good idea? Wouldn't that lead to the creation of a permanently violent society? Again, ancaps say no, because violence is expensive for all parties - which I don't agree with. Violence is only expensive for who it is directed against, not those profiting. I'm not gonna get into detail about this, I just don't imagine anarchism working well for the individual (though it might sound promising on paper).

    As far as the state goes, I agree that it is coercive, simply because it requires taxation to exist. I don't have an easy solution to this problem either, there are speculations about how we could fund a state without taxation, one of those being voluntary means of funding government, but I fear that would short-circuit the neutrality of government. The reason government is necessary is because otherwise individual rights cannot be effectively protected. So, a collective entity exists to protect the individual.

    Corporations, too, should respect law in my system. They are not above it. And since the role of government is to protect individuals from violence/coercion, that includes from corporations who would break the law. Easier said than done of course, that much is true, but I think it can work.
    Last edited by Uncle Ave; 06-15-2019 at 05:43 PM. Reason: typo


  34. #154
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,727
    Mentioned
    191 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    IMO, liberalism and conservatism are both useful and noble in their endeavors, but in completely opposite ways. Liberalism seeks to bring in new ideas to improve society (both good and bad), conservatism seeks to stop new ideas from degrading society (both good and bad). Centrism can be either good or bad in that it can either bring in bad ideas, while stopping good ideas from coming through simultaneously at its worst (in this scenario, centrism is worse than both liberalism and conservatism - aka establishment neo-liberal Democrats, neo-conservative Republicans and independents) or centrism can bring in good ideas, while stopping bad ideas from entering society at its best (in this scenario, centrism is better than both liberalism and conservatism - aka anti-establishment Democrats, Republicans and independents that seek to change the system by introducing new beneficial ideas and/or rejecting bad ones).

    Seems straight forward enough in theory, but where it gets tricky in practice is that most cannot agree on what is good or bad to begin with and that's why politics is a mess that is both fascinating and frustrating for all involved. I think the main point that I'm trying to make is that regardless on whether you're a liberal, conservative or a centrist that you should seek to avoid both forms of extremism on the left or the right, which means either advancing too many bad ideas as a far leftist or stopping too many good ideas as a far rightist. Also, avoiding destructive centrism by preventing good ideas and advancing bad ideas simultaneously. I'm completely aware that I'm generalizing, but I'm trying to paint a picture on how I see politics figuratively and then hopefully some people can open their minds more on how they view politics instead of being stuck with a limited tribalistic mindset.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  35. #155

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,238
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't think that politics is such a mess, as in a democratic system, if you think of it as proposals and criticisms of ideas.

    So if a party takes over, then that party is going to get criticized by opposing parties, the media, the people and so on. And if the party's ideas aren't good, then either it gets changed or modified, or someone with a better idea, in this case the opposing party, will take over. And that's really how anything will gradually improve over time.

    Anyone should be in favor of criticizing ideas, and anyone should be in favor of coming up with good ideas. But of course if all we do is criticize then nothing gets produced, so it's necessary to come up with alternatives and good ideas yourself.

    The tribalist mindset is to be overly loyal to your group and overly defend whatever idea that the group has, and you won't let it accept any criticisms or produce any new ideas.

  36. #156
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,727
    Mentioned
    191 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    I don't think that politics is such a mess, as in a democratic system, if you think of it as proposals and criticisms of ideas.

    So if a party takes over, then that party is going to get criticized by opposing parties, the media, the people and so on. And if the party's ideas aren't good, then either it gets changed or modified, or someone with a better idea, in this case the opposing party, will take over. And that's really how anything will gradually improve over time.

    Anyone should be in favor of criticizing ideas, and anyone should be in favor of coming up with good ideas. But of course if all we do is criticize then nothing gets produced, so it's necessary to come up with alternatives and good ideas yourself.

    The tribalist mindset is to be overly loyal to your group and overly defend whatever idea that the group has, and you won't let it accept any criticisms or produce any new ideas.
    I think in theory that is the ideal situation, but like I mentioned in my post, it's entirely possible to get stuck into either counter productive extremism or establishment centrism, which can happen with either political party or any candidate that causes more harm than good. Tribalism is a major issue in politics because it results in each side expending more effort in criticizing the opposing side rather than promoting good ideas or preventing bad ones from being implemented.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  37. #157

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,238
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raver View Post
    I think in theory that is the ideal situation, but like I mentioned in my post, it's entirely possible to get stuck into either counter productive extremism or establishment centrism, which can happen with either political party or any candidate that causes more harm than good. Tribalism is a major issue in politics because it results in each side expending more effort in criticizing the opposing side rather than promoting good ideas or preventing bad ones from being implemented.
    I don't necessarily think that you'd have to be "nice" and stop criticizing, but you will need to come up with alternative ideas. So even if you're critical of the majority party, if you don't have any alternatives then they can just say "Yeah well what are you going to do about it? You have no alternative" (that's why merely criticizing Trump doesn't work). "There Is No Alternative" is a dangerous phrase in a democracy. It makes it no different than dictatorship.

    So for example things have been stagnating in economics, because economists have been pretending that neoliberalism is the only way, and that "there is no alternative". Well it turns out there are, and things like MMT are one of them and that's why people are finally starting to flock to alternative economic theories. So people will flock to alternatives, if the current one isn't working and if there is one. People knew that there is something wrong with the economy, but they had no alternative to turn to. Now they do.

    So basically, liberals, conservatives, centrists, etc, are all potentially good, as long as they can criticize and produce new ideas. What's "evil" is if they don't accept any criticisms and won't let any new ideas to emerge.

  38. #158
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,727
    Mentioned
    191 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    I don't necessarily think that you'd have to be "nice" and stop criticizing, but you will need to come up with alternative ideas. So even if you're critical of the majority party, if you don't have any alternatives then they can just say "Yeah well what are you going to do about it? You have no alternative". "There Is No Alternative" is a dangerous phrase in a democracy. It makes it no different than dictatorship.

    So for example things have been stagnating in economics, because economists have been pretending that neoliberalism is the only way, and that "there is no alternative". Well it turns out there are, and things like MMT are one of them and that's why people are finally starting to flock to alternative economic theories. So people will flock to alternatives, if the current one isn't working and if there is one. People knew that there is something wrong with the economy, but they had no alternative to turn to. Now they do.

    So basically, liberals, conservatives, centrists, etc, are all potentially good, as long as they can criticize and produce new ideas. What's "evil" is if they don't accept any criticisms and won't let any new ideas to emerge.
    Well, I'm not trying to advocate for everyone to hold hands and sing kumbaya with each other as that would be counter productive However, I'm advocating for each side to listen to the other a bit more instead of being stuck in tribalistic competition and warfare, which is also counter productive. I like that you mentioned neo-liberalism economics because that's one way how centrism can be bad in that it is about seeking to maintain the status quo rather than introduce new ideas economically.

    So in a sense you're touching into one aspect of how I find politics can be detrimental with establishment centrism where we are basically in agreement. However, you are ignoring how extremism in either the left or the right can be detrimental at introducing new ideas that can be potentially harmful. I agree that criticism and producing new ideas is good as long as the criticism is productive and actually based on concrete evidence and the new ideas are actually going to be beneficial instead of detrimental.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  39. #159
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Ancapistan
    Posts
    2,386
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    So if a party takes over, then that party is going to get criticized by opposing parties, the media, the people and so on. And if the party's ideas aren't good, then either it gets changed or modified, or someone with a better idea, in this case the opposing party, will take over. And that's really how anything will gradually improve over time.
    The problem with the democracies of today is that often comes down to who is the most effective and able to spread their message, rather then who has the best ideas. The average Joe is oblivious to how politics effects their everyday life, and will usually join with however speaks the loudest or is "more cool" then their opponents, as in the case of Trump. Another problem with western democracy is that it makes it very hard if not impossible for governments to take harsh but necessary action, especially with issues that aren't an immediate and tangible threat like global warming for example, or the obesity epidemic.

    The way I see it, liberal democracy is candy whereas totalitarianism is spinach. Democracy is something we crave and appeals to us in the short term, but in the grand scheme of things makes us weak, unhealthy and ultimately unhappy.

  40. #160
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,727
    Mentioned
    191 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddy View Post
    The problem with the democracies of today is that often comes down to who is the most effective and able to spread their message, rather then who has the best ideas. The average Joe is oblivious to how politics effects their everyday life, and will usually join with however speaks the loudest or is "more cool" then their opponents, as in the case of Trump. Another problem with western democracy is that it makes it very hard if not impossible for governments to take harsh but necessary action, especially with issues that aren't an immediate and tangible threat like global warming for example, or the obesity epidemic.

    The way I see it, liberal democracy is candy whereas totalitarianism is spinach. Democracy is something we crave and appeals to us in the short term, but in the grand scheme of things makes us weak, unhealthy and ultimately unhappy.
    I disagree, the real issue with democracy is not the issues it has when it is practiced properly. It is that democracies are prone to devolve into oligarchies over time:

    "The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence."

    In 2014, a Princeton University study concluded that the United States lapsed into oligarchy at some point in the 20th century. Oligarchy can best be understood as a form of government that enacts policies that overwhelmingly benefit a small and privileged elite.
    https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...hy-For-Decades

    It asserts that rule by an elite, or oligarchy, is inevitable as an "iron law" within any democratic organization as part of the "tactical and technical necessities" of organization.

    Michels's theory states that all complex organizations, regardless of how democratic they are when started, eventually develop into oligarchies. Michels observed that since no sufficiently large and complex organization can function purely as a direct democracy, power within an organization will always get delegated to individuals within that group, elected or otherwise.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy

    Basically, the issue is indirect democracies like representative democracies in Western developed nations are prone to become oligarchies. So an economic elite will dictate the vast majority of policies, while the disenfranchised majority will only have the illusion of choice by voting for political representatives that won't cater to them despite what they say while campaigning.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •