Whats with the leftwing bent of Wrongplanet?

Page 9 of 16 [ 247 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 16  Next

Griff
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,312

30 Apr 2008, 6:25 pm

Natural choice for an Aspie, I'd say.



nominalist
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,740
Location: Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas (born in NYC)

30 Apr 2008, 6:55 pm

I would suggest that there are different types of liberatarians (though I am neither): critical libertarians and knee-jerk libertarians. If one eliminated all the knee-jerk libertarians, I suspect that the number of libertarians would diminish substantially.

I am not convinced that any one social construction, considered critically, is more "aspie." However, a knee-jerk libertarianism might be appealing to some aspies for a variety of reasons, including a presumed lack of empathy (theory of mind).


_________________
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. (retired tenured sociology professor)
36 domains/24 books: http://www.markfoster.net
Emancipated Autism: http://www.neurelitism.com
Institute for Dialectical metaRealism: http://dmr.institute


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

30 Apr 2008, 7:37 pm

nominalist wrote:
I would suggest that there are different types of liberatarians (though I am neither): critical libertarians and knee-jerk libertarians. If one eliminated all the knee-jerk libertarians, I suspect that the number of libertarians would diminish substantially.

I suppose depending on the definitions, I would argue that the number of any people in any political orientation would decrease if the knee-jerk members decreased.
Quote:
I am not convinced that any one social construction, considered critically, is more "aspie." However, a knee-jerk libertarianism might be appealing to some aspies for a variety of reasons, including a presumed lack of empathy (theory of mind).

I doubt that is necessarily it. There is a small number of conservatives within Aspie circles and a larger number of libertarians, more of the phenomena would likely be explained by aspies tending to be socially liberal than their tendency to be less empathetic as this group is likely not much worse than knee jerk conservatives.



nominalist
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,740
Location: Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas (born in NYC)

30 Apr 2008, 7:49 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
I suppose depending on the definitions, I would argue that the number of any people in any political orientation would decrease if the knee-jerk members decreased.


Yes, but among aspies, I suspect that the most attractive knee-jerk position may be libertarianism. The word "liberal" is used to too many different ways. Some of them (like economic liberalism) are what most people would think of as conservatism (classical liberalism).

Quote:
I doubt that is necessarily it. There is a small number of conservatives within Aspie circles and a larger number of libertarians, more of the phenomena would likely be explained by aspies tending to be socially liberal than their tendency to be less empathetic as this group is likely not much worse than knee jerk conservatives.


Well, short of conducting a social survey, there is no way to know for sure. However, I have never come across, on any other message board, the same numbers of libertarians I have seen on Wrong Planet and other aspie-focused forums.


_________________
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. (retired tenured sociology professor)
36 domains/24 books: http://www.markfoster.net
Emancipated Autism: http://www.neurelitism.com
Institute for Dialectical metaRealism: http://dmr.institute


NOBS
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 304
Location: Alaska

30 Apr 2008, 7:52 pm

Hi All;

I am fairly right wing, with a hell bent libertarian streak. Mostly, I am a realist! Not unlike the founding fathers.

Nominalist, you just broke my heart, I had so much respect for you.;) Actually, I am a practicing socialist, but I call it marriage.

Regards,



ToadOfSteel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,157
Location: New Jersey

30 Apr 2008, 8:07 pm

I am not liberal.
I am not conservative.
I am not libertarian.
I am not socialist.
I am not communist.
I am not capitalist.
I am not anarchist.
I am not fascist.

Only one political ideology dominates: Oppose Jack Thompson and all the cronies that support him...



nominalist
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,740
Location: Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas (born in NYC)

30 Apr 2008, 8:09 pm

NOBS wrote:
Nominalist, you just broke my heart, I had so much respect for you.;) Actually, I am a practicing socialist, but I call it marriage.


lol. I guess marriage is a kind of socialism.


_________________
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. (retired tenured sociology professor)
36 domains/24 books: http://www.markfoster.net
Emancipated Autism: http://www.neurelitism.com
Institute for Dialectical metaRealism: http://dmr.institute


fabshelly
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2007
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 207

30 Apr 2008, 10:03 pm

Johnnie wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Johnnie wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Johnnie wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Johnnie wrote:
I'm here, the forum is mostly school kids who aren't victims of taxes yet.



yeah, cause anyone who has a different view than you obviously doesn't pay taxes.


yeah exactly, glad somebody gets it 8)


i live in los angeles, ca. i get taxes way more than you do.


short of us both posting nearly everything about our lives, you are just guessing who's tax rate is higher and who pays more overall taxes and who gets what in return for paying.

Somebody could be happy as hell paying 40% income tax and $10,000 a year property tax if they had a 6 figure do next to nothing cake government job 35 hours a week while living in a house they got from their grandparents. They would think the system is wonderfull.


i don't think the system is wonderful and i think there's a lot of crap to cut down on. just, i most likely differ from you in which areas i think need to be cut first.

that and i don't just play the partisan song and dance like you seem to do.


edit: and i make nowhere near six figures.


so income taxes aren't much of an issue than are they ?

Quote:
i don't just play the partisan song and dance like you seem to do.


just because I think the dems are worse than the republicans doesn't mean I support the republicans. As it stands right now I hope Obama gets elected and really isn't what he has been forced to be to get where he is. He has had no choice but to be a good team player and could be a great president :?: the other two have proven records of being good team players, so it's not likely they will change if they get elected.

As one working man put it, he didn't leave the democrat party, they left him.

We have had a country for a few decades now that has catered to the yuppie baby boomers and screwed the blue collar working class. Obama might actually get the BITTER fact in rural america is no different than the BITTER fact in the inner city. We have had the Biff & Muffy society for decades and most of america has been left out of the warm & fuzzy life in bedroom communities where life is all about their snot nose children who must get a college degree so they don't end up like THOSE working class people Biff & Muffy have exploited and sold out to get their 4 bedroom 2 1/2 bath yuppie castle away from THOSE people, the flithy dirty working class lowlifes.

The news media goes on and on about religion & abortion as top issues in election. More likely is people are voting their wallets and for rural people they are being cleaned out to support the cities and know it. It's nothing more than a transfer of wealth from the blue collar working class outside the major cities to the low income servants of Biff & Muffy so they don't have to pay the people who clean their toilets,cook their food and in general wait on them hand and foot for chump change, bubba is fully awhere of what is going on and the news media won't dare touch the subject of the raping of the rural population and exploitation of the low income urban populations so Biff & Muffy can live the good life.


Democratic


_________________
I wonder if Homo Sapiens Sapiens called Neanderthals "NT"s too?


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

30 Apr 2008, 10:38 pm

nominalist wrote:
Yes, but among aspies, I suspect that the most attractive knee-jerk position may be libertarianism. The word "liberal" is used to too many different ways. Some of them (like economic liberalism) are what most people would think of as conservatism (classical liberalism).
I agree that liberal is used in too many different ways(curse you FDR for appropriating the term for the left-wing! :P) Perhaps that is so. I don't know, as I would tend to suspect a left-leaning tendency amongst many aspies with libertarians not being too uncommon but not dominant, especially given the common idea amongst aspies to seek governmental aid for their position.

Quote:
Well, short of conducting a social survey, there is no way to know for sure. However, I have never come across, on any other message board, the same numbers of libertarians I have seen on Wrong Planet and other aspie-focused forums.

Very true. Well, most political message boards I've seen are divided between libertarians and left-wingers. I really can't say though, I do think that WP has been more left wing in the past.



oscuria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,748

01 May 2008, 7:50 am

ToadOfSteel wrote:
I am not liberal.
I am not conservative.
I am not libertarian.
I am not socialist.
I am not communist.
I am not capitalist.
I am not anarchist.
I am not fascist.

Only one political ideology dominates: Oppose Jack Thompson and all the cronies that support him...


'Mr. President, are you a Communist?'
''No."

'Are you a capitalist?'
'No.'

'Are you a Socialist?'
'No!' he said, with a look of surprise, as if he wondered about what he was being cross-examined.

The young man said, 'Well, what is your philosophy, then?'
'Philosophy? asked the president, puzzled. 'Philosophy? I am a Christian and a Democrat. That's all.'



nominalist
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,740
Location: Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas (born in NYC)

01 May 2008, 7:53 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
I don't know, as I would tend to suspect a left-leaning tendency amongst many aspies with libertarians not being too uncommon but not dominant, especially given the common idea amongst aspies to seek governmental aid for their position.


Seeking government aid is not inconsistent with all schools of libertarianism, i.e., left libertarianism.

Quote:
Very true. Well, most political message boards I've seen are divided between libertarians and left-wingers. I really can't say though, I do think that WP has been more left wing in the past.


I am using "libertarian" in the broad sense of word. For instance, I would include, not only Ron Paul, but also Ralph Nader.


_________________
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. (retired tenured sociology professor)
36 domains/24 books: http://www.markfoster.net
Emancipated Autism: http://www.neurelitism.com
Institute for Dialectical metaRealism: http://dmr.institute


Griff
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,312

01 May 2008, 10:25 am

NOBS wrote:
I am fairly right wing, with a hell bent libertarian streak. Mostly, I am a realist! Not unlike the founding fathers.
The founders of the country were liberals, you illiterate twit. Government "by the people, for the people" was a radically leftist idea for their time. The philosophers responsible for their ideas would be liberal even by modern standards. For example, many of the more educated elite of the day would not have objected to polygamous marriages if some arrangement could be made for them and they were in great enough number to constitute a legitimate minority population. If I recall correctly, there were at least a few who actually said so. The right-wing of their time were monarchists who were loyal to the King. The King's Men were flag-waving "patriots" who were happy to murder their own countrymen in the name of their distant ruler. They were also called "tories," which would be a much more fitting term for modern conservatives. Conservatives don't have any business in this country. They've fought against it since the get-go, and it mystifies me that we even put up with them.

Oh, but libertarians are a different story. They're deluded, but they have good intentions. I think. Just try to remember the leftist roots of your philosophy. Libertarianism is rooted deeply in liberal philosophy, and it always has been. I don't know why many people seem to think it's "right-winged." They're outright wrong, really. Even Adam Smith, the original libertarian, was a liberal philosopher, and most people either don't know or won't tell you that he was one of the earliest advocates of progressive taxation. Even today, his views would be seen as very liberal.

Of course you don't believe it. You're historically illiterate. It's easy to argue from a position of ignorance, you know. It's how Creationists can convince so many people of their stupid rubbish. They aren't constrained by facts, so they're free to make the truth up as they go along. Before you make another post, I suggest you do some actual reading on history. Actually check out a few books from a library, and act like you're really serious about enlightening yourself before you come back on here to spout your ill-researched opinions. If you don't, count on this: you WILL be ridiculed.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

01 May 2008, 11:30 am

nominalist wrote:
Seeking government aid is not inconsistent with all schools of libertarianism, i.e., left libertarianism.
Ah, and I was assuming we were sticking to the American usage of the term libertarian. Really though, given that the basic defining feature of libertarianism is its dislike of government, I would say that it tends to be somewhat inconsistent. I mean, a left-libertarian who accepted that the status quo was to stay I suppose could compromise on this issue, but they typically dislike this system.

Quote:
I am using "libertarian" in the broad sense of word. For instance, I would include, not only Ron Paul, but also Ralph Nader.

Right, I would only include Ron Paul as left-libertarianism is along the same lines as most anarchism and I don't see Ralph Nader advancing such a view very much, but perhaps I am not very familiar with his work.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

01 May 2008, 12:03 pm

Griff wrote:
The founders of the country were liberals, you illiterate twit. Government "by the people, for the people" was a radically leftist idea for their time. The philosophers responsible for their ideas would be liberal even by modern standards. For example, many of the more educated elite of the day would not have objected to polygamous marriages if some arrangement could be made for them and they were in great enough number to constitute a legitimate minority population. If I recall correctly, there were at least a few who actually said so. The right-wing of their time were monarchists who were loyal to the King. The King's Men were flag-waving "patriots" who were happy to murder their own countrymen in the name of their distant ruler. They were also called "tories," which would be a much more fitting term for modern conservatives. Conservatives don't have any business in this country. They've fought against it since the get-go, and it mystifies me that we even put up with them.

Well, depending on your views of them. I agree that the idea was very leftist for the time, however, the emphasis on states rights, a non-interventionist foreign policy(not always consistently followed), and such were somewhat libertarian. That is sort of true about the right wing at the time, however, it can't be ignored the powerful religious influences in the colonies given the original desire of Massachusetts being somewhat theocratic. I say that the issue of right or left sort of depends on the founder, and things like that, but to label the right as wrong historically without distinguishing between British Tories and modern American conservatives is an issue from my view.

Quote:
Oh, but libertarians are a different story. They're deluded, but they have good intentions. I think. Just try to remember the leftist roots of your philosophy. Libertarianism is rooted deeply in liberal philosophy, and it always has been. I don't know why many people seem to think it's "right-winged." They're outright wrong, really. Even Adam Smith, the original libertarian, was a liberal philosopher, and most people either don't know or won't tell you that he was one of the earliest advocates of progressive taxation. Even today, his views would be seen as very liberal.

Hmm..., the original libertarian isn't John Locke who justified property and whose ideas include the protection of property? Frankly, I would argue that libertarianism and leftism are 2 separate philosophies that have some common roots in the Enlightenment and some figures held in common, but are ultimately separate. You know, the libertarian will assert Bastiat and Locke, and the leftist will look more towards Rousseau and John Stuart Mill, Mill may be influential to libertarians as well as leftists, but he is more of a leftist forefather than a libertarian. You are right, Adam Smith was an early proponent of progressive taxation, the reason why he is a libertarian forefather is simply because he argued for self-correcting markets, frankly, the libertarian ideology stems more from other figures who more rigorously developed the notion of the sovereign individual.
Quote:
Of course you don't believe it. You're historically illiterate. It's easy to argue from a position of ignorance, you know. It's how Creationists can convince so many people of their stupid rubbish. They aren't constrained by facts, so they're free to make the truth up as they go along. Before you make another post, I suggest you do some actual reading on history. Actually check out a few books from a library, and act like you're really serious about enlightening yourself before you come back on here to spout your ill-researched opinions. If you don't, count on this: you WILL be ridiculed.

I don't see his statement as being *that* bad. I mean, I would see the thrashing being more necessary if he said that the US were a Christian nation, but to defend the conservative/libertarian grouping for the founding fathers does not seem wrong, especially given that between the Hamiltonians and the Jeffersonians, the former were rather conservative, and the latter were rather libertarian with neither really being "left" as we would typically understand it.



oscuria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,748

01 May 2008, 12:09 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
blurb



We have to understand what is meant by LEFTIST and if it is applicable. I would say that society then was conservative with libertarian ideals, and liberal to the idea of rights. :| :? :shrug:



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

01 May 2008, 12:17 pm

oscuria wrote:
We have to understand what is meant by LEFTIST and if it is applicable. I would say that society then was conservative with libertarian ideals, and liberal to the idea of rights. :| :? :shrug:

We aren't liberal to the idea of rights. We are libertarian to the idea of rights. If we were liberal then we'd have a lot more social insurance. Frankly, libertarians and leftists are both socially liberal and both have socially liberal aspects of their conceptions of rights, however, the former sees economic rights from an individualist standpoint and the latter sees them from a more communal standpoint and our system does hold to both, but compared to the rest of the world it is more libertarian and compared to the history of ideas it seems more libertarian.