Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

[POLL] Where are you politically?

Page 5 of 15 [ 233 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 15  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Where are you politically?
Liberal 13%  13%  [ 13 ]
Conservative 10%  10%  [ 10 ]
Moderate 7%  7%  [ 7 ]
Socialist 13%  13%  [ 13 ]
Libertarian 15%  15%  [ 15 ]
Authoritarian 1%  1%  [ 1 ]
Anarchist 5%  5%  [ 5 ]
Communist 3%  3%  [ 3 ]
Centrist 6%  6%  [ 6 ]
Mixture of a few 20%  20%  [ 20 ]
Other 9%  9%  [ 9 ]
Total votes : 102

Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

13 Mar 2012, 8:15 am

scubasteve wrote:
As I posted recently on another thread: Without property, there is no reward. Without rewards, the only way to motivate people is by holding a gun to their head. So that's what the Soviets tried to do. I would argue that this was not their failure, but the failure of Marx's theories to account for human nature, and therefore to be applicable on a national scale.


+1.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

13 Mar 2012, 8:16 am

scubasteve wrote:

Communism was already dying in the Brezhnev years. The events of 1989 were inevitable. Soviet communism wasn't "true" communism, in the sense that the term was originally synonymous with socialism. But consider the reasons why it may have diverged. As I posted recently on another thread: Without property, there is no reward. Without rewards, the only way to motivate people is by holding a gun to their head. So that's what the Soviets tried to do. I would argue that this was not their failure, but the failure of Marx's theories to account for human nature, and therefore to be applicable on a national scale.


anyone attempting to put a provably bogus theory into practice is at fault. Marxism can be shown not to be feasible. As long as human being prefer the welfare of their own children to that of the children of strangers collectivism cannot work.

ruveyn



donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

13 Mar 2012, 8:22 am

scubasteve wrote:

Communism was already dying in the Brezhnev years. The events of 1989 were inevitable. Soviet communism wasn't "true" communism, in the sense that the term was originally synonymous with socialism. But consider the reasons why it may have diverged. As I posted recently on another thread: Without property, there is no reward. Without rewards, the only way to motivate people is by holding a gun to their head. So that's what the Soviets tried to do. I would argue that this was not their failure, but the failure of Marx's theories to account for human nature, and therefore to be applicable on a national scale.



In a materialistic society, which even 20th century Russia was, you're right. But hunter-gatherer society and East Asian societies in many ways are culturally what you would call communist. If material wealth is the only kind of 'reward', then yes, communism doesn't work, but I think that has more to do with memetics than genetics.

In Vietnam, communism actually is working quite well, though it's a mixed system like China is.



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

13 Mar 2012, 8:29 am

ruveyn wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:
Leftish egalitarian - probably some mix of Fabian socialism watered down with liberalism, i.e. social democracy. Supportive of Saxon style Co-Determination, the cooperative sector, and a plethora of social welfare measures.


Paid for by people who are charged with the cost whether or not they desire the services. If an individual did that to other people, he would be convicted of theft and extortion.

ruveyn
And if anyone other than a police officer cuffed someone up and threw him/her in the back of a car, that individual would be convicted of kidnapping. Why do you keep having to regurgitate this line over and over when this logic proves nothing?



Last edited by AceOfSpades on 13 Mar 2012, 8:51 am, edited 2 times in total.

scubasteve
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,001
Location: San Francisco

13 Mar 2012, 8:30 am

donnie_darko wrote:
In a materialistic society, which even 20th century Russia was, you're right. But hunter-gatherer society and East Asian societies in many ways are culturally what you would call communist. If material wealth is the only kind of 'reward', then yes, communism doesn't work, but I think that has more to do with memetics than genetics.


That's a good point. The political system has to fit the culture. What works in parts of Asia won't necessarily work in the West, and vice-versa.



Mummy_of_Peanut
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Feb 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,564
Location: Bonnie Scotland

13 Mar 2012, 8:32 am

Most people in our society see material wealth as the only way. That notion doesn't exist in my ideal society (as I said, it's pie in the sky and unrealistic) and, in case anyone was wondering, I have watched the Zeitgeist movies.


_________________
"We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all we need to make us really happy is something to be enthusiatic about." Charles Kingsley


donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

13 Mar 2012, 8:37 am

scubasteve wrote:

That's a good point. The political system has to fit the culture. What works in parts of Asia won't necessarily work in the West, and vice-versa.


I guess my main issue with capitalism is that many of its defenses, such as the trickle down theory, are incorrect, and also the fact I find it immoral because it's based on endless growth which translates to endless destruction of the environment and endless depletion of resources, and also why capitalists claim that their system rewards people for their merit and hard work, it actually rewards people who already have money and punishes those who don't have money, making the gap between the classes impossibly wide and based almost solely on heredity and luck.

The problem is that capitalism is built into the American culture, and to a lesser extent into all European and European-based cultures, so it's difficult to get people to go along with it. I think the best way to discourage capitalism is to educate people of its flaws and more importantly, to demonstrate how other systems can work.



scubasteve
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,001
Location: San Francisco

13 Mar 2012, 8:40 am

What Winston Churchill said about Democracy, I think is true about Capitalism as well: It is the worst economic system, except for all the others that have been tried.



donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

13 Mar 2012, 8:42 am

scubasteve wrote:
What Winston Churchill said about Democracy, I think is true about Capitalism as well: It is the worst economic system, except for all the others that have been tried.


Eh I guess so. I would rather have a system that wasn't so ecologically destructive and rewarding of human greed.



Chipshorter
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 477
Location: The Georgian Quarter of The Pool of Life, The Centre of The Creative Universe

13 Mar 2012, 8:49 am

donnie_darko wrote:
The problem is that capitalism is built into the American culture, and to a lesser extent into all European and European-based cultures, so it's difficult to get people to go along with it. I think the best way to discourage capitalism is to educate people of its flaws and more importantly, to demonstrate how other systems can work.


Modern capitalism is however capitalism historically is built on European culture via the industrial revolution and mercantilism..


_________________
Censorship reflects a society's lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime. --Potter Stewart
Corruption is authority plus monopoly minus transparency. --Unknown


TheHouseholdCat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Feb 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 667
Location: Berlin, Germany

13 Mar 2012, 9:00 am

I voted for "mixture of a few" because I do have some... Socialist beliefs, but do not feel I have much in common with most Socialist parties. I also feel... Moderate.

CoMF wrote:
I'm an individualist and don't subscribe to a particular political philosophy as being inherently "superior" to any others.

I somehow feel like this most of the time.

The other day, I just thought that basically the majority of all political parties have the same goals or ideals. It doesn't matter all that much.

What I like about Socialism is that in theory it seems logical to me.

Mummy_of_Peanut wrote:
Most people in our society see material wealth as the only way. That notion doesn't exist in my ideal society (as I said, it's pie in the sky and unrealistic) and, in case anyone was wondering, I have watched the Zeitgeist movies.

Material wealth destroys us. I don't mean to make it sound so apocalyptic, but I can only see what happens around me. There is a reason why people betray others for money. It's not a good thing. And I don't understand it. Not because I feel morally superior but because I would feel so bad and guilty about myself if I betrayed someone just to get money.

Material wealth is so absurd to me. Because most material things, ironically, seem so insubstantial to me. You buy a new dress - it's just like all your other dresses. Unless you connect some immaterial value to it. You buy a car. It's just a car. Unless you connect some immaterial value to it.

Children. It's the same. If you have children because you feel obliged to have them... I don't know... It's strange to think of your own children as cultural goods. They are living beings, not things. :?


_________________
EXPANDED CIRCLE OF FIFTHS

"It's how they see things. It's a way of bringing class to an environment, and I say that pejoratively because, obviously, good music is good music however it's created, however it's motivated." - Thomas Newman


TheHouseholdCat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Feb 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 667
Location: Berlin, Germany

13 Mar 2012, 9:02 am

Chipshorter wrote:
donnie_darko wrote:
The problem is that capitalism is built into the American culture, and to a lesser extent into all European and European-based cultures, so it's difficult to get people to go along with it. I think the best way to discourage capitalism is to educate people of its flaws and more importantly, to demonstrate how other systems can work.


Modern capitalism is however capitalism historically is built on European culture via the industrial revolution and mercantilism..

Yeah, capitalism has its root in England. It started in Europe until America moved along. And, well, America was still connected to England in a sense at that time.

Now the US is ahead of everyone else. But I think that's only because the country is so huge and has great oil resources. Or resources in general. They had better "starting conditions". ^^


_________________
EXPANDED CIRCLE OF FIFTHS

"It's how they see things. It's a way of bringing class to an environment, and I say that pejoratively because, obviously, good music is good music however it's created, however it's motivated." - Thomas Newman


Last edited by TheHouseholdCat on 13 Mar 2012, 9:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

Mummy_of_Peanut
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Feb 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,564
Location: Bonnie Scotland

13 Mar 2012, 9:02 am

donnie_darko wrote:
I think the best way to discourage capitalism is to educate people of its flaws and more importantly, to demonstrate how other systems can work.
As I said, my daughter has been given a homework task which feeds the idea that making money is good. She has been given £1 to invest in an entrpreneurial scheme and come back to school in 2 weeks, with at least the £1 she was given. So we've been trying to think of something ethical, which fits in with the family's moral standing. She bought a colouring in set (which may not even be very ethical given we don't know where it was made and we don't know the harm that has been caused to the environment, but what can you buy for £1). She then coloured it in, spending ages on it, and sold it for £3. I find this morally acceptable as she used her skills and sold that to someone who wanted it (Granny & Papa). She wants to be an artist when she grows up, so this was helpful in that respect too.

However, the idea on the paperwork we were given, said 'Buy some sweets at bargain price and sell them at regular price'. I find that morally repugnant, even though that's how shops make profit. My friend has even broken the law, by buying multipacks and selling them individually and I doubt anything will be said about that sort of thing. Her son has £30 already and my daughter is unlikely to have more than £9, as she's buying just 3 more art sets, with the money she got for the first one. He's likely to get more praise for earning the most, whereas the effort that my daughter will have put in by then is so much more.


_________________
"We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all we need to make us really happy is something to be enthusiatic about." Charles Kingsley


techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,451
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

13 Mar 2012, 9:03 am

Center-right conservative; just not a social conservative and not quite as systemically austere as a libertarian would be (ie. believe in smaller government but not an absence of safety nets).


_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.


AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

13 Mar 2012, 9:04 am

I am a libertarian with collectivist views on anything that has universal demand and is subject to conflicting interests. Things such as utilities, infrastructure, health care, and the environment. So I'm not sure what I'm supposed to vote for...



TheHouseholdCat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Feb 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 667
Location: Berlin, Germany

13 Mar 2012, 9:04 am

Mummy_of_Peanut wrote:
donnie_darko wrote:
I think the best way to discourage capitalism is to educate people of its flaws and more importantly, to demonstrate how other systems can work.
As I said, my daughter has been given a homework task which feeds the idea that making money is good. She has been given £1 to invest in an entrpreneurial scheme and come back to school in 2 weeks, with at least the £1 she was given. So we've been trying to think of something ethical, which fits in with the family's moral standing. She bought a colouring in set (which may not even be very ethical given we don't know where it was made and we don't know the harm that has been caused to the environment, but what can you buy for £1). She then coloured it in, spending ages on it, and sold it for £3. I find this morally acceptable as she used her skills and sold that to someone who wanted it (Granny & Papa). She wants to be an artist when she grows up, so this was helpful in that respect too.

However, the idea on the paperwork we were given, said 'Buy some sweets at bargain price and sell them at regular price'. I find that morally repugnant, even though that's how shops make profit. My friend has even broken the law, by buying multipacks and selling them individually and I doubt anything will be said about that sort of thing. Her son has £30 already and my daughter is unlikely to have more than £9, as she's buying just 3 more art sets, with the money she got for the first one. He's likely to get more praise for earning the most, whereas the effort that my daughter will have put in by then is so much more.

It just shows what it's all about. It's not about actual work. It's about cheating. ^^


_________________
EXPANDED CIRCLE OF FIFTHS

"It's how they see things. It's a way of bringing class to an environment, and I say that pejoratively because, obviously, good music is good music however it's created, however it's motivated." - Thomas Newman