I was just wondering what everyones favorite political party was. Because I know that everyone is from different countries, I will keep it to left wing right wing.
In my country both sides are equally useless. The right is fragmented to the point that they're completely powerless and their too stupid/stubborn to join together and offer real opposition. The left has been in power so long having no significant threats that the normal checks and balances have been eroded. Basically the left suffer from absolute power and all the trappings that come with it. Anyway, canada is a good example of how meaningless the ideas of left and right really is. A party in power will be as left or right as the populous demands, whatever keeps them in power.
hmm... tough question, Jack_Quack Anyhoo, I live in Canada, and I like the Liberals, which advocates change. but the Conservatives are not bad either. As a matter of fact, I don't see much difference between the two parties fundamentally. I choose moderate/middle
I would agree that the conservative and liberal sides in America have very much become the same party, just with different names and different self-absorbed quests. The left corrodes away the foundation of society and the conservatives gradually give in to their demands or posit an alternative that is almost identicle. I am moderate to all political ideas because I am young and would rather see how the world functions before I jump on some bandwagon. I think the parties in the US are awful: they don't address real issues, they have no firm idealogy, they simply throw things out in the air that will garner the most votes.
Communist is such a loaded term, I support Libertarian-communism, not to be confused with authoritarian socialism. Unfortunetly there is no party in Britain that I know of so I could vote accordingly.
As to american politics, i would have to go against whoever is starting wars. In this case Dubya. I dont agree with many of the things that he has done, like caving in to large corporations, and high military spending. I am totally against him going to war both in Iraq and in Afganistan. I would therefor vote for kerry, just because he is the best chance at kicking George's ass out of the White House.
It would depend on weather I was ruling power or not. If I was it'd be fascist...but since I'm not it's moderate.
I don’t know what Libertarian-communism is, but as to communism I have a few comments. Communism never works. There has never been true communism, and there never will be. The leaders always become corrupt, and mistreat their citizens. There is also no will to work. Why work hardest, when you will not be promoted, and you will see no further benefits. Competition drives people to do better/best. As to fascism, well that is just evil. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely". I will not comment on the other 3 for now.
There has been no TRUE democracy or republics or any other kind of government. They are all political theories, which can never be truly achieved in reality. Other than that, I agree that Communism is an utopia. and it's unlikely that it could work for a long time in the modern society I don't think "evil" is the proper word to describe fascism, it's jsut very controlling and restricting, not a lot of people are happy in a fascist society. But it is very efficient, I must admit. I believe that democracy is the best kind of government we have yet, though its original definition can never be accomplished in real world, it still makes the most people happy.
I picked moderate, really anyone who is wiling to categorize themselves so easily as left/right, communist/fascist are ideological, and anti-intellectual by nature (no offence to anyone). I think we always have to keep our minds, and ideas open. Neither side is right, they are both equally wrong the same issue, the only thing we hope for is that one can avoid the most damage. Right/Left literally mean nothing, they are way too broad to accurately tell the movements within their wings. Some hard knock republicans voted for Nader believe it or not. What scares me is that the left and right essentially are saying the same thing, with a different set of rhetoric's. Communist/fascist are both too extreme for any modern population. Communism in her purest form would have to defy our taught human nature (I don't believe it is innate), Fascism is too extreme in the sense that it will almost always end in a blood bath, from which it came. Neither communism/fascism will ever get into power without a serious economic/political crisis, I meanserious . So the best thing for humanity is too be pragmatic and be moderate imo. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves.
Right/left must mean something for without them there's no moderate position available. Right/left give definition to the moderate. The left and right are not saying the same thing. There’s a huge difference between, say, a position to maintain forests for future generations and a position to convert most of them to lumber on the pretext of preventing forest fires (that occurred naturally with no long-lasting damage for as long as forests have existed). And that’s just one huge difference among hundreds or thousands. The overall difference is that a righty is considerably more selfish than a lefty.
Right/left must mean something for without them there's no moderate position available. True, but even moderate is very hard to define? What is moderate, btwn Communist and a Democrat? Btwn a Fascist and a republican and so on? Consider that a Democrat compared to a Communist is a rightist, so really what is the difference? Imo not much. There’s a huge difference between, say, a position to maintain forests for future generations and a position to convert most of them to lumber on the pretext of preventing forest fires (that occurred naturally with no long-lasting damage for as long as forests have existed). Well left in some places could be characterized as rightist. I am sure there are rightists, who support environmentalism, so does that mean they aren't rightists? There are the "log cabin republicans" you know those Gay republicans, or even the pro-abortion republicans. Right/left is heavily skewed in their definitions, and I don't put too much water into them. The overall difference is that a righty is considerably more selfish than a lefty In some instances it is opposite, really we can't say with any authority what is what.
It all depends on the scale. Communism is an example of a form of government that doesn't scale well. I would be very surprised if communism in a small group (less than 50 people) where everyone supported the ideals failed in any reasonable timeframe... That's what computers are for Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! You're right. Normal people who don't buy in to the communism WILL break it. But if everyone buys in, if everyone says "this is what we need to do to survive" (and there's position cycling so people don't get bored with doing the same thing forever) then I do think that it would work fairly well. Only if there's some end benefit (even if its only to say "I'm better than you, "OMGWTFHAX J00 SUXOR", or whatever). People won't compete if they get no foreseeable benefit... meh. Perhaps, perhaps not. Different philosophies have their uses, they are tools, nothing more. Tools are not inherently evil.
Now now undecided, thats a very provocative statement you got yourself there and people will take offence to it. I cant help but have my views and you can help but have yours. To make a personal remark that anyone that shows a leaning is an idiot is just wrong and will cause offence. Just because I voted communist doesnt mean I havnt thought about it, its just my views. I showed that I have an understanding that left/right isnt as clear cut, indeed, the political spectrum is three dimentional, I even stated that there is no party I could vote for because no such party exists in Britain. So I vote for the moderate parties. Indeed, this poll doesnt say that you cannot vote according to ideals and I took it that way.
I cant help but have my views and you can help but have yours. I never asserted otherwise, and I agree with that statement. I am not stating my opinion as the almighty truth, that's impossible. But I think my opinion is a very reasonable one. I hope you would disagree Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! To make a personal remark that anyone that shows a leaning is an idiot is just wrong and will cause offence. I didn't call anyone an idiot, I called people anti-intellectual. Anti-intellectualism is when you are incapable of listening or even reasoning with another persons perspective. The Bush administration is anti-intellectual isn't it? Wasn't the Politburo of the USSR anti-intellectual? Of course, and they both share one common thread, ideology. As an ideologue you sometimes have to deny reality (shown most vividly with Zionists), or do things that go beyond logic, and reason. As an ideologue you automatically put yourself in a position, anti-capitalist, anti-fascist, etc. Yet you are against those things because someone else tells you to be against those things, and even if x was better it can't be because of your ideological tinge. Being an anti-intellectual doesn't mean you are an idiot, what it means is that you are closed minded, and devoted to cause that may just be wrong. I guess I am being very nihilist. Just because I voted communist doesnt mean I havnt thought about it, its just my views. I never said you didn't, what I am saying to you is; if you are wiling to so easily define yourself as a communist then you automatically put yourself in a position. Something I would not want to happen to me, I agree with some communist ethos but I am not a communist because some things are just too bizarre for me. Dissention imo is necessary for rational human thought, once an ideologue you aren't rational anymore. Pragmatic truth is human truth according to James, and I tend to agree.
Yes, maybe i did jump to conclutions with the whole idiot thing. Your assuming that I agree with the USSR and that the USSR was communist. Neither is true, I dont believe in the ideals of stalinism which is Authoritarian communism, a totalarian dictatorship. Yet you are against those things because someone else tells you to be against those things, and even if x was better it can't be because of your ideological tinge. Being an anti-intellectual doesn't mean you are an idiot, what it means is that you are closed minded, and devoted to cause that may just be wrong. I guess I am being very nihilist. No, Im not against those things because someone has told me to be against those things, Im against those things because I see those things as being wrong. Thats just my opinion.
There are really only two types of parties, Fascist And Communist everyone else is either close to them or in the middle of the timeline F----------Democracy----R---Radical Republican-------C
Your assuming that I agree with the USSR and that the USSR was communist. Neither is true, I dont believe in the ideals of stalinism which is Authoritarian communism, a totalarian dictatorship. I know the USSR was almost anti-thetical to the teachings of Marx; state capitalism is not your thing I would fathom. There has never been a communist state, that's a certainity. But I didn't assume anything about you and the USSR, all I was saying is that the USSR like the modern US are anti-intellectual in their nature. Both started out as intellectual states full of opportunity, with the ideas of the enlightenment and romantic eras, but as the ideology has been perverted by the masses, the end of the dream begins. The masses are brutes... and that’s why I oppose the masses following a ideology. No, Im not against those things because someone has told me to be against those things, Im against those things because I see those things as being wrong. Thats just my opinion. But I very highly doubt you would know why you are against those things if it weren't for Marx and the gang (do tell me if I talking smack). Consider, would you be just in angst if Marx wasn't around to guide you? I personally believe that anyone (not just you) who is wiling to label themselves so easily and so devotedly is rather anti-intellectual, and an ideologue. They are easily swayed by the messages of the "messiahs" (Lenin, Reagan, etc) because it's always easier to follow then to lead.
Individualism is over-rated. Theres nothing wrong with faith in a mass ideology, it keeps you in society. People are unintelligable outside of society. And Marx didnt invent communism, im a communist (sometimes), but i wouldnt look at his writings as guidance. The essence of communism is co-operating for a greater benifit, and people have done that since time immemorial.
